Did GGG struggle vs Canelo because he was past his prime or was Canelo just the best guy he faced

GGG got hit far less by Jacobs than he did by Canelo, but Canelo beat Jacobs more convincingly, so I guess it was a case of Canelo being the best fight he faced, GGG struggled in his last fight because it was at super middle and his opponent was able to bully him.

 

GGG got bullied by Sergiy Derevyanchenko, Jacobs was big but didn`t use his size to his advantage and used a lot of movement, you have to push GGG back to have a chance.

 

I think there are plenty of valid criticisms that can be made of Golovkins's career choices so no mental gymnastics needed my end. Admitting he became occasionally hypocritical as he got older doesn't offend or bother me in any way.

I'm also on record as criticising him for not sorting out his promotional situation a lot earlier. He should have got the hell out of Germany years before he did.

That said, you've made plenty of excuses for the guys who didn't want to fight him who were lineal middleweight champs and willing to fight other middleweights but not the man people suspected was the divisions true number 1. They deserve to get criticism for that.

The Brook fight was indeed a farce and looked terrible after his comments on Khan although there were a few redeeming features to that fight being made outside of a cash grab. Brook is naturally heavier than Khan and should have been a 154lber at that point anyway and it was thrown together after bona fide middleweight Chris Eubank Jr. who was inexplicably very highly rated at the time pulled out at the last minute.

He was also very unlucky that Pirog suffered an injury that ended his career.

I like Jacobs but he had to be pretty much forced to take his mandatory shot, demanding a larger split to get a shot at the world title despite not being an especially massive draw at the time.

The other comment I take issue with in your post is that Golovkins's 'Mexican style' talk means he should have to do more to win rounds. That's absolute nonsense. To win a round all you have to do is be better than the other guy, this is what I hate about Canelo. His opponents can't edge a round against him. Anything remotely close goes to the house. It's BS and I don't know why fans tolerate it let alone in some quarters actually celebrate it.

And don't get me started on the 35+ is now magically the physical prime of Golovkin brigade as at that point I have desire to bother discussing such an intellectually dishonest take on human physiology.

 

Derevyanchenko was a middleweight. The fight was for the vacant IBF title.

 

A bit of both.

 

Imo , it was less about being past prime and more about GGG adjusting his style after Brook lifted him out of his boots with an uppercut.

You can fight gung-ho Mexican style against the likes of Geale and Murray , but that style has to be refined when you step up a level and thats exactly what Golovkin did.

He reverted back to street fight style again with Rolls and Martirosyan who were blown away by roundhouse hooks - the same shots he knew not to throw against Canelo

Being 35 doesn't mean you are past prime. Golovkin didn't have a lot of hard fights prior to meeting Jacobs and he always kept himself in good shape. Its the wars and poor lifestyle that will shorten a fighters prime.

 

Sigh

 

Thanks, he looked very big and strong v GGG though, a lot stronger than Canelo looked v GGG.

 

He was on the decline in the first fight and won it in my eyes.

2nd fight even more on the slide and I did have Canelo winning that one.

So basically, yes he lost because he's on the decline.

 

I definitely don't think Golovkin or any boxer is in their "physical prime" beyond 35.

As for Canelo, I agree it is extremely difficult to win rounds over him as he's boxing's cash cow on top of actually being a good boxer. My point about the mexican style stuff wasn't that Golovkin should be penalized or lose rounds for not simply gritting his teeth and slugging it out, but that I can see why the judges were turned off when he asked Canelo for that kind of fight and then he didn't oblige. Canelo showed more versatility and won the psychological warfare by doing exactly what his opponent wanted. He put his cajones on the line and forced golovkin to put his money where his mouth was.

I already said the Eubank Jr fight wasn't his fault.

Sergio martinez had a broken knee and wad old af. I think that's a pretty valid excuse.

Should Cotto have fought ggg for his legacy and for the fans? Sure. But i don't blame him. He was much smaller than golovkin having been a former 147 pounder while G weighs like 175 in the ring. And there wasn't much financial incentive.

 

Golovkin was not as fresh for Canelo, no, but the problem is his he's never looked great when the competition was good.

In the first Canelo bout, I agree, he generally outworked the Mexican for a 116-112 victory, yet he was sloppy, repeatedly missed the right and was never the master, getting pushed back in the last round. And so the narrative changed from, "Golovkin is going to wreck him...," to, "Hey! Golovkin deserved to win!"

It's unlikely that a 'prime' Golovkin would deliver on that early promise.

His decline has been gradual.

 

He through those round house cork screw types on accation vs Canelo and Canelo had that puzzled "what the hell was that ?" Iook, before eating the fallow up jab. I loved those punches.

 

Yes, Canelo doesn't like the skull compactor

 

Well Martinez still shorted us, it lead to a chain of events that allowed the money men to freeze out the guy we wanted to see try to live up to the hype during the last of his prime years. I understand why Sergio did it and I understand why Cotto and then Canelo did it but I don't have to like it.

I think Lara and Ward are unfairly used against Golovkin too. Lara should have moved up and I think that fight would have prob been made. I don't think he had the confidence to go after Ward in his first fight at 168 much like Ward didn't go after Kovalev in his first fight at light heavyweight. The timelines didn't match up as well as we'd have liked. Froch retired and JCC Jr. bolted. They could have been great fights and let us know whether or not he was a genuine threat to Ward at the weight.

Anyway I agree with you on the scoring for Canelo other than the motivation for the scoring which I believe to have been more due to a house bias than anything else. If not directly corrupt then they were at the very least looking to preserve their position as house friendly judges in the eyes of the big promoters IMO.

 

Clearly because he was by far and away the best fighter he ever faced.