Deep division with over a 100 years of history. Talent wise yes, he would beat people above him resume wise he's close if not already there yet.
Resume wise he ain't close yet. Big GGG fan but this kinda s#it's best left to the fans of the future.
I would place him outside top 50 myself for the time being, based upon the mediocre names littered on his ledger. He did have a stellar amateur background that I would give some credence too, he also has made 13 successful defenses of his title and counting. He is being avoided by all the top competition and belt holders in his division like the plague. So even if he doesn't get to mingle with all of the alphabet strap holders in the ring, his stature as the "man" in his weight class will carry merit on such lists when looked at in context. Very soon this question will be irrevelant if his career trajectory plays out as many suspect it will.
Yes. Golovkin looks like a special fighter. A confident and ferocious fighter who happens to have great skills, fast hands and ATG power at 160 pounds. Never floored as an amateur or pro, I think he has a great chin too. While ranking active fighters is tricky, I think he has shown enough in a head to head rating to be placed in the top 15. I would like to see Mayweather fight him at 154 but its not going to happen.
Negative, by estimation. Definitely above him: Lytell Papke Monzon Moore Greb Hagler Robinson Klause Hopkins Fitzsimmons Martinez Thill Fulmer McCoy Dillon Burley Wade Chase O'Brien Ketchel Walker Cocoa Kid Tiger Tunero Smith Jones Junior LaMotta Williams Cerdan Flowers Langford Steele Charles Giardello Toney Ryan Griffith Gibbons Other Gibbons Dempsey Chip Booker Graziano Zivic Yarosz Rodriguez Zale Taylor Hostak Kriger Soose Overlin Then I really need to start investigimating. Would people have him above Ray Leonard right now? Or not?
That's my question. Yes he's undefeated, has a lot of title wins and has looked positively stellar in a lot of his performances. But be that as it may, who has he really fought? Not saying his abilities should be questioned. He's clearly a remarkable middle weight by all standards. But his win column is lacking in anyone elite. And if we're honest, 30 fights isn't a terribly huge number when sizing him up to the very best middles of all time. He might be good enough to barely crack the top 50, but I don't know that I'd have him too deep into it.
I think so. To me Ray Leonard is a superb welterweight and a p4p giant. But having only one fight at middleweight isn't enough to place him ahead of a man who has been crippling a division for years, even if that one fight was against Marvin Hagler.
I think I would disagree with you. I think beating Marvin Hagler is more impressive at middleweight than Golovkin's entire resume value. But on the other hand, what you say isn't unreasonable, and if I was making an actually list I might leave him off it based upon that one-fight logic. Which is why I didn't list him I suppose.
I agree with the apparent lack of quality wins on GGG's record. And I'm not opposed to anyone ranking Leonard higher. But a narrow decision win between two aging foes when sized up to a lengthy title reign falls a little short from where I stand. Still, not an unreasonable point on your end.
He's achieved just about as much and been as dominant in his weightclass as pre Spinks Tyson. So Yes.