HBO needs to STOP with the false advertising, GGG is *not* the 160 champ

Trout was a nobody, he made his name by upseting Cotto and frankly hasn't done much since. Is losing to Mayweather an achievement now?

Bingo! Cotto is a draw at the Garden and was less risk to Martinez.

 

And everybody knows GGG won't get those fights because he is high risk&low reward.boxing is popularity contest and about money.yes i know that,i'm only thinking it by sports perspective.and to me it's wrong.

It amazes me,that people defend and justify this.

Also Cotto lost 2/3 of those fights.and you are correct that GGG won a paper title,and also that GGG resume is poor compared to Cotto.but why you don't want to give this man a chance?

You keep saying he fights these bums,and should step up.but in next breath you don't want to give the man a shot on Cotto?

You sound like a promoter.can you explain how GGG will proof himself?using your logic GGG can never step up in the competition.

Fights bums,is paper titlist,doesn't deserve shot on lineal title,needs to prove himself etc..

Sounds impossible task.

Using that logic,GGG should keep fighting these bums and would never get a chance to prove himself.

 

In here Boxing Forums,many posters have ordered the book

FLOYD MAYWEATHER AND THE ART OF EXCUSES&DUCKING 101

 

And it sickens me that many use an excuse that fighters resume is loaded and he don't need to prove himself,and it's okay him to take a small vacation.or handpick couple of opponents

In sports you have to prove yourself everyday.Lebron James don't take year off in basketball court.saying i can take it easy because i don't have anything to prove.maybe next year.he would get flamed,so as any other sport star.

Again this **** is possible only in boxing.

If you are the best,fight against the best.if you don't fight.vacate your title.there is no need that we have champion who won't defend his belts regulary.

 

The point you were trying to make didn't to over my head, I just offered you a different perspective to help you understand why your point didn't make sense in this situation based on the fact that GGG is a MW.

GGG has more than just power. His extensive AM background ensured Golovkin is working with solid skills based on a foundation of over 340+ fights even before he turned pro. To think he won't have the ability to find his mark is a bit dusional as even a guy as raw as Miadana was able to find the most elusive boxer in the game today, Floyd Mayweather.

You can say that GGG has only faced "tomato cans".......but that wouldn't make it reality. He hasn't been facing elite guys but those guys aren't knocking down doors looking to face GGG either.

 

Triple Duck can beat HWs in sparring , yeah? but he can't take a fight at SMW?

Move up , move down. Thats what he said years ago.

Wait for another no namer to be announced next.

 

So now the IBO belt counts because it fits this one argument of yours?

Cool...

 

Hard to fight anybody with name when nobody gives you the chance,because you are not proven.

Just fought 2 top10 MW'S in Geale and Rubio,next will probably fight agains somebody same caliber.because he doesn't deserve bigger fights.and after that it will be probably another noname.because he still doesn't deserve big fights,because he never fought anybody proven.

It's really endless cycle with this.

Everybody else earns shots over him according to couple of posters here.no need to argue anymore about this subject with you guys

 

Well becoming mandatory for the title was a good start when I suggested it last year everyone claimed Rubio was a bum and GGG shouldn't fight him.
Look Cotto is fighting a better more accomplished fighter than GGG in his next fight, and for his last fight. The Cotto/Canelo have both said they have no problem facing GGG after they fight each other. I think Canelo beats Cotto and GGG and have said it multiple times so I don't think he win the Lineal title anyway I could see your point if these guys were fighting nobodies while GGG was sitting there but there fighting guys who have done more and have a better claim at being one of the best.

 

The ring championship policy had ceased by the time Foreman was champ, not until Holyfield Lewis did they award a new champion.

The champion doesn't have to be the best, in fact he rarely ever is the best because the vast majority of champions lose in the ring.

But lineage can't be disputed because Foreman beat the man who beat the man, as Cotto did. Golovkin might well be the best but that won't be proven until Cotto agrees to fight him.

Again Golovkin is no more than the outstanding contender to the championship, it's just that he has a couple of titles to his name. Most global ranking bodies have Cotto above for good reason.

 

They just had a #1 for all divisons. They removed Foreman from the top 10 completely and made Holyfield #1.

Lineage can't be disputed, but the lineal Champion's claim as the top guy can be, as we saw with Foreman.

If Cotto doesn't defend the title against Golovkin he will not remain so.

If Cotto is stripped of his belt and never fights another meaningful MW opponent, you people still going to be trumping him as the true Champion because of lineage?

 

Exactly. The idea of lineage gets twisted depending on the agenda of those discussing it.