Golovkin vs. Roy Jones Jr. @ 160 lbs both in their prime.

Bhop & Toney would both lose to GGG.

 

What are you showing us?

Vinny's wild swings, where only one shot got through?


Now go and look at the left hook that Roy finished Tate with.

 

Based on what?

I love GGG but he hasn't done hardly anything as yet.

A MW Toney was a hell of a fighter.

 

I think he would find GGG, GGG would find RJJ.
We know what happens when Roy gets caught.

Just ftr, GGG has knocked more people out in more brutal fashion than RJJ ever did.

 

IF is the biggest word in the English language.

IF GGG could get close to him and land flush.

But look at Roy's offensive ars*nal, along with his speed and GGG's defence.

It's not a given that Roy would have been pressured and backed up, but he could have put GGG on the defensive all night.

Look at their attributes one by one.

Roy had many clear advantages.

GGG isn't hard to hit, and he marks up easily.

Yes, IF he'd have landed flush, then Roy would have been taking a nap.

But look at the Tate fight, for a reminder of how devastating Roy was back then. Thomas Tate was a decent fighter who'd gone the distance with Julian Jackson.

 

I'm showing you if some poor boxer can get Superman on the ropes, just imagine what GGG would do when he did.

 

Look at each fighters offense.

Then look at each fighters defence.

Offensively, Roy was more of a threat, with his superior speed, along with his power and his shot variation.

Defensively, GGG is quite easy to hit, whereas Roy wasn't.

Roy was never stopped until he was 35, after more than 50 fights.

Roy was content to coast until a knockout presented itself. The only fight where he went in there specifically looking for a knockout, was against Griffin in the rematch.

Again, bump the thread in a few years.

As yet, I can't see any evidence where GGG would have been favoured over Roy at 24/25.

 

You've shown me Paz throwing 23 punches, with only two glancing shots having landed, without any leverage.

Now go and view the Tate knockout. Because that shot was from out of nowhere, and those are the shots that do the most damage.

This is how simple it is for me:

Roy had much more of a chance of landing clean on GGG, than vice versa.

And seeing as though how Roy's power was equal, along with more speed and variation, then there would only have been one winner.

 

Roy wouldn't fight him.

 

Why?

He fought Toney didn't he?

 

Thomas Tate had been in with Julian Jackson and not stopped,and Jones stopped him with one punch in round 2.

Thulani Malinga had been in with a whole host of top MWs, and SMWs and never stopped, and Jones took him clean out in 6 rounds.

People seem to remember his athleticism, speed and elusiveness, but thye guy was an absolute wrecking machine at 160

 

:good

IMHO, GGG is fresh in people's minds, they look at his KO's, and then they also envisage Roy's bad knockout defeats.

But just go and look back at Roy from the early 90's.

I really like GGG, but Roy was something else back then.

 

We are using logic in boxing when we compare and deduct, but there are areas where logic is thrown out the window because of emotional proclivities- much like we see on this board.

 

Roy would literally knock his block off with one hook.

 

Not sure