Is it acceptable to have Gennady Golovkin on the same list of the All Time Greats of boxing?

We know, who the HOFers are - but what is an ATG? That's a bit more uncertain, and comes down to personal opinion.

For exampel... Is Ketchel an ATG?

 

Do you think the four kings are all All Time Greats?

 

GGGs resume is by no means stellar but he is undefeated.

 

I need to see what you mean by ATG before voting. Who else is on that list?

 

Who ever fought Golovkin was at high risk of staring in Golovkins huge highlight reel KO film list, not just lose.

 

You mean he avoided Ward!

 

Tuff one because in theory he has some decent wins. Over solid contenders like Murray, Lemieux, and JAcobs but he doesn't officially have a win over an ATG. I had him winning the first two Alvarez fights so that would make GGG an ATG in my opinion but it's a shame he doesn't have some other really top tier fighters on his list of wins as others have mentioned. Steve Rolls, an undersized Brook and Vanes don't really help his argument to be mentioned amongst some of the true greats at his weight class.

 

20 Titel defenses at MW, one of the longest title reign, 82 % ko ratio
Ducked by the Top guys at MW for more than 6 years. When Golovkin was still fighting here in germany around 2009 it was
obviously to most fans that guys like Sturm, Mundine, Geale and N'Dam N'Jikam tried to avoid him at all costs.
Same with Martinez and Cotto later in the US.

GGG
-was a MW beltholder for nearly a decade
-Robbed 2 times vs doped Canelo
-Unified MW Belts again at the age of 40

 

Me too! That's why I asked, if Ketchel was an ATG.

You hear all the time, that this moden fighter or that modern fighter, with maybe only 20-25 pro fights, can never be an ATG - because he can never build up a résumé, that can compare with the oldtimers' 100+ pro fights.

So what kind of résumé is needed to be classified as an ATG? How about (for example) 250+ fight HOFers like Jack Dillon and Battling Levinsky - do they make the cut?

What if Usyk beats Fury in his next fight - and then retires? With only 21 fights under his belt, would he have done enough to deserve the ATG label?

 

Not really Brook best wins were all at 147 - not up at 160. It was a mismatch.

 

I've seen people say this often that Golovkin rates top 5 or top 10 H2H as Middleweight, and again I always ask based on beating who exactly ? Do you know how deep the Middleweight division is ? And how many great fighters there has been in the division ?

Marvin Hagler
Sugar Ray Robinson
Carlos Monzon
Roy Jones Jr
Bernard Hopkins
Michael Nunn
James Toney
Harry Greb
D*ick Tiger
Mike McCallum
Holman Williams
Gerald McClellan
Charley Burley
Thomas Hearns
Etc

Top 5 H2H against those fighters ? when his best win is a razor thin decision over Daniel Jacobs ? I don't think so.

 

No it wasn't Kell Brook was a Welterweight moving up to Middleweight and was out of his depth, Brook never even won a single fight as a Middleweight. Brook wasn't even the best Welterweight, let alone jumping up two weightclasses to fight Golovkin.

 

Thank you another person who knows his boxing, I've had a few debates about Golovkin. And I've often made the comparison to Michalczewski, both men made alot of title defences against so-so opposition. But Michalczewski actually had more title defences than Golovkin, and the better single win over Virgil Hill. Yet no one rates Michalczewski as a top 10 Light Heavyweight of all time, so why should Golovkin be top 10 Middleweight of all time ? when really Golovkin/Michalczewski achievement and resume wise is pretty much identical.

 

No one is giving their definition of an ATG. My definition, or part of it, would be does he have HOF names on his resume, whether or not he defeated them. Surely Canelo will be, so that's one, but that's it. Title defenses could be one parameter so that's two but there are guys who never won a title that are HOF worthy. Popularity shouldn't be a measurement otherwise Vinny Pazienza would be in the HOF. And an ATG should be in your top 25 or so.

He doesn't measure up for me. I can easily think of 25+ boxers with better numbers. Certainly should. E remembered as a very good boxer and one who really brought home that Central Asian boxers were for real. Z