Who had the better CAREER: Froch or Golovkin?!

Best win vs best win and drug cheating Canelo is obviously much better than Kessler, so GGG.

 

You telling people to debate properly? Eff off with that crap. What's Froch's best win in your opinion?

 

Lacy?!?! There's goes what cred you THINK you had....

You are clearly just taking the **** here... no one in their right mid would suggest what you just did in regards to Taylor/Lacy/AA...

95% of the world knows Canelo is 3G's best win. Go troll someone else if this is your level...

And Kessler is Froch's best win? Kessler's status seems to be based on a loss to Calzaghe and Ward.. his wins aren't that great for his supposed status.

 

why am i wrong to correct u mistakes? explain.

i already wrote kessler is a possible candidate. why did you ask again.

 

explain why lacy is not a smw win

explain why taylor post lacy is not a smw win

explain how a draw or loss is a win.

 

**** off.... this is troll stuff.

 

I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying, but if Kessler got the kind of officiating that Canelo does, he might well still be undefeated.

 

That can sort of be said for anyone though. Well, those w/o a KO loss

 

He's too slow. Speed is what put Froch on the canvas. You can see Golovkins punches coming a mile away

 

Froch by some way

Better resume AND H2H

 

noted that you ran from explaining why lacy isnt a smw win, ok.

 

Myth

 

You're using too much logic for Lance. He's going to start verbally abusing you or run and hide. Its what happens when you use logic with him.

 

Golovkin was the number 1 middleweight from 2014 to September 2018 on basically every list worth talking about, Ring, ESPN, three of the four world titles. Canelo didn't do anything significant at MW until he fought Golovkin in September 2017, no way he was arguably no. 1 just like that.

And regarding p4p just look at the rankings history, Golovkin spent far more in the top 5 than Froch, who never even made it there.

We are discussing who had the better career. You could argue that Golovkin got overrated and Froch underrated on these lists, but the fact remains that Golovkin was considered number 1 MW and a top p4p boxer for far, far longer.

His resume is worse but it does not follow that Froch must be better p4p. Resume is largely determined by who a boxer had the opportunity to fight.

 

Froch better resume as it stands but ggg is still active, ggg will be remembered historicaly, Froch's achievements will be forgotten over time.
History remembers fighters who dominated their division, regardless of who they have on their resume, controversial decisions for or against keep fighters careers in mind and get used as reference.
Ggg had those things, Froch didn't.
So it depends on how you rate a career, and once you break it down the only thing that matters is who will be remembered longest/who left more of a mark on the sport....
So I think that will be ggg