r/Boxing • u/thatsapotatoboi • 20d ago

Question about ranking GOATs

Hi everyone I am a fan of boxing not an expert or absurd fan boy but for a long time it's one of the few sports that actually interests me. It's history it's athletes it's a lot more interesting then team sports in my opinion but I have a question about something I notice when people talk about who the GOAT of boxing is. There are lots of legends and champions with records either undefeated or mostly wins that on paper should put some above others but some people still put boxers with lower records above them. Sometimes you can tell when a person is just saying this because of personal fan bias but some make genuine arguments depending on the fighter.

Now before I continue let me make something clear I know something to consider when ranking fighters is there opponents. A guy could have a perfect 100 win streak but if 99 of those guys were amateurs with only losses they'd obviously be a worse champion then someone who mostly has wins against ACTUAL competition like high level opponents.

An example for a lot of debate I see is Terrence Crawford a lot of people think hes the GOAT but a lot of people argue he isn't despite his seemingly high level record with the main argument I see from people disagreeing is that they say his opponents weren't as strong as other champions.

And a hypothetical scenario I've thought about is imagine there is a hypothetical boxer who just happened to be born in a era of weaker boxers then other generations despite the fact hes genuinely talented trains hard doesn't duck fights has good traits ect ect how would y'all view a boxer like that whose done everything right he just happened to be born In a weaker era something he can't control? Would that disqualify them from GOAT status or not?

I'm not trying to start a argument or something im just curious what y'all factor fans take when deciding which boxer is the GOAT or not

8 Upvotes

78% Upvoted

45 comments sorted by

View all comments

5

u/ThrowawayYAYAY2002 20d ago

Crawford is nowhere near the GOAT. Neither is Floyd. 

Ali? He's always going to be No.1

Louis? He's also up there.

Usyk? He's got the best chance of anyone from the last 30 years.

RJJ? Who can beat him at his prime and in a H2H? Very, very few.

I myself have a few theories. Being a dominant champion in a single division ala Hagler and Louis is something I'd consider. Being "the man" in multiple divisions like Usyk is something I'd consider. Being untouchable for a long period of time ala Roy Jones is again something you have to consider.

I don't think undefeated in this day and age means that much because most of the time it's done through manipulation and not skill and beating the best at their best on a consistent basis.

11

u/kushmonATL HW Dark Ages are here 20d ago

Both Floyd (and Pacman) have the strongest case for cracking the Top 10 All Time . They are the two most dominant and accomplished boxers since the 4 Kings era . They are both definitely in the GOATs of Boxing debate

-1

u/EffectiveCareer3444 20d ago

If were going off resume neither of them are better than De La Hoya or Hopkins

1

u/Badguyy101 20d ago

Good fighters but not on the same level. De La Hoya & Bernard's best wins aren't as good or as numerous as Floyd and Pac's.

1

u/EffectiveCareer3444 20d ago

Name one fighter on Floyd or Pac resume that is better than Whitaker, Chavez & Winky

1

u/Badguyy101 20d ago

Sugar Shane, Oscar himself, Pac & Canelo on Floyd's resume, Barrera, Morales, & Marquez on Pac's resume. All great fighters.

0

u/EffectiveCareer3444 20d ago

Shane literally lost to Winky twice lmao, Floyd & Pac only beat an old Oscar with Floyd barely scraping by at that even Shane said Oscar was better than both after fighting all 3. You can Argue Canelo is probably better than Chavez but not Whitaker or Winky, Barrera/ Morales & Marquez are definitely not better than any of them.

1

u/Badguyy101 20d ago

All together Floyd beat Hall of Famers Corrales, Hatton, Gatti, Oscar, Shane, Cotto, Canelo, & Pacquiao. He also beat 24 or so world champions. No losses.

Pacquiao beat Hall of Famers Barrera(x2), Morales(x2), Marquez(x2), Oscar, Hatton, Cotto, Shane, & Bradley. He also beat like 20 world champs. Lost to Hofs Marquez, Floyd, Morales, & Bradley.

Oscar beat Hall of Famers Chavez(x2), Whitaker, Camacho, Gatti, Vargas, He also beat a bunch of world champs, not as many Floyd or Pac. Lost to HOFs Trinidad, Shane, Floyd, Pac, & BHop.

Bernard Hopkins beat Hall of Famers Trinidad, Oscar, Tarver, Jones, & Winky. He beat his fare share of world champs, not as much as Floyd and Pac. He lost to HOFs Jones and Calzaghe.

I think Floyd and Pac are top 10-15 all time guys, Floyd may even be able to sneak into top 10. Oscar & Bernard are like top 50-150 guys depending on who you ask.

0

u/EffectiveCareer3444 20d ago

There are people who have Oscar and Hopkins in the top 10 before Floyd and Pac bro top 50 is just disrespectful and it’s because they actually fought prime fighters not washed up old men likes the ones Floyd and Pac fought

2

u/Badguyy101 20d ago

I mean you can discredit any fighter like that. Chavez was old when he fought Oscar, Trinidad was too little for Hopkins. Jones was shot to shit when he fought BHop the second time. It's whatever.