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

[bklynboy]

Still waiting for GGG to fight somebody with a pulse. Curtis Stevens next, what a fu.cking killer that guy is no wonder every fighter on the planets ****ting bricks from GGG

The guys fought like one ranked middleweight and a load of petrified scrubs who should probably look at doing something else for a living. Its okay though he **** out medals in the amateurs!

& too think people was ripping Rigondeaux before, talk about double standards. 30 pro fights in and still not fought anybody and that won't change when (if) he beats Stevens.

Never in all my life have I seen a guy get such praise for doing virtually sweet F.A

I'm still wait and see regarding GGG but his win over Macklin convinced me - the man has world class potential. The key word there is "potential." He needs to fight Martinez, Quillin, Sturm. If he and beats them, especially if he beats them convincingly, then we'll know he's for real.

[Godsfly]

That's not comparing his resume to Floyd's. It's comparing his resume to those three guys.

Basically if the argument is that GGG hasn't done enough to fight Floyd based on resume it's invalid since those three guys mentioned didn't really do anything themselves, especially Canelo and Guerrero. The greatest thing they did was be Mexican.

robert Guerrero has beaten Casamayor (although past prime) Selcuk Aydin, Katsidis, & berto...........robert guerrero in realty has a better record then Macklin (ggg's best win) canelo has a better record then ggg with the trout win.

those 2 fighters have a better record then anything ggg has ever fought & thats pretty sad...........

even ortiz has a better record then Proksa

[JPsol]

robert Guerrero has beaten Casamayor (although past prime) Selcuk Aydin, Katsidis, & berto...........robert guerrero in realty has a better record then Macklin (ggg's best win) canelo has a better record then ggg with the trout win.

those 2 fighters have a better record then anything ggg has ever fought & thats pretty sad...........

even ortiz has a better record then Proksa

Who the heck had Aydin beat and Berto has lost pretty much every time he has stepped up. I'd argue Macklin was as impressive if not more impressive in his performance against a P4P fighter in Martinez than Berto has been against the lesser foes he has lost to.

The manner in which you win should also be taken into account. Golovkin has been dominant in almost all of his victories whereas the same could not be said for Guerrero or arguably even Canelo. Trout's best win came against Cotto coming off a loss and it wasn't like Cotto had really done much in the LMW division to begin with. Canelo's win against Trout wasn't exactly an a** kicking. This isn't to say Canelo doesn't have talent, but he has spent most of his career thus far beating faded veterans who are fighting above their natural weight.

I do think Golovkin's amateur career should probably be factored in as well. Using your logic Rigondeaux probably hadn't earned a shot at Donaire based on his pro record/resume, but he still convincingly beat him nonetheless.

You have conceded that it isn't GGG's fault he hasn't faced more contenders/champions and have said you want him to move-up (he probably will soon). That's fair enough, but I think if you use your eyes you should see that Golovkin is a better talent than a Guerrero or an Ortiz. I could be wrong in my assessment, but I'm sure we'll find out soon enough.

[Godsfly]

Who the heck had Aydin beat and Berto has lost pretty much every time he has stepped up. I'd argue Macklin was as impressive if not more impressive in his performance against a P4P fighter in Martinez than Berto has been against the lesser foes he has lost to.

The manner in which you win should also be taken into account. Golovkin has been dominant in almost all of his victories whereas the same could not be said for Guerrero or arguably even Canelo. Trout's best win came against Cotto coming off a loss and it wasn't like Cotto had really done much in the LMW division to begin with. Canelo's win against Trout wasn't exactly an a** kicking. This isn't to say Canelo doesn't have talent, but he has spent most of his career thus far beating faded veterans who are fighting above their natural weight.

I do think Golovkin's amateur career should probably be factored in as well. Using your logic Rigondeaux probably hadn't earned a shot at Donaire based on his pro record/resume, but he still convincingly beat him nonetheless.

You have conceded that it isn't GGG's fault he hasn't faced more contenders/champions and have said you want him to move-up (he probably will soon). That's fair enough, but I think if you use your eyes you should see that Golovkin is a better talent than a Guerrero or an Ortiz. I could be wrong in my assessment, but I'm sure we'll find out soon enough.

lets start with macklin vs Robert Guerrero (the records) macklin got knocked out against martinez & before that his claim to fame was against sturm (a sturm thats past prime) that sturm win is the equivalent of past prime Casamayor.......macklins resume: A tough fight with martinez (and ko'd) & a robbery against a past it sturm. his best win is really sturm.........Robert Guerrero has beaten Casamayor (past prime) he's beaten berto, Aydin, & Katsidis. thats a better ring of opponents then what macklin has. period point blank. and also when macklin stepped up to the highest level he got ko'd (by martinez) when robert stepped up to his highest level he was not ko'd (mayweather) & i don't want to hear how martinez is just more powerful.......mayweather and martinez both have around the same power pound for pound.

"The manner in which you win should also be taken into account"

The manner in which you win should not be taken into account if the opponent is low in quality. in that case gary russell jr. is the p4p king because the manner in which he wins is marvelous haha if ggg was knocking out the bikas, kesslers, dirrells (dirrell in a professional fight) there would be no issue..........thats p4p status. open & shut case.

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


this is why some people are saying that golavkin don't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as mayweather..............& judging by everything. it's the truth. golavkin has a piss poor resume.

[Godsfly]

I'm still wait and see regarding GGG but his win over Macklin convinced me - the man has world class potential. The key word there is "potential." He needs to fight Martinez, Quillin, Sturm. If he and beats them, especially if he beats them convincingly, then we'll know he's for real.

Macklin is trash..............he's not the worse that I've seen but he has a horrible style for someone like a golavkin.

[JPsol]

lets start with macklin vs Robert Guerrero (the records) macklin got knocked out against martinez & before that his claim to fame was against sturm (a sturm thats past prime) that sturm win is the equivalent of past prime Casamayor.......macklins resume: A tough fight with martinez (and ko'd) & a robbery against a past it sturm. his best win is really sturm.........Robert Guerrero has beaten Casamayor (past prime) he's beaten berto, Aydin, & Katsidis. thats a better ring of opponents then what macklin has. period point blank. and also when macklin stepped up to the highest level he got ko'd (by martinez) when robert stepped up to his highest level he was not ko'd (mayweather) & i don't want to hear how martinez is just more powerful.......mayweather and martinez both have around the same power pound for pound.

"The manner in which you win should also be taken into account"

The manner in which you win should not be taken into account if the opponent is low in quality. in that case gary russell jr. is the p4p king because the manner in which he wins is marvelous haha if ggg was knocking out the bikas, kesslers, dirrells (dirrell in a professional fight) there would be no issue..........thats p4p status. open & shut case.

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


this is why some people are saying that golavkin don't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as mayweather..............& judging by everything. it's the truth. golavkin has a piss poor resume.

First off, I wasn't comparing Macklin with Guerrero. I was comparing Macklin's solid losing performance against Martinez to Berto's (a guy you implied was a good win for Guerrero) losses to lesser quality opponents. Also, Macklin performed far better against Martinez (not as good as Floyd, but still a top P4P fighter) than Guerrero did against Floyd. I really don't care if Guerrero was able to last 12 rounds because he was totally dominated. I also think Sergio has more power at 160 than Floyd does at 147. When has Floyd displayed anything more than average power at 147? He's continued to be great at 147, but it hasn't been because he has particularly good power.

This is all a bit off topic as well because I don't base my case for his worth as a boxer entirely around his (respectable) pro resume/record. I've also seen some of his fights in the amateurs and saw his skills fully on display. Again, he went something like 345-5 in the amateurs. Very few guys compile a record like that.

If the manner in which you win doesn't matter then how do we determine which fighters are worth watching, evaluate guys with similar records, etc.? It isn't everything, but I do think if you dominate your opponents (even if its solid or slightly inferior opposition) it means you are at least ready to provide the guys at the next level a challenge. Golovkin's timing, power, ability to cut off the ring, and well-placed shots are certainly impressive to me. IMO, he certainly looks like major talent.

In any case, it does look like Golovkin is probably going to move up soon, so you'll get your wish. If his fight night weight doesn't go up (high 160s-170 thus far) then he will definitely be undersized just like Floyd has been at 147.

It seems like you're effectively blaming the guy for being stuck at Universum during the first part of his career and now for being stymied by the HBO/Showtime dispute as well as unwilling opponents. I know you don't like the MW division, but you should be able to understand why the guy wants to unify his natural division. I wish he had been given more opportunities up to this point though.

He would certainly fight Canelo, but I highly doubt GB would risk the fight even if there was no dispute between the networks.

Can you please clearly explain why Canelo deserved to be mentioned in the same sentence as Floyd but GGG doesn't? Was it because he beat up on faded veterans that weren't natural to JMW and/or because he brings money to the table due to his nationality? Had Canelo clearly established he's a level above Golovkin?

[Godsfly]

First off, I wasn't comparing Macklin with Guerrero. I was comparing Macklin's solid losing performance against Martinez to Berto's (a guy you implied was a good win for Guerrero) losses to lesser quality opponents. Also, Macklin performed far better against Martinez (not as good as Floyd, but still a top P4P fighter) than Guerrero did against Floyd. I really don't care if Guerrero was able to last 12 rounds because he was totally dominated. I also think Sergio has more power at 160 than Floyd does at 147. When has Floyd displayed anything more than average power at 147? He's continued to be great at 147, but it hasn't been because he has particularly good power.

This is all a bit off topic as well because I don't base my case for his worth as a boxer entirely around his (respectable) pro resume/record. I've also seen some of his fights in the amateurs and saw his skills fully on display. Again, he went something like 345-5 in the amateurs. Very few guys compile a record like that.

If the manner in which you win doesn't matter then how do we determine which fighters are worth watching, evaluate guys with similar records, etc.? It isn't everything, but I do think if you dominate your opponents (even if its solid or slightly inferior opposition) it means you are at least ready to provide the guys at the next level a challenge. Golovkin's timing, power, ability to cut off the ring, and well-placed shots are certainly impressive to me. IMO, he certainly looks like major talent.

In any case, it does look like Golovkin is probably going to move up soon, so you'll get your wish. If his fight night weight doesn't go up (high 160s-170 thus far) then he will definitely be undersized just like Floyd has been at 147.

It seems like you're effectively blaming the guy for being stuck at Universum during the first part of his career and now for being stymied by the HBO/Showtime dispute as well as unwilling opponents. I know you don't like the MW division, but you should be able to understand why the guy wants to unify his natural division. I wish he had been given more opportunities up to this point though.

He would certainly fight Canelo, but I highly doubt GB would risk the fight even if there was no dispute between the networks.

Can you please clearly explain why Canelo deserved to be mentioned in the same sentence as Floyd but GGG doesn't? Was it because he beat up on faded veterans that weren't natural to JMW and/or because he brings money to the table due to his nationality? Had Canelo clearly established he's a level above Golovkin?

ok, so you were comparing macklins solid losing performance with berto. what? dude. barker had a solid losing performance against martinez. murray had a solid losing performance against martinez. & macklin did better against martinez (vs Guerrero did mayweather) only because martinez is no where near as dominant as mayweather.......numerous guys have had solid losing performances against martinez (thats no accomplishment) robert Guerrero has A better resume then macklin & he's a much more solid fighter. shrink macklin into a welterweight & place him in the ring with mayweather.....he would probably get ko'd & do a hell of a lot worse then Guerrero. people would call him a bum (that mayweather cherry picked just to look good against) comparing macklin to Guerrero is a joke............Guerrero is not some ATG but without a doubt he's better then macklin.

power.......


martinez himself doesn't have marvelous power. in fact he has a much lower ko percentage.......when you fight guys like cotto, mosley, alverez, delahoya. these are guys with pretty sturdy chins........certain guys will knock down your ko percentage. mayweather has above average power. martinez has above average power..........p4p their around the same in the power department. martinez had a mini surge of knock outs but like i said. it varies from the level of comp & opponent to opponent........


also.........i really don't care about ggg's amateur record. the guy said that he has 5 years left in boxing. he's 31 years old without a signature win. do i want to see him waste that time trying to clean out a weak crap division? no. my solution to everyone low balling him and not wanting to give him fights at middleweight (as you say) is simply move up.


"Can you please clearly explain why Canelo deserved to be mentioned in the same sentence as Floyd but GGG doesn't"

canelo has campaigned at weltweight and jr middleweight. (which golovkin has not) canelo has a better record with his last win being trout. (golovkin is 31 years old and his best win is mathew freaking macklin) not only that but canelo has a much bigger name........i wouldn't say canelo deserved to be mentioned in the same class as mayweather but he's definitely a more worthy opponent. we haven't even seen ggg at jr. weltwereight & his trainer will talk crap all day about him fighting at jr. middle but they refuse to actually move him down there. instead they had jr. middleweights coming up to him. (what type of crap is that) that shows you that they had no intention of fighting at jr middle because if they did they could of just fought ishida or Rosado at jr. middle......

[Godsfly]

[JPsol]

ok, so you were you were comparing macklins solid losing performance with berto. what? dude. barker had a solid losing performance against martinez. murray had a solid losing performance against martinez. & macklin did better against martinez (vs Guerrero did mayweather) only because martinez is no where near as dominant as mayweather.......numerous guys have had solid losing performances against martinez (thats no accomplishment) robert Guerrero has A better resume then macklin & he's a much more solid fighter. shrink macklin into a welterweight & place him in the ring with mayweather.....he would probably get ko'd & do a hell of a lot worse then Guerrero. people would call him a bum (that mayweather cherry picked just to look good against) comparing macklin to Guerrero is a joke............Guerrero is not some ATG but without a doubt he's better then macklin.

power.......


martinez himself doesn't have marvelous power. in fact he has a much lower ko percentage.......when you fight guys like cotto, mosley, alverez, delahoya. these are guys with pretty sturdy chins........certain guys will knock down your ko percentage. mayweather has above average power. martinez has above average power..........p4p their around the same in the power department. martinez had a mini surge of knock outs but like it said. it varies from the level of comp & opponent to opponent........


also.........i really don't care about ggg's amateur record. the guy said that he has 5 years left in boxing. he's 31 years old without a signature win. do i want to see him waste that time trying to clean out a weak crap division? no. my solution to everyone low balling him and not wanting to give him fights at middleweight (as you say) is simply move up.


"Can you please clearly explain why Canelo deserved to be mentioned in the same sentence as Floyd but GGG doesn't"

canelo has campaigned at weltweight and jr middleweight. (which golovkin has not) canelo has a better record with his last win being trout. (golovkin is 31 years old and his best win is mathew freaking macklin) not only that but canelo has a much bigger name........i wouldn't say canelo deserved to be mentioned in the same class as mayweather but he's definitely a more worthy opponent. we haven't even seen ggg at jr. weltwereight & his trainer will talk this crap all day about him fighting at jr. middle but they refuse to actually move him down. instead they had jr. middleweights coming up to him. (what type of crap is that) that shows you that they have no intention of fighting at jr middle because if they did they could of just fought ishida or Rosado at jr. middle......

Again, I was comparing Macklin to Berto and GGG to Guerrero/Canelo. In any case, GGG destroyed/dominated Macklin, while the same cannot be said of Guerrero against Berto or arguably Aydin. I would also argue Macklin did better than Barker, but I think Murray did better than both. Regardless of all this, I will maintain that GGG is a better talent than Guerrero and arguably Canelo (he's definitely still promising given his age). It's as simple as the eye test in this instance.

I would also point out Martinez is bigger at MW than Floyd is at WW, so if they have the same P4P power in your eyes then it would follow that Martinez would be more powerful at MW than Floyd is at WW.

First off, they were going to fight Rosado (who is actually the same size if not bigger than Golovkin) at a catchweight of 158, but he requested the fight at 160. I didn't really pay attention to the Ishida fight since that was clearly just a keep busy affair. In both cases though Golovkin was the draw, so he isn't going to move far from his natural weight if he does not have to. I don't doubt he would seriously consider fighting Canelo or maybe even a Trout at 154 (the reason I say seriously consider is because all of them are about the same size on fight night, so there isn't necessarily a reason for it not to be at say 157). Who knows maybe he'll decide to move down instead of moving up soon, but I doubt that.

Shrink Macklin into a welterwight? Who knows what he would be like. Does he have P4P the same quickness and speed? How can I really judge this?

Again, what had Trout really proven in the 154 lb. division against top flight competition? You don't care about GGG's amateur career, but that is partially why Canelo has a "better record". Canelo had a very short amateur career and has been able to get a lot of the fights he or his team wants because he is Mexican. Golovkin had the relatively long (and successful) amateur career, his troubling stint at Universum, and does not have a built-in fan base like Canelo.

I already mentioned my thoughts about him moving up to 168, so it probably isn't necessary to go over it again.

[bklynboy]

Macklin is trash..............he's not the worse that I've seen but he has a horrible style for someone like a golavkin.

Well ... I wouldn't exactly call Macklin trash. He fought Martinez and Sturm pretty even. Anybody that wins even 5-6 rounds against Martinez is not trash.

Now -- I don't think GGG has anywhere near proved himself to be an ATG like Mayweather; and I am not in any way comparing GGG to Mayweather or any other HOFer or ATG. (Had to be said as the topic is about comparing GGG to Mayweather.)

Back to GGG. I consider the Macklin fight to be GGGs first real test. Was he nothing but hype? Did he belong? The answer is yes - and not because he beat Macklin but in the way he did it. That 3 punch combination he used was beautiful: left at 3/4 speed (to keep Macklin's gloves up), a right for the same reason - and then a quick shift to the left and hook to the body that brings down Macklin.

OM F**KING G. That was awesome.

Now Stevens is also a good test. Stevens has faster hands and good pop. Let's see what happens.

No one should be saying that GGG is an ATG. He hasn't done **** in that regard. But I think he's worth watching.