Honestly, I think it’s absolute desperation on your part to both denigrate McCallum and to suggest that GG’s low level opposition could have beaten Roy in his prime. It’s absolutely laughable which defies all logic.
Regarding GG’s chin, yeah, it looks to be great. But how would it have fared against LHW’s and CW’s? Nobody knows. We’ve never even seen him fight a SMW yet.
You’re the one who likes stats. Roy iced 2 LHW’s with single shots. GG has only levelled B and C class MW’s. Those are the facts.
If you really think Golovkin would have pulled off that double feint/showboat, then end it with a leaping left hook that lands flush, on Toney I dont know what to tell you
Well no you were provided with EVIDENCE that Mike was still a great fighter at the time.It is not my fault that you are losing this debate.
He probably will claim GGG would have have laughed at Sam Peter bombs and outboxed him with his greatest jab of all times.
That is exactly right. When I look at GGG's record, I see B and C level fighters. Toney has 2 A level wins (Nunn and Mc Callum) and a B plus win (Reggie Johnson). Then they have the audacity to attack Mc Callum . A fighter who was a 5-2 favourite to beat Toney. A fighter who had 1 loss which he avenged around the same time against Kalamabey, who is better than anybody on GGG's record! A fighter who beat Collins and Watson around the same time. A fighter who went on to win the light heavyweight belt 3 years later in dominant manner against a fighter in his prime (no washed up Kovalev). I mean this whole debate is silly.
Really? If you watch the Nunn fight you will see that he wasn't schooling Toney before he gassed. If you look at who Mike beat around the same time he fought Toney, you can clearly see that he wasn't just merely a good fighter. If GG's title defences weren't against B and C level opposition, what level were they? I don't know what you disagree with and why. Tell me and we can debate it.