Ottke undoubtedly has a better super middle record than Jones. Admitting that McCallum is light in the pants to take on GGG ^ We disagree. I think that Golovkin is better than Tiberi, Sanderline Williams and Duane Thomas. I think his record would have two more wins on it and guys like you would be calling them mediocre. Because Golovkin would put their heads on a pike. As you have assiduously tried to misunderstand since the start. Better than OLD Kalambay? Or WELTERWEIGHT Jackson? Or, LOL, let me guess, Steve Collins? Jacobs, Derevyanchenko,Lemieux, Geale and Brook off the top of my head. Sure but in the same breath you point out that Golovkin had hard fights against Jacobs and SD without taking into consideration the context thereof. That we are looking at the work of an OLD fighter. At middleweight Toney did not look that impressive. He got the crap beaten out of him by Nunn and soundly spanked by Jones. Wrong. I'm pointing at his sad, sad outing against Sanderine as well. He fought an OLD McCallum and barely squeaked by. Toney also barely scraped past Sosa and Reggie Johnson. Everytime Toney stepped it up at middleweight it seems that he had to struggle mightily to accomplish anything. Golovkin by contrast did not start looking mortal until he got into his late boxing career.
Yes but is Ottke a better fighter than RJJ ? no. That's the same logic you was trying to apply with Golovkin/McCallum and it was a very poor argument from do you even read what you post ? What ? Yeah Golovkin was more consistent than Toney in regards to staying in shape and being a consistent performer. But on the flipside Golovkin would also probably have more losses on his record had he fought Toney's level of opposition so that works both ways. Toney also moved up in weight and challenged himself, Golovkin's only fight above Middleweight was a flat performance vs Canelo in their 3rd fight in which he lost. Put who's head on a pike what are you even talking about ? i said Golovkin hasn't beaten the same level of opposition as McCallum or Toney i don't even know what you're rambling on about in regards to this comment. Welterweight Jackson ? the fight took place at Jr Middleweight ? since when was Jackson a Welterweight ? and you're also talking about Welterweight when Brook an actual Welterweight moved up two weightclasses to fight Golovkin in a weightclass he'd never fought at ? and you're classing that as a better win over the likes of Jackson ? Kalambay ? and you accuse me of double standards.......laughable. As for implying the likes of Geale, Lemieux, are better opponents than Jackson ? Kalambay ? i think any knowledgeable poster here will know that's complete rubbish. I'm taking into consideration Golovkin never beat anyone as good as Jacobs am i wrong ? hence it's hard to gauge Golovkin's level when he doesn't have any stand out wins. We can only judge him based on the best Middleweights he fought which were Canelo, Derveyanchenko, Jacobs, in which he didn't have a standout performance in any of those fights. Also funny how in your last comment you rate Brook as one of Golovkin's best wins which was prior to his fight with Jacobs was it not ? so was Golovkin old vs Brook aswell ? or just vs Jacobs to fit your narrative ? Golovkin had no wear and tear and had not been in any tough fights prior to Jacobs fight so he was relatively fresh. He didn't get the crap beaten out of him by Nunn that's completely false, Nunn built up and early lead but Toney had won the last 3 or 4 rounds in a row prior to the stoppage and was coming on strong. Nunn would also be far and away Golovkin's best win on his resume so i don't see how scoring a KO over the number 1 rated Lineal Middleweight champion is a negative ? Toney also had what is considered one of the mostly highly skilled technical fights of all time vs Mike McCallum, another name who would be far and away the best opponent Golovkin ever beat. He didn't squeak by Sosa stop looking at boxrec for reference and actually watch the fight Toney won that fight clearly by atleast 6 rounds it was not close at all. Sanderline Williams was a tough awkward journeyman who gave alot of good fighters trouble. He lost razor thin decisions to Benn, Barkley, and often went the distance in close fights vs alot of notable fighters. Reggie Johnson, Mike McCallum, are clearly a level above the likes of Daniel Jacobs, Sergiy Derveyanchenko. Golovkin started looking mortal because he stepped up in competitio, whilst i'm not deny Golovkin isn't a class fighter. It's also fair to say his opposition was not that strong during his reign and when your best win is Daniel Jacobs that says it all really. Toney had some flat performances we all know this but we're comparing both fighters vs their best opposition and Toney clearly looked better vs higher quality opposition.
This is bad. Like REALLY bad. This is a No Neck type post. One of two things is happening here: 1. You are trolling for some amusement. 2. You’re having some free time on the asylum’s computer where you’ve recently been sectioned. This is one of the worst posts I’ve ever seen. I don’t know what’s happening with you. You’re usually a very good poster.
Sanderline Williams was robbed against Iran Barkley and could very easily also hold a win over Nigel Benn, name a Golovkin victim who could potentially do that.
Sure, Jacobs was a good fighter and bigger than the MWs McCallum faced. Dereva... also good, sure, although he's really mostly known for giving Jacobs and GGG close, hard fights. He never really beat anyone of note. But Geale, Lemieux and Brook??? Geale made small and old Cotto look like prime Mike Tyson and Lemieux made Saunders look like a southpaw Willie Pep. And Brook did ****ing what at MW? Manners.
It's especially silly when he calls Julian Jackson a Welterweight for some bizarre reason ? When Jackson held titles at Jr Middleweight/Middleweight. But yet considers Brook a legit Middleweight win who moved up two weightclasses to fight Golovkin and never had a single win at that weightclass. And yet I'm being accused of having double standards baffling.
That's why people should never look up on Boxrec and assume stuff based on fighters record. As you said Williams run Barkley, Benn, very close and also went the distance in other competitive fights vs other notable names. He was a very defensively sound tricky fighter who wasn't an easy night for anyone. Another example is Jesse Burnett if you look at his record it's nothing to write home about. But if you watch his fights and do some research you'll find he lost alot of controversial decisions vs top fighters. Burnett was definitely robbed in the John Conteh who he dropped twice, and lost other controversial decisions to Leon Spinks and Victor Galindez.
I don't much give a toss about these and don't have any real problems with GGG as a pick. He was very good and bigger than most MWs in Mike's era, and MW wasn't McCallums best weight anyhow. So, sure, maybe GGG wins. But you go to some absurd lengths to make your case. Lemieux and Geale were much bigger than old time MWs, but they were not good. Cotto and Saunders weren't great MWs and they made these guys look like absolute amateurs. And Brook never did anything above WW. So to ease up just a tad might be a good thing for you.
Not really the Middleweight division wasn't that strong when Golovkin reigned and he never had a standout name on his resume his best win is Daniel Jacobs and that's a fact. People prefer McCallum's smoother skillset and more proven ability against top opposition that's absolutely fair. Pretty much no one agrees with any of your points in this thread. So I would I say it's more of a you problem than a "them" problem. It's not the fact you think Golovkin wins this fight which is your opinion which your entitled to just like it's my opinion McCallum wins. It's the way you've gone about it some of your points are baffling and really don't make much sense in all honesty. Trying to make cases for the likes of Brook, Geale, Lemieux, and then in the same sentence you frown upon names like McCallum, Kalambay, Jackson, is just baffling.
At a certain point wiping the floor with whoever is around carries a certain weight. Joe Louis for example beat nobody who would give anybody in the modern heavyweight top ranks sleepless nights. Yet he's very highly regarded despite the bum of the month tour. Regardless, you wildly underrate Golovkin's opposition and overrate Mike's. You just pointed out that MM was at junior middle for much of his career. So more like a Brook than a Danny Jacobs, let's be honest. I see nobody that Toney fought at middleweight outside Jones who I think would have a chance of beating Golovkin. 40 year old fighters against elite opposition tend to fare badly. The same as McCallum who was what, 35-36 when he fought Toney, had a tough time. Nobody seems to want to address this point. Clearly your comprehension problems are coming to the fore again. Sorry super welterweight. I misread. Regardless, the point stands - a weight division below middle. And Kalambay was old and shopworn by that time. If a junior middle is a great win, then we have to give credit to Golovkin for beating a middleweight version of Brook, no? Or are your double standards coming to the fore again? And Kalambay was old. 35 is old for a boxer. Middleweight Lemieux. Young Geale. As usual people ignore context when they get emotional and try to defend their favourite fighters regardless of the facts. Yes you are wrong, Golovkin beat Jacobs. He officially won two and in my opinion beat Canelo twice. Actually in my opinion his worst fight was against Derevyanchenko over the first two Canelo fights. To repeat: 35 is old for a fighter. Furthermore 400 odd amateur fights are not "no wear and tear". To repeat: age wasn't the only factor against Jacobs. Jacobs had fully rehydrated and GGG had not. Here's the full fight. I feel Nunn handily outboxed Toney until he ran out of gas. Watch the fight and refresh your memory: This content is protected Nunn never fought in this era so it's hard to say. He'd be one of the better names, sure. Let's talk about the two wins GGG has over Canelo. Yeah he was a real beast Opinion. I don't think so. he hit 35 and his speed and reflexes dropped off. Yes. Disagree.
Cotto dehydrated Geale into a waxwork. Did you even see the weigh in? It was laughable. Saunders is one of the Toney types who could pick it up when needed. If you're talking "best versions" a best version of Saunders is a nasty proposition.
