Putting Golovkin's name in the same sentence with Mayweather is an insult to boxing

[Kagami Taiga]

I apologize, but I don't understand why you keep on comparing Guerrero to Macklin when I was actually comparing him to GGG. Again, I was comparing Macklin's close loss to Martinez and performance against Sturm with Berto's disappointing performances every time he stepped up against better competition. I recognize Floyd has proven far more as a professional fighter than Golovkin has, so I don't know what you are trying to prove by comparing Macklin to Guerrero. My point about dominance/destruction isn't that Guerrero failed to knock out Berto, but that his performance wasn't nearly as impressive (in my opinion) as GGG's was against Macklin. Guerrero definitely started strong and won the fight, but Berto had his moments and gave a fairly decent account of himself. IMO, you can't really say the same about Macklin in the GGG fight.

An eye test is a joke? I can see Golovkin's technique, his well-placed shots, his good jab, his power, etc. How else are you supposed to evaluate the skill or technique of a fighter? I'll concede that I may be wrong about him, but from what I have seen of GGG in the amateurs and pros he is a more skilled/complete fighter than Guerrero (I only said he's arguably better than Canelo given his youth). It's not that I think Guerrero is a bad fighter by any means, but I just don't see how he was/is particularly more deserving of a shot against Floyd than GGG (part of my calculation is that GGG will naturally pose more of a challenge since he is bigger though). You're free to disagree and I think GGG will prove me right in the coming years. I don't believe he has the best resume by any means though.

I have nothing in particular against Trout as a fighter, but you're pumping up the guy over GGG (maybe Macklin) because he beat Delvin Rodriguez? Was Rodriguez a top/proven LMW or even ever a top WW (where he campaigned at for years)? You should also keep in mind that Trout is around the same size as GGG on fight night. The Cotto win is nice on paper, but he was coming off a loss, had never really done much at 154 himself, and Trout certainly had the overall size/height advantages. I agree that Trout's showing against Canelo was certainly respectable, but I was originally talking about Trout in the context of Canelo's resume (often faded veterans he had a size advantage over). As such I can't give either of them too much credit for their performances against one another since they both had relatively thin resumes. They had also both benefited from some physical advantages over their opponents.

I also don't think you really addressed the points I made (in my previous post) in regards to why Canelo has the better resume/record.

I don't recall if Golovkin's team ever said he would campaign at 154. I thought their position was that he would fight at the weight if the right opportunity presented itself. In any case, the guys you have been touting or mentioning in that division are around the same size (at least in terms of weight) as him anyway.

I've already said I'm not opposed to GGG moving up and that I think he will shortly if fights with Quillin, Martinez, or potentially Murray don't materialize. I've just mentioned that he will be undersized for the weight if he doesn't put some on and that his desire to unify at MW (his natural weight) is understandable as well.

dude, I'm failing to see what your argument is. I think the bottom line is golovkin doesn't have a resume, which he doesn't. As was mentioned before, both Guerrero and Camelot have better resumes and add to the fact thatey have actually accomplished things in the weight class where the floyd fights which golovkin hasn't. Golovkin hasn't accomplished anything iat160 let alone 154. Now this is not me saying he's not a good fighter this is me saying he has yet to prove how good he is. And that's the simple truth.

[Mr. Philadel]

Golovkin and Floyd don't belong in the same sentence because they're in different weight classes....what's the obsession with Floyd fighting at a size disadvantage?!?.....you dudes are full of ****....real talk!!!

peep game....Floyd is ****ing Einstein in the ring....he's not gonna fight a dumb fight....NEVER EVER!!....that means those big mother****ers will spend 36 minutes trying to find the most elusive dude in the game...mean while getting picked off and tagged enough to lose most if not every round....then you same full of **** dudes will cry like lil girls and scream out that the fight was boring...smh

when Floyd fights other dudes his size it's far more exciting because he takes more risks and lets his hands go more....if he's not gonna fight Sergio Martinez then there's no need for him to fight outside his comfort zone of 147....when Jordan in the Bulls won 72 games hoop fans didn't wanna see them go through the playoffs playing 7 against 5 just because they dominated 5 on 5....smh

[Godsfly]

I apologize, but I don't understand why you keep on comparing Guerrero to Macklin when I was actually comparing him to GGG. Again, I was comparing Macklin's close loss to Martinez and performance against Sturm with Berto's disappointing performances every time he stepped up against better competition. I recognize Floyd has proven far more as a professional fighter than Golovkin has, so I don't know what you are trying to prove by comparing Macklin to Guerrero. My point about dominance/destruction isn't that Guerrero failed to knock out Berto, but that his performance wasn't nearly as impressive (in my opinion) as GGG's was against Macklin. Guerrero definitely started strong and won the fight, but Berto had his moments and gave a fairly decent account of himself. IMO, you can't really say the same about Macklin in the GGG fight.

An eye test is a joke? I can see Golovkin's technique, his well-placed shots, his good jab, his power, etc. How else are you supposed to evaluate the skill or technique of a fighter? I'll concede that I may be wrong about him, but from what I have seen of GGG in the amateurs and pros he is a more skilled/complete fighter than Guerrero (I only said he's arguably better than Canelo given his youth). It's not that I think Guerrero is a bad fighter by any means, but I just don't see how he was/is particularly more deserving of a shot against Floyd than GGG (part of my calculation is that GGG will naturally pose more of a challenge since he is bigger though). You're free to disagree and I think GGG will prove me right in the coming years. I don't believe he has the best resume by any means though.

I have nothing in particular against Trout as a fighter, but you're pumping up the guy over GGG (maybe Macklin) because he beat Delvin Rodriguez? Was Rodriguez a top/proven LMW or even ever a top WW (where he campaigned at for years)? You should also keep in mind that Trout is around the same size as GGG on fight night. The Cotto win is nice on paper, but he was coming off a loss, had never really done much at 154 himself, and Trout certainly had the overall size/height advantages. I agree that Trout's showing against Canelo was certainly respectable, but I was originally talking about Trout in the context of Canelo's resume (often faded veterans he had a size advantage over). As such I can't give either of them too much credit for their performances against one another since they both had relatively thin resumes. They had also both benefited from some physical advantages over their opponents.

I also don't think you really addressed the points I made (in my previous post) in regards to why Canelo has the better resume/record.

I don't recall if Golovkin's team ever said he would campaign at 154. I thought their position was that he would fight at the weight if the right opportunity presented itself. In any case, the guys you have been touting or mentioning in that division are around the same size (at least in terms of weight) as him anyway.

I've already said I'm not opposed to GGG moving up and that I think he will shortly if fights with Quillin, Martinez, or potentially Murray don't materialize. I've just mentioned that he will be undersized for the weight if he doesn't put some on and that his desire to unify at MW (his natural weight) is understandable as well.

so you're trying to compare guerrero to golovkin? why?

mayweather fought Guerrero at welterweight. golovkin has never campaigned at jr. middle let alone welterweight. so to you, fighting guerrero is proof enough that mayweather should fight golovkin? let me ask you this. what wins did golovkin ring up at jr middle that would put him on notice for a mayweather fight? none.........in fact he's barely fought anyone in his own division.


"I just don't see how guerrero was/is particularly more deserving of a shot against Floyd than GGG"

dude, because he's actually campaigning at welterweight & he has a better record then ggg's best win in macklin. you're arguing around in circles........

also. trout ****s all over any win that ggg has. what exactly did proska do? get schooled by a faded sergio mora? thats ggg's 2nd best win. what did macklin do apart from getting ko'd against martinez & golovkin? his best win is against a shot sturm...........how is this enough to warrant a mayweather showdown? & read what i said closely...........i said that trout is a better win then anything on ggg's record (thats the truth) you can spin it how ever you want.

and i really don't care how much a fighter gains on fight night...........just as long he's fighting at the weight. golovkin has never fought below middleweight so you can't compare that to guys like canelo who's fought at weltwerweight & jr. middleweight their entire career. thats just remedial man & it's a whole new meaning of "reaching"

also let me tell you something about the "eye" test........ golovkin: i don't see a guy with high technique, skill, any of that. lucas mythsse all over again in the sense that a lot of feelings are gonna get hurt. ggg is a fighter with a lot power, good jab (but doesn't use the jab enough) & he's decent with cutting the ring off. the downside. he doesn't move his head, he's slow, his foot work is slow & if he can't get off his power on you he can be smothered, outworked, & made to look very average & sloppy. people are talking about andre ward vs golovkin.......thats a suicide. golovkin would get picked apart & knocked smooth out of the ring & that would be the end. horrible style match up. but getting back to the eye test........A eye test is just a opinion because i may see things in golovkin that you don't........anything good that you may think you see in a "eye test" is meaningless without the resume to back it. you gotta do those things against high quality opponents (then it actually counts for something)



it seems that you don't want to talk realty.......if you want ggg to fight floyd he's gonna have to campaign at 154. he campaigns at the weight and gets a trout or a cotto & he's on notice (but he doesn't want to actually put in the work at 154 because he doesn't want to drain himself) anyone is willing to drain themselves in one mayweather fight because they know it will be their highest pay day. but thats not how it works.......for a guy like ggg to get A mayweather fight he's gonna have to really do some work at 154 because he lacks a fan base & a name. he also has a very weak record at 31 years old (these are his problems) it's a joke to talk about mayweather canelo or cotto. if he wants these kinda fights he needs to immediately move down but he refuses to do that..........so my solution? move up. no one wants to see you try & clean out a crap division if you only have 5 years left in the sport........

[Godsfly]

dude, I'm failing to see what your argument is. I think the bottom line is golovkin doesn't have a resume, which he doesn't. As was mentioned before, both Guerrero and Camelot have better resumes and add to the fact thatey have actually accomplished things in the weight class where the floyd fights which golovkin hasn't. Golovkin hasn't accomplished anything iat160 let alone 154. Now this is not me saying he's not a good fighter this is me saying he has yet to prove how good he is. And that's the simple truth.

& this is what I've been trying to tell him for about 4 pages now. it's just not clicking though...............

[Light_Speed]

canelo has a better record then macklin, proska, ishida & rasado. canelo has a better record then anyone on golavkins resume. (and golavkin is 31 years old) you can spin it how ever you want but the fact remains canelo has a better record then anyone on ggg's resume. (and thats sad because golovkin is 31 years old) we're talking about a 23 year old

Canelo has 13 more fights than Golovkin, he's received massive hype by the main TV networks in Mexico, he was signed by a big promotion company very early on in his career and got exposure by fighting on the undercard of big fights, he quickly became a big draw in America because of the mexican-american fanbase which makes him an attractive opponent. Golovkin on the other hand is one of the most avoided fighters in recent years. Fighters openly say they don't wanna fight him and promoters don't wanna match their guys against him. He got a title and offers people a 6 figure payday and a main event slot on HBO and they STILL don't want it, that's why he gotta fight guys like Stevens who have nothing to lose. You can only fight guys who are willing to step in the ring with you.

[Citizen Koba]

OK, I get that this is a fight which will never happen, for a number of reasons, the Cold War, GGGs resume and lack of name recognition amongst the casual fans, etc. But, as boxing fans, isn't it a fight you'd like to see... either at 154 (my preference) or 160?

Even the folk who hate on GGG can relish the thought of him being 'schooled' and his fans silenced. Either way we get to see FMJ in with a legitimate KO artist, who would, on paper at least, offer a real threat.

[Godsfly]

Canelo has 13 more fights than Golovkin, he's received massive hype by the main TV networks in Mexico, he was signed by a big promotion company very early on in his career and got exposure by fighting on the undercard of big fights, he quickly became a big draw in America because of the mexican-american fanbase which makes him an attractive opponent. Golovkin on the other hand is one of the most avoided fighters in recent years. Fighters openly say they don't wanna fight him and promoters don't wanna match their guys against him. He got a title and offers people a 6 figure payday and a main event slot on HBO and they STILL don't want it, that's why he gotta fight guys like Stevens who have nothing to lose. You can only fight guys who are willing to step in the ring with you.

i think that this is an excuse........canelo has the better record because he has the better record. & the reason i say that is because if golovkin wanted to do something about it he could easily move up.........froch would love to welcome him to the u.k.

he would have no problems getting fights at 168. if everyone is ducking him (in a weak division) move up........

[Light_Speed]

i think that this is an excuse........canelo has the better record because he has the better record. & the reason i say that is because if golovkin wanted to do something about it he could easily move up.........froch would love to welcome him to the u.k.

he would have no problems getting fights at 168. if everyone is ducking him (in a weak division) move up........

People not wanting to fight you is an excuse? Canelo can fight whoever he wants because he's a big draw so he'll get those fights, why are you comparing a guy like that to a guy who's being openly avoided? It's like comparing Oscar to Winky. He offered fights to super middleweight contenders Oosthuizen and Rodriguez but either HBO turned it down or the fighters turned it down. You haven't done your homework on GGG and you dare speak on his resume.

[Godsfly]

People not wanting to fight you is an excuse? Canelo can fight whoever he wants because he's a big draw so he'll get those fights, why are you comparing a guy like that to a guy who's being openly avoided? It's like comparing Oscar to Winky. He offered fights to super middleweight contenders Oosthuizen and Rodriguez but either HBO turned it down or the fighters turned it down. You haven't done your homework on GGG and you dare speak on his resume.

i know about fighters turning down golovkin. the problem that i have is that middlweight is a weak division. if he can't get fights at middlweight why not move up to 168 where the crop of fighters are better in quality. I say make a permanent move to 168 and as your first fight take on someone like bika (who is more then willing to fight ggg) i don't see anything happening for golovkin at middlweight..........his record would be a hell of a lot better if he could manage to get some wins against some decent guys at 168.

[FrankJack]

I like Gennady, but I do think many of us are really jumping the gun with him. His amateur record is impressive, but, haven't we seem good amateurs fall short at the professional level before? The win over Macklin was outstanding, but I think it requires more than one standout performance to begin placing him as being worthy to automatically fight some of these other big names. Hes on his way there, I think, But let's just be patient and see how his career unfolds