Is GGG a top 10 Middleweight of all time

Since I see you've also replied to the thread, I will reply here as well. I just checked his Wiki page. It cites an Abel Sanchez interview about what he believes Jacobs weighed on the night. I remember this article as it also had Jacobs own estimate of his weight: 176.

I didn't call you out. I said 10% certainly isn't the average and it isn't. You also randomly chose 20 fights to get a sample, which in and of itself isn't bad, but that is not very representative of the average weight gain per fighter. In those 20 fights you could have multiple appearances by Golovkin, but only one fight from Geale.

What would have been better is if you had given averages for specific individuals. I'll lift this part out of my DM to you:

Ronald Wright
5'11"
Williams 159 168
Hopkins 170 n/a
Quartey 160 169
Taylor 159 166
Trinidad 160 168
Mosley II 154 n/a
Mosley I 154 162
Hernandez 154 163
Candelo 154 161
Mullings 154 160
Vargas 154 164

In this way, you would be able to make more specific judgements on the individual fighters. Wright in his prime, for example, gained only 5% for his bouts in light middleweight. The same applies if you extend it to middleweight bouts, but I have a personal preference of distilling it to prime performances.

Felix Trinidad
5'11"
Wright 160 169
Mayorga 158 168
Joppy 160 165
Thiam 154 163
Reid 153 164
De La Hoya 147 155
Pineda 147 157
Whitaker 147 155
Zulu 147 160

Here's another example. Tito, I thought, was tight at welterweight. He hit his prime at light middleweight, in my opinion. Nevertheless, the gain for both weights is only 6-7%.

Saul Alvarez
5'9"
Lara 155 171
Mayweather 152 165
Trout 154 172
Lopez 154 164
Mosley 154 167
Gomez 154 168
Hatton 152 165

Canelo was similarly quite big at 154, like Tito was at 147. I think the average weight gain here, at a weight he would have been ballooning up the most from, is 9%.

 

Well the start a DM thread that he is under rated! I think DM is arguably a top 20 guy at light heavyweight ( 15-25 ) but lacked the same domination of a prime GGG, and never was viewed as the #1 light heavyweight around, what GGG was viewed as the #1 middle weight around. There is a difference.

Some if DM's fights were close in his prime. Fights with Roy Jones , ( Jones avoid him and would not take the fight ) and Hopkins would have been nice. I tend to think Hopkins didn't want any part of him! Holes in his resume. So for me, not in the top ten. He would not get many votes for it, nor is he current is the hall if game which GGG surely will be. 1st ballot I say.

Anyway this author thinks the way I do when it come to rankings in terms or era rankings, and completion beaten of ring magazine opponents. How may did DM ring ranked magazine opponents did he fight? I don't know!

[url]https://www.*******.com/measured-against-all-time-dariusz-michalczewski--20296[/url]

 

I mean yes you have a point that maybe Golovkin, was a bit more dominant overall in his victories. Although i'd argue that the best opponent Golovkin beat at Middleweight, in regards to Daniel Jacobs was a controversial decision, and Golovkin also did have another close controversial decision vs Sergiy Derevyanchenko.

As for your other point well Michalczewski was the lineal champion from 1997-2003, so technically he was considered "the man to beat". Although obviously Roy Jones Jr was the P4P king, and considered one of the greatest fighters of all time at that point.

But as i said overall i think little actually separates Golovkin, Michalczewski, regarding opposition and achievements.

 

1) Geale wasn't part of the 40 fighters in my randomly selected sample.
2) Yeah, ok you specifically choosing 3 boxers is a fairer representation of the average weight increase than randomly selecting 40.

 

That is why I want to know how many of ring magazine raked opponents beaten for DM. Maybe it can shed new light on him.

I don't think Jacobs win was controversial. He knocked Jacobs down and landed more punches in every round but two! With a knockdown scored you win such a match. I have the punch stats on a round by round basis.

 

1.) Jesus. Do you have a background in statistics? I was trying to demonstrate a flaw in your method by posing a hypothetical, but it looks like it went over your head.
2.) Again, no bias from me. My screen happened to be on my file for Wright, and Tito and Canelo just happened to be the files next to Wright. I can give you more examples, but to be honest, I don't think you're being very civil. You said you believed the average weight gain was roughly 10%. I did not go on to say, "you're wrong, it isn't roughly 10%". I said, "it certainly isn't 10%". Apparently, that hit a nerve and here we are.

That site has been around for a while on this forum. If all the research you intend to do is scan through the first 20 fights, and present it as a variance of 1.3 to your initial claim, okay. Congratulations, you don't know how statistics work.

 

I thought Golovkin beat Jacobs aswell in a close competitive fight, but some people do believe Jacobs won. On "eyeofthering" it has quite a high controversy rating i believe. But i do think Derevyanchenko beat Golovkin by 1 point.

Back to the resume in all honesty i'd probably give the edge to Golovkin overall, but Michalczewski had the best single win by far with a win over Virgil Hill. And also made a few more defences than Golovkin, which is a few notches Michalczewski has over Golovkin.

 

Derevyanchenko ran GGG closer than Jacobs. I thought Golovkin beat Jacobs 7-5 + KD, fairly unambiguously. I had Derevyanchenko 6-6 with the KD being the difference. That said the rounds were fairly close and it would not be unreasonable for somebody to have it 7-6 to SD.

 

Jacobs looks impressive because of the amount of leather he throws in his bursts but if you look at what actually landed clean on GGG it is much less than it seems at first blush.

 

We need to believe your samples were randomly selected, whereas mine demonstrably were.

I'll leave our discussion here. Other posters reading our exchange will arrive at their own conclusions as to - 1) Whether a randomly selected sample size of 40, gives a reasonable indication as to the likely average weight modern boxers add from weigh in to fight night, in world title contests; and 2) Whether on average, boxers contesting world title fights today weigh significantly more in the ring than their counterparts, when they were contesting world titles in those same divisions c.50+ years ago.

 

I consider Canelo a win for GGG. The vast majority who scored the fight do they same.

The Deryanchko fight with was close, but GGG was 37 ( past his prime ) and floored him winning narrowly on all three cards

How would Hagler, or Monzon two universally fighters who don't have as clean of a record, and are aided by facing several famous blown up welter wights do at age 37? Not well. Both retied a long tome before that age. I really don't see much of a difference between Moznon's quality of opponents beaten of GGG's do you?

 

I've had this argument before where people consider 1st Canelo fight a win to add to Golovkin's resume. I agree 1st fight was highly controversial, but i have no problem with Canelo winning other two fights. So even if we give Golovkin 1st fight, he still would be 2-1 overall vs Canelo with other two fights being scored fairly. And how highly is Canelo rated as a Middleweight ? That's another discussion. Also am i allowed to rank Golovkin lower then, if i believe he lost to Derevyanchenko ?

As for Monzon he has victories over Napoles, Griffith, Valdez x2, Briscoe x2, Benvenuti x2, which is by far better than anyone on Golovkin's resume.

And since you like judging fighters on their ranking, these were the rankings of some of the lesser known fighters when Monzon beat them.

Denny Moyer ranked 3
Jean-Claude Bouttier ranked 4
Tony Mundine ranked 1
Tony Licata ranked 2

 

The Golovkin/Jacobs bout was very close. But my takeaway from that fight lay more in the ironic narrative that a destroyer like Golovkin had essentially won it off of his jab - especially when he was out-landed in power-shots.

Of course, the KD made a significant enough difference. But that Jacobs wasn't then put away by Golovkin was telling, IMO. That is, regardless of the actual result, this contest essentially established Golovkin's ceiling, in terms of class.

 

Yes considering Dmitry Pirog absolutely dismantled Daniel Jacobs in 5 rounds, i mean fair enough you could say there was a big gap between Pirog-Golovkin. And obviously Jacobs would of made improvements and got more experience during that time, but when the fight was announced between Golovkin-Jacobs i was expecting a battle, and when i see the seemingly indestructible Golovkin. Fight a very passive fight jabbing away at Jacobs barely winning a winning a decision, i come away being disappointed in all honestly.

And that's the thing with Golovkin even during Canelo fights, i never felt like he took any real "risks" or fought of his skin. Too really separate himself from Canelo. I mean compare it with Hagler when he had his biggest challenges vs Mugabi, Hearns. He took the fight by the scruff of the neck and absolutely dismantled them. And that for me is the difference between someone like Golovkin and Hagler.

 

Okay then, your game.

Napoles was a short 5'7 1/2" former welter weight ( and best rated there ) who happened to cut often. But yeah Monzon beat him, GGG would butcher him too!


Griffith was old ( 35 ) short 5'7" and lost a ton before and after facing Mozon. But he was completive in the fights.


Vladez was another short 5"8 " fighter and he was competitive with Moznon ( knocked him down ) and like Napoles a former lower weight fighter, ( welter and below ) He is perhaps the best overall puncher and fighter Monzon met.


Brisoce was another short fighter ( 5'8 " ) who fought and drew with Monzon. I suspect this was a home nation bad decision. Do you have the film? Is it on film? In the re-match Monzon won it clearly but was nearly knock out in round nine.

In his first fight with Carlos Monzon in Argentina, Briscoe walked away with a draw. He said getting a draw in Argentina is getting a victory in the United States. In this rematch with Monzon for the title, Briscoe badly stunned the champion in the 9th round, but failed to score a knockout. Monzon always respected Briscoe, and when the champion was New York, he gave Briscoe a warm greeting.

Briscoe lost a ton before and after facing Monzon, and lost to his most famous opponents.


Benentui was good, and unlike the others here he was a natal middle and not drawled in height, but Nino was an Italian playboy type, and past his best. He fought 1 other fighter after Monzon and was knock down twice and lost that one too which is why I say this.


Those are his best opponents. GGG would be favored to beat the same Monzon opponents when Monzon faced them and IMO would have less problem doing it. I will say that the fame of his opponents was greater than GGG's. Guys like Mayweather, Cotto, and Martinez wanted no part of GGG! No doubt a factual replay like this will ruffle some feathers on the Monzon fans but they are true words.