Gennady Golovkin vs. Carl Froch @ 168.

Generally regarded as the last thing to leave a fighter, but, oh well.

Ouma isn't a puncher of any real note. That said, I doubt it was Golovkin's intention to get hit nearly as much as he did. He had nothing to gain from doing so. He wasn't trying to win over a lucrative market, he was in Panama. It wasn't a "Here's my face, Willie Monroe, hit it for free a few times on HBO before I whoop your C-level butt" type of situation. And he certainly didn't appear to be having a ton of fun in that fight. It rather resembled what is known as a life-and-death battle.

But I realise that there will always be excuses when it comes to Golovkin. Typically, the excuse-makers say he doesn't need any excuses, pointing out that he beat [insert name] into the hospital, but then make them all the same. GGG had flu, GGG got stuck at the airport, GGG was letting him do that, GGG wanted to look beatable to make [insert name] fight him. So I won't waste my time in a circular argument with the cultists.

 

Didn’t even need to post in this thread. Good job to those who have common sense. Guy barely gets past DJ. Froch would’ve ripped G’s head off and shove it up his buttocks.

 

Yeah, Ouma woulnd't land on Froch as well would he, or does Froch get him out of there in 1rd. Lol

 

A slick southpaw like Ouma would give Froch nightmares. Froch would beat him later on like GGG did but you're just downplaying Ouma as some bum when he's clearly a solid fighter for anybody.

 

This.

 

Prime GGG lmao. You mean when he was fighting cab drivers never seeing the 11th and 12th round? Every fight has been an excuse even in victory.

 

I have a lot of respect for Ouma, and I'd recommend the film that documents his incredible story to anyone reading here. The man could certainly fight a bit, but, before we start throwing the poor guy in a ring with Froch, let's remember 1. who had dealt with him handily enough prior to his fight with Golovkin, 2. what kind of a run he was on against anything resembling top opposition when he faced Golovkin and 3. the fact that you're presenting the 2011 Golovkin as some mythical beast who would eat Carl Froch up and spit him out.

I'm not really trying to imagine how a faded, blown-up Ouma, whose optimum performance years were at 154, fares against a career 168lber. I'm just saying, you were talking about a mythical version of GGG that existed in 2011, and that doesn't fit my recollection of the guy I saw back then.

Golovkin only became a faded fighter when Canelo started to loom realistically in the distance. You know, just in case.

I honestly think some of the fans who bought in are having a hard time coming to grips with Golovkin being not quite what he was cracked up to be by his biggest backers. A good middleweight fighter, perhaps even a very good middleweight fighter, but not great, amateur pedigree be damned.

 

I don't think anybody makes the case that GGG would "destroy" Froch. It would be a competitive fight, and a very good one. But imho GGG does too many things well for Froch to handle. Golovkin stretched Bute out in the amateurs with pillow gloves and headgear on. I've no doubt that he would have done the same in the pro ranks. Golovkin and Froch are similar in punching power.

 

One of the best technical/punchers in MW history with an iron chin gives Carl Froch problems, its just Froch's flaws are too damn apparently for this to be ignored. I never said he'd spit him out, stop putting words in my mouth, I said he beats him easily, as would Joe. Froch's not walking through GGG, he'd be lucky to get past his elite jab. I won't even mention footwork in this bout, because GGG will be dictating the pace and the range from the start.

I'm not to sure what point you're trying to make stating GGG is somehow still in his prime when Canelo was around, Canelo avoided GGG for a few more years to fight a faded version. Athletes lose a step in their early 30's, this is throughout all sports, soccer, boxing, tennis, etc... You probably think "Prime" Pacman just lost to Horn don't you, Christ.

 

He also experienced somewhat of a torrid 3rd round in a bout that was far from one-sided prior to Bute being sat down. Bute's range and herky-jerky time signature gave Golovkin his fair share of issues, with Bute actually able to land inside the latter's shots at times.

I don't really like to dig up amateur fights, but I thought I'd offer my two cents on that one seeing as it was raised. Froch presents some awkward angles and is a lot tougher than Bute.

 

Froch was getting KTFO in the amateurs.

 

That's a fair post and I don't have a problem with it. We are talking about the creme de la creme of boxing at the time and it's natural that the fights should be competitive. Golovkin did however work Bute out in the end and timed him beautifully. I would have loved to see Froch / GGG. I can't see how that fight would fail to deliver.

 

Ok, you said he'd beat him quite easily. Whatever Joe has to do with the discussion, Golovkin is certainly not him (entirely different bag of tricks, Calzaghe had tremendous upper body movement for a start).

Nobody said it would be a tactically smart idea for Froch to try to walk through GGG. Froch, for the most part, isn't even that kind of fighter, though he will press the fight a bit more where necessary (Taylor, Dirrell, those kinds of scenarios). He's pretty versatile.

The ATG MW technical puncher struggled to dictate the pace and the range against Daniel Jacobs, and he certainly didn't win that fight easily.

That is the point I'm trying to make. You just said it.

All the talk of Golovkin being faded began as soon as the Canelo fight started coming around the bend. It's a little like Trump suddenly being a racist the second he announced he was running for the Republican ticket.

Your 'Exhibit A' was punching power. Widely considered the last thing to leave a fighter, especially one whom relies on technique as opposed to pure dynamic athleticism to generate his power.

Pacquiao, a fighter whose style was defined by dynamic athleticism in his pomp, has been in more wars than I care to count against more quality fighters than GGG can dream of sharing a ring with at this stage. What Pacquiao's venerable ring-age has to do with Golovkin still being within his optimum performance range, I won't even try to guess.


Btw, maybe it's a sign of the impoverished boxing times we live in that Daniel Jacobs is ever described by anyone as "slick". In all seriousness, the recipe for the degree of success he enjoyed against GGG was quite basic boxing allied to size.

Joey Giardello and George Benton were slick, as in guys who can fight in and out and put it all together real smooth-like, make it look effortless. Danny can box some, but he's rather more workaday than that.

 

And those are perfectly reasonable sentiments, man. I can get along with that.

 

Golovkin would murder Froch!