Why was Rigo over the hill at 37 yet GGG is prime at 36?

Because people are different.

 

Why was Mayweather able to dominated Canelo at 36, but Golovkin struggled 2 times?
Why did Fury scare Wlad out of the titles, but Joshua fought tooth and nail for the win?
Why did Bush knock down the towers? Why I'm I even around you cowards?
Why?

 

False equivalencies.

Golovkin fought a prime Canelo. Mayweather did not. Golovkin fought Canelo at 160. Mayweather fought Canelo at 152.

Fury beat Wlad in an easy boring fight. Because styles make fights. Joshua struggled against an ancient Wlad. Also Fury is a much superior technician to Joshua or Wlad.

 

Excuses tinman. Canelo has 40 fights before fighting Mayweather, thats a lot of experience. What, wait until Floyd is 40?
Golovkin is not as talented as alot of you guys wish he was and thats the reality. He is good but not great. Plus calling that boring but profitable fight between Wlad and Fury "technical" is not accurate. Wlad had not faced a man his own size in a decade, he was afraid of getting chin checked.

 

He shouldn't have fought Floyd. It was too early to step up, especially being drained. If you think that Canelo from 2012 is as good as 2018 Canelo then will just have to disagree.

GGG isn't some incredibly great fighter anyways. But to say he's in his prime is false.

Also Fury's technique was very underappreciated. Joshua punches way harder than Fury anyways.

 

Thankyou!!!

Very few boxing fans get that today.
The smaller weight classes rely more on speed and reflexes and those are the first to go as you age.

When you think of fighter still fighting at a high level that are past the age of 35, its almost all above the lightweight limit.
……..and the lower in weight you go the less the probability of there being a higher in age world champion in that division.
…...and the higher in weight you go, the higher the probability of a world champion being up there in age.

 

Any Fighter who has had 400 Fights and is 36 is on a downward spiral...especially in the Lighter divisions...

 

I agree, but Golovkin's style is a young man's style. Well he's actually evolved his style as he aged. Starting with Lemiuex he began transitioning into a boxer-puncher. And pretty much abandoned his swarmer style. Pressure fighting is the most physically taxing and draining style on your body.

How many elite pressure fighters do you see after age 35?

 

Yes, it makes a big difference. Flyweights can wear out at 25 or 26. Heavyweights can fight at 40 and it does not mean as much. Never could Foreman have fought if he weighed 108. Slower pace etc.

 

Foreman in his early 40s took one hell of a beating from Holyfield. A 70s Foreman knocks out Holyfield in 2 rounds. So while I agree that HW's can slow down the decline much better. They're still inevitably aging and slowing down past 35.

 

I don't see Holyfield being knocked out by Foreman in 2 rounds. Evander did not come forward like Frazier. He used his jab and would counter.

 

Remember the Cuban multiplier is x1.25

Take Rigo's age at the time (37) and multiply by that = 46.25

Guy was 46 and 4 months.

Not sure why Boxrec doesn't use this factual multiplier.

Joe Louis age multiplier is x3.702703
So we take his age when he fought Marciano, 37, and multiply it by that and you get his real age, 137.000011 years old.

For Ortiz, just add B.C. before the day he was born and start counting the years from then til now.

 

So jab and move like Ken Norton?

 

Evander was greater than Kenny Norton. Evander was a great amatuer and jabbed well and countered and many of his punches on George which landed were when he started to land he kept it going as George was off balance. he would reset and jab and then land again. The punch which won the fight for Evander was the jab. and double jabbing Norton was not double jabbing against Foreman, he was throwing one jab at a time and backing up almost in fear. And Evander had offence on his mind. Evander was much greater than Norton. In my estimation.

 

AKA they hate Golovkin and don't hate Rigo. Simple logic. Case and point this thread. Those trying to argue to one case in true and the other isn't(I think both scenario's are) are notorious Golovkin haters.