Hell yeah he would've. Unranked at middleweight, 5 years past his best, and coming off a KO loss at 154...no contest. It was a different time then. Going 1-4 in title fights with 4 KO losses showed me all I need to see. Anyone of Bumlovkin's opponents would find a way to go 0-6 with 6 KO losses in those 5 title fights. It's math-breakingly bad.
Love the G-Man. Thinking about it now, the battle of the "G" monikers would have been an appealing selling point had these two fought in the same era. 1 G or 3 G's? Does the "G-Man" get "Good boyed"?
I'll take this man's word on G-Man. Emanuel Steward knew a thing or two about boxing. G-Man would have marmalised triple hype.... http://www.***********.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39096 PS: This article also offers explanation for his early career losses EDIT: insert b.o.x.i.n.g.s.c.e.n.e. where the stars are, minus the full stops obviously...
This would be a proper big drama show I think G-man is a bit overrated and would have been exposed if he faced better competition.
mcC fought benn, and was winning fairly clearly until the turnaround, so hes never going to do badly in this matchup. However, McGGG hasn't been tested at this level yet, so we cant say how he would do in this matchup.
And genna wouldn't have wet thru mugabis competition like a hot knife through butter? Obvious bias is obvious
I'm not dismissing Jones McLennan I was stating that it was in the amateurs correcting a poster who insinuated they fought as pros. Triple GGG's amateur record however is stellar better than both Jones and McLennan amateur record. The version of Mugabi that G-man fought would not beat Triple GGG's resume that is laughable. Hagler ruined Mugabi. 1991 Mugabi lol. Your bias shows real bad in calling triple G bumlovkin. Come back when you have a clue.
But he is not leagues above Golovkin himself. That's what matters, since we are not talking about McClellan against *anyone* Golovkin has been in the right with. We are talking about McClellan agains Golovkin himself.