Golovkin Against The Bodysnatcher..?

Is he trolling?

 

Yeah OK double dealing and hypocrisy at its finest.

A good night to you.

 

Why you so emotional ? Is it not a fact that Golovkin never stopped anyone as good as Nunn ? Or never beat anyone as skillful as McCallum ? A simple yes or no ?

All you've done is rant throughout this entire thread with no context.

You brought up McCallum not being as good as Golovkin based on title defences when that's a very flawed logic which I proved on page 1.

You've not put forth a case of any standout performances of Golovkin vs any standout opposition.

You also have some very bizarre takes like suggesting Toney and Kalambay are mediocre which is complete nonsense.

Honestly you're all over the place in this debate you're just acting emotional and ranting with no substance to be quite frank.

 

I don't even know but there is some very bizarre takes like suggesting Toney and Kalambay being mediocre which I can't believe anyone truly believes without trolling.

 

I’ve never believed it before. But those last replies to me are just utterly ridiculous.

So I’m not sure.

 

I like that Golovkin is being afforded his due respect in this thread. Even those favoring the Bodysnatcher have left room for the possibility of a close defeat to Triple G.

I think more than just power, Gennadiy's size and own superb jab will do a lot to mitigate McCallum's successes. But I decided to side with Mike because I don't see Golovkin producing the output needed to completely shut down a superior technician that he is unlikely to knock out.

 

I am a huge Nunn fan and he was getting the better of Toney early but James was making his presence felt and was getting closer and closer as the fight wore on. He was countering Nunn very well.
That fight still hurts me to watch lol.

 

The problem that I have with picking GGG over Mike is that Mike can switch up his style during a fight and while GGG is underrated as a boxer at times he never appeared to me to be as multi skilled as Mike.
I honestly think Kalambay would have beaten GGG if they had fought.
I mean vs Toney 1 Mike used lateral movement among his tools against Toney and against Watson he just used a heavy body attack to wear down Watson.
Against Graham he was the aggressor moving forward pressing.
I do not see that with GGG.

 

I like Golovkin a lot - but I think big difference here would be Mike's counter punching ability. That's one limitation that GGG had, which You could see in his fights against Canelo. Canelo could go on offence against him without much fear of being met with counters, while Golovkin had to be very careful about what was coming back at him - which is why He stuck to a jab so much.
Then the relative lack of speed would also make it pretty easy for Mike to counter him - and while Golovkin had a great jab, He never fought someone who could match him in that department and I think Mike could at least give it a go.

McCallum takes it by decision, the way I see it.

 

The poll has got it right

 

Well Toney did beat better fighters than GGG. It is a fact. Your level of posting just seems to have reached a new low.

 

It is not a fact. I see nobody at middleweight that Toney beat that is considered "better" than Gennady Golovkin. This is a fact. What is also a fact is that Toney shat the bed against fighters that Golovkin would have beaten practically back to back. The only guy that Toney fought against at middle that could be argued to be better than GGG is Jones, and we all know what happened there. Indeed, I'd further argue that McCallum himself was unlucky to lose to Toney and had he been a bit younger he probably would have pulled out the W. Finally, your posting has always sucked bar one or two occasions when, like a broken clock, you get it right by accident.

 

Your understanding of my arguments is limited and frankly all you are proving is your difficulty in parsing basic english. Furthermore you clearly, together with your chum Loudon, have double standards when it comes to evaluating fighters.

 

My understanding of your arguments is limited ? is that what you call it ?

Let's go back and review posts in this thread shall we ?

Very poor argument that i already addressed here......

Using that logic Ottke is better than RJJ at Super Middleweight because of his record amount of title defences.

McCallum spent 30 odd fights at Jr Middleweight and didn't spend anywhere near the amount of time Golovkin did at Middleweight. If Golovkin had to fight a prime James Toney and Sumbu Kalambay his record amount of title defences would've been cut shorter aswell.

Again another bizarre comment that literally makes no sense why would Kalambay and Toney be considered mediocre fighters ?

So what strong arguments have you put forth exactly ? you've still failed to mention any opponent Golovkin beat that was on the level of any of McCallum's best wins, in which i've asked you for 3 times now and you've yet to still provide any rebuttal.

As for double standards ? what double standards have i got exactly ? you keep bringing up the Dave Tiberi fight without mentioning fights against McCallum, Nunn, Jirov, etc who are much higher calibre of opposition than Golovkin beat. I tend to rate fighters on how they performed against their best opposition. And if we compare Golovkin vs his best opposition compared to how Toney did vs his best opposition, then Toney certainly looked more impressive against a higher calibre of opposition how is that a double standard ?

You want to talk about double standards ? you're the one using one fight in Toney's career to discredit him, and not talking about how he did against elite opposition that's double standards.

My understanding of the English language is just fine mate it's just your arguments and takes in this thread are very poor and hard to take seriously.