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

you sound like a nostalgic old man.
Probably with an Italian background.
Gatti was a lovable loser.
Yes he gave us some classics - with his heart & his cojones.
Those were his Best attributes.
Well, Good day to you sir.

 

The poll only asks about him being on the list of ATG boxers.

It needed an ATG middlewt option.

 

I don’t doubt his capability of being an all time great but he didn’t have the fights to prove it. IMO an all time great has to have some great wins on their record. Even if you give GGG a win for Canelo, would that really be enough?

 

If that's true he offered 164 fight with Ward, then he was really a coward! He was scared as hell of Ward lol. GGG should have been at 168, but he wanted to be weight bully and fight the lil small 160 fighters. He avoided 168 at all cost. He still won't even fight Charlo.

 

So Marvin Hagler was a coward, cause he stayed his entire career at 160? Ggg is also not a big middleweight. Jacobs was huge compare to him the night of the fight.

 

I reckon his schooling of Canelo is enough evidence to warrant being up there.

He'd essentially be undefeated throughout most of his career if he wasn't robbed.

His only true defeat was against Canelo the 3rd time when he was 40 years old and way past his best.

 

Golovkin also got the benefit of the doubt vs Derevyanchenko, and won a pretty close decision vs Jacobs it's swings and roundabouts. Yes Golovkin was unlucky not to win vs Canelo the 1st time, but i thought the 2nd and 3rd fights were scored correctly. And as i alluded to earlier Golovkin also won a highly controversial decision that many thought he lost aswell as i said "swings and roundabouts".

People seem to bring up the Canelo fights alot yet forget Golovkin also had controversial decision himself.

 

Just ****ing lol at thinking Canelo won the 2nd fight. Just imagine actually believing that.

 

Really ? Canelo was the aggressor entire fight and landed the harder punches, Golovkin's offence for the most part was the jab. And whilst a jab can be effective i preferred Canelo's aggression and power punches.

So it seems quite logical to me Canelo won a close fight based on that. If you believe Golovkin won well that's up to you, but to suggest Canelo didn't have an argument to winning 2nd fight is a bit baffling to me.

 

To me GGG definitely outboxed him, he controlled the fight with his jab, it may have been closer than the first, but GGG's jab was clearly superior.

I have watched the fight a few times now, and would struggle to make an argument for a canelo win. I could maybe accept the 2nd one was close decision for GGG, but definitely not a canelo win.

 

I had GGG winning the first 2 fights 8-4 each time and frankly the second was clearer than the first. In the first fight Canelo could claim he landed the best punches of the fight. In the second GGG landed the better punches as well as landing more punches. They analyzed that fight with AI and the AI had Golovkin ahead by a landslide.

 

But he did though? It’s like you telling me to call you ma’am even though you clearly have a beard. Like I mean no disrespect but Canelo did beat him, so the whole world should acknowledge your delusion?

 

A great fighter is defined by the great victories and risks they've taken.
Golovkin's biggest win to date is Rubio.....

 

Every time Gatti entered the ring he gave 110% he never had the "help" both legal & illegal that Floyd & Canelo received. Didn't want it didn't need it. It only Floyd & Canelo had been blessed with the Heart & Cojones that Gatti was, then maybe they'd really be as good as they mistakenly obviously are
I'm actually a transplanted Brit wh supports real fighters not divas
Good day to you too my friend