Is Canelo Alvarez a top-100 fighter of all time? Boxing experts differ on his legacy

LAS VEGAS — By any objective standard, Canelo Alvarez has had a fabulous boxing career, and it's not yet over. There is still much to accomplish, beginning with beating undisputed super welterweight champion Jermell Charlo on Saturday at T-Mobile Arena in their bout for Alvarez's undisputed super middleweight title.

Alvarez goes into the bout with a 59-2-2 record and he's fought a who's who of boxing's greatest stars in and around his weight class during this era. Three of his previous opponents, Floyd Mayweather Jr., Shane Mosley and Miguel Cotto, are already enshrined in the International Boxing Hall of Fame. Former middleweight champion Gennadiy Golovkin is certain to be, as well.

Charlo will represent the 22nd opponent Alvarez has faced who has held a world title. He's won belts at 154, 160, 168 and 175 and he's 20-2-1 in world championship bouts. He has been lineal champion at both middleweight and super middleweight and is the reigning 168-pound lineal champ.

He's been on top and so good for so long that he's almost taken for granted. So in an effort to add perspective to his career, Yahoo Sports interviewed four prominent boxing figures — trainers Stephen "Breadman" Edwards, Teddy Atlas and Freddie Roach, and longtime matchmaker and promoter Sean Gibbons — in an attempt to clarify where he stands.

There is a vigorous ongoing debate online about whether Alvarez has climbed the steep mountain to become the greatest Mexican-born fighter in boxing history. Yahoo Sports asked these experts to place Alvarez in historical perspective in terms of the greatest Mexican fighters ever.

Further, it asked them if they believe he's a top-100 fighter of all time and, if so, how high up on the list they'd put him. And finally, we asked the secrets to his longevity and whether they've seen decline in his game.

Where does Alvarez rank all time?

I have long had a great interest in boxing from a historical perspective and firmly believe that Sugar Ray Robinson is far and away the greatest boxer ever, with no one really even close.

But to give an idea of the kinds of fighters Alvarez is being compared with in this category, Yahoo Sports ranks the all-time pound-for-pound top 10 like this:

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Willie Pep
5. Sugar Ray Leonard
6. Joe Louis
7. Harry Greb
8. Jimmy Wilde
9. Roberto Duran
10. Archie Moore

It's a subjective list and it changes as new fighters make their way into the list and as I learn more about the legends of the past.

With that in mind, there was a clear distinction on our panel: Edwards, Roach and Gibbons believe in Alvarez and all would rank him in their top 100, at the minimum. Atlas is a huge critic of Alvarez, and he doesn't see it that way.

"I give him credit, and he's in my opinion a nice, solid fighter, and a legitimate champion," Atlas said. "But we use the term great way too quickly and way too frivolously. The fans today who love him have a great passion for him, and I love that, because they're judging based off of what they see. They want to think what they're seeing in the best. But this sport has a tremendously long history and there have been so many great fighters, so many incredible talents.

"Everyone has soft opposition on their record, and when I say that, I mean everyone. But it's how you did against the best that's important. And when you look at him against his best opposition, he didn't do that good."

Atlas said he felt Alvarez lost his first two fights against Golovkin, as well as a 2014 bout with Erislandy Lara.

Edwards had a different viewpoint than Atlas. While Atlas said he felt fans overestimated fighters they are watching now, Edwards said he thinks it's the opposite.

"When we watch stuff in real time, as it's going, we tend not to appreciate it as much until later, when we go back and give it a hard second look," Edwards said. "Look, he has ... 20 wins in world title fights, which is a huge deal. And he's unified three divisions, which to me is a big deal. He is very consistent. He's had some tough fights, close decisions, where the call went his way where we thought maybe it could have gone the other guy's way. But if you look closely enough, everyone has those decisions, including Floyd.

"I think 20 years from now, his legacy will hold up. ... He's firmly within the top 100 in my opinion."

Roach and Gibbons agreed with Edwards. Both said Alvarez deserves to be top 100 and perhaps even top 50.

Has Canelo become the greatest Mexican-born boxer?

Mexico has a rich boxing history and has produced some of the greatest champions the sport has ever known. Julio Cesar Chavez Sr. is widely regarded as the greatest Mexican boxer ever, but he's hardly the only one: There is also Salvador Sánchez, Ricardo López, Rubén Olivares, Carlos Zárate, Baby Arizmendi, Marco Antonio Barrera, Juan Manuel Márquez, Erik Morales, Miguel Canto and Vicente Saldivar.

While most rank Chavez No. 1 among Mexicans, there are supporters for Lopez, Sanchez and Olivares, as well.

Prominent Mexican American fighters like Oscar De La Hoya weren't considered for this list. Only fighters born in Mexico are eligible.

And Atlas believes Alvarez's résumé trails the vast majority of those listed. He mentioned Morales as having been better than Alvarez, but when challenged, gave a bit.

"You could argue that Morales is the one guy out of those I mentioned who you could accurately put Canelo ahead of, but while you could, it's no guarantee or slam dunk," Atlas said. "It's a serious debate. But these other guys, look at what they did. How many fans of today would even mention Baby Arizmendi? And he beat Henry Armstrong three times."

Edwards said Alvarez is clearly a top 10 Mexican fighter ever, and perhaps higher. He noted Alvarez has been consistent and won the fights he's supposed to have won. He pointed out that Marquez had losses that he shouldn't have had, such as ones with Freddie Norwood, Chris John and Tim Bradley. He pointed out that he struggled with Michael Katsidis, who was a tough but not notable lightweight.

"When you look forensically at these fighters' careers, so many of them had an off night here and there," Edwards said. "Marquez, of course, is a great fighter, but he had plenty of them. So did Morales and Barrera. They were forgiven for those, but it's as if Canelo has not been. And the off-nights, he's mostly still won."

Is there slippage in Alvarez?

Alvarez is only 33 and is in fantastic shape and could easily fight five more years. That will give him an opportunity to add more significant wins and move up in the all-time rankings.

But if he's slipping — and there were a lot of whispers about that after his less-than-inspiring win over John Ryder in May — he may not be able to do that.

And our experts all spotted slippage of some degree from what they viewed as Canelo at his best.

"Anyone who has fought as long as he has had and has had as many big fights as he's had, of course there's going to be some slippage," Gibbons said. "When I look at him going into this fight, no way could I say, 'Look, this is a prime, prime version of Canelo.' There's been some slippage. But I don't see it as anything dramatic where you're going to say, 'Oh, he's nowhere near what he was.'"

Roach said Alvarez hasn't been the same over the last six years, but he wasn't critical of Alvarez.

"Canelo has never been the same after the first two wars with Triple-G," Roach said. "Who could? ... Since those two fights, and moving up in weight, I don't think he's been as good. He's a little slower and it seems like it's a little harder for him to make it through the championship rounds. His stamina is not the same and though he is still powerful, his output in the later rounds drops considerably. To me, the middleweight Canelo was the best Canelo. But take nothing away from him. He's accomplished a lot over the past two or three years. He's a winner. And that's what makes a champion."