What do you mean "Once again"? This is the first exchange we've had on this thread. The only quotation is that of your very own words, automatically inserted into the 'Reply' post. Other than that, I didn't quote you. Now I will quote you (in your favorite This content is protected ). You wrote: " This content is protected " You DID NOT write: " This content is protected he won the first fight cleanly" You are quite laughable. Nothing I wrote misrepresents what you posted initially, but you then go and misrepresent what you originally posted to try and make out you were misquoted. You need a vacation, chap - really! This is irrelevant to the point made. You clearly and without question put forward the idea that the scale of GGG's legacy is directly linked to Canelo's because you think GGG beat Canelo. Whether Canleo could beat a retired Hagler or not is neither here nor there.
GGG was the number 1 in the world. He is still subject to critique imo. Hence why I did. Hagler had much more fights by that point. He was done as a top fighter at the age he was because he burnt himself out and lost ambition. GGG has had the same happen to him, just later. Why'd you think he quit the altitude camp and is only chasing paydays? It means the judges know better than I do. The 2nd was razor thin, Canelo got the nod. Deal with it. I had it a draw, but had GGG winning the first. I mean, it doesn't lol. It means I'm taking an experts word for it. Here's my top 10: 1. Harry Greb 2. Carlos Monzon 3. Marvin Hagler 4. Sugar Ray Robinson 5. Bernard Hopkins 6. Bob Fitzsimmons 7. Jake LaMotta 8. Freddie Steele 9. Dick Tiger 10. Holman Williams Which of these does he deserve to be above? And why? I just can't see it.
Hopkins for a start I believe he gets very overrated, got schooled in his first step up to elite level against Jones, struggled to say the very least against Mercado, gets massive credit for beating blown up Trinidad and never-really-was-a-middleweight De La Hoya. Got beaten back to back v Taylor and had to wait til Jones was a shell before exacting his 'revenge'. Golovkin just out works him and stalks him down all night to a UD at worst without being bothered about anything Hopkins brings. I really think Hopkins is massively overrated but maybe it's just me. LaMotta is really just a poor man's Golovkin. Prime Golovkin is really bad news for LaMotta, I think Golovkin would hurt him badly. I wouldn't bet against him v most of those at middleweight, except for Hagler and Monzon. I don't know about Greb really, it's a harder fight for me, Fitzsimmons? I don't know if I'm honest, we're going back a really long way now. Robinson is tough as well, he did enough at the age he was against some very good middleweights to make the top ten though. You don't fancy Jones in there? Hagler, Monzon, Greb, Jones, Golovkin and Robinson are all easy for my top ten, Fitzsimmons and Fullmer probably too. Don't know about the rest or to put them in order, have to think a bit more.
Jones would do that to GGG. Who gave Jones a better fight before he got to 175? Tito was a damn sight better than Brook. Joppy, Johnson and Allen(3x) is better than Jacobs, Derevyanchenko and Lemieux imo. Also, 20 title defences is better than 9... you can literally argue for days about whether Hopkins actually lost to Taylor. If you go off official scores, then you gotta do the same and say Canelo beat him and the best he could do was a draw. You know mid 90s Hopkins fought with a high-pace right? He'd do a helluva lot better than Canelo did in the first. He'd capitalise on GGG's reliance on his jab. Regardless, H2H is a pointless argument for how you grade someone, you go in circles with no actual claims to back anything up. I think you need to learn about Jake LaMotta... Robinson has an ATG MW résumé. Beating LaMotta 4/5 times is enough to be top 10. Then you gotta factor in the wins over Fullmer, Basilio, Olson Dykes, Basora, Mims, Graziano ect. Also, Robinson on the 14th Feb, 1951 is quite simply a top 3 fighter of all time. AT LEAST. He's a lock for top 4 imo. Arguably the 2nd best MW ever. Nope. A single win over a green Hopkins isn't enough for me. He is one of the best ever H2H, though. Yeah, I think you're definitely overrating Jones' and GGG's achievements. It's cool though, it's hardly a bad list either way. Fitz is a must, but Fullmer is reallyyyy sus.
If he did, it doesn't have much to do with GGG-Hopkins? He maybe would, when GGG was 35, as usual you don't acknowledge that Golovkin had a prime and it was long before Canelo. I don't. Yes, hence his top ten inclusion, he did also lose quite a lot, to fighters not better than GGG. One of the best ever 'head to head', but he's not better than Hopkins? Your parameters are a bit strange. Fair do's, we can have a different opinion.
Yeah. It's not a valid criticism. It wasn't long before Canelo. Don't pretend. It was from 2012 to 2015/2016. That's not "long before Canelo". Then you should stop making claims like this... LaMotta is really just a poor man's Golovkin. It's a bad look When? In his prime he lost to LaMotta and Turpin. Avenging both. LaMotta is definitely better than GGG and Turpin is an excellent fighter as well. Given that H2H and achievements are different things... Yeah, Hopkins is greater at 160, but Jones is better. No. I just have two lists.
how long after his destruction of Hearns and Hamsho was Hagler struggling against Mugabi and stuck in the mud v Leonard? He really is though, smaller , less power , less defence. Great fighter for sure but please tell me what I'm missing? Even his self-espoused chin is probably behind Golovkin. Well, no. His prime was welterweight and he lost one of six v LaMotta, heavily outweighed. Well, they both are factors, ' Jones is better'. That's true, so just make it simple.
Lamotta would take everything from the overrated "super" power of golovkin, lamotta was too tough for him
He dominated his era, this is very rare. I'm against the general concensus that I think Alvarez decided to edge him on points. Everyone
Lamotta was an overrated journeyman who beat up on lightweights. Lloyd Marshall didn't rate him after beating him. Said he wasn't as good as the murders row crew How many top middleweights lose to a 142lb fighter as a MW. Embarassing How does Golovkin not outbox and outpunch Lamotta? Lamotta wasn't very good.
Golovkin was only calling out aging welter weights because he didn't want to try fight anybody above his own weight class. Andre Ward gave him a good offer and he went running. GGG was much closer in size to Ward than he was to Mayweather and Pacquaio. Trying to fight those guys while avoiding Ward was cowardly. Martinez was 40 and had a badly shot leg when Golovkin came calling. Sergio had every right to retire , he was totally finished as the Cotto fight sadly showed. But you call Martinez at 40 years old a ducker. Why? Here you say a still fully capable Golovkin should retire at 37.. Double standards exposed.
