GGG is - at the very least - the Greatest middleweight since Hagler

Any verdict that was not a Golovkin win would be met with controversy given the way fight unfolded and public perception of it. The fact her score was so preposterous just made it all the more obvious and frustrating.

 

Canelo was canny even in his less vigorous rounds, did a lot of things that haven't been credited at all in some quarters. Working the body, punctuating exchanges. Definitely a close fight in which a draw is a justifiable outcome.

 

Some People still believe in Santa Clause.....The Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny....and they will argue till they are Blue in the Face they are right....the same thing is happening here don't waste Your time on them there knowledge of Boxing could fit on a Postage Stamp.!!!!

 

Canelo fans don't want the rematch. Canelo fans are terrified.

Canelo fans want out. they don't want the rematch. They're terrified.

Canelo's fans are wetting their bed at night thinking of the rematch. OMG. What a bunch of wimps.

 

Wait. What was that?

"Lets have that rematch"

one more time:

"Lets have that rematch"

Log off.

 

From a skills perspective, Hopkins is absolutely one of the best pugilists at 160. He was never the most talented, athletic or gifted but what he lacked in those areas, he made up for 10 fold with the ring IQ and skill set he mastered.

His dilemma was there were few during his era that allowed him to attain the massive fights that only golden eras of Boxing were able to produce. He lost to Roy at 160 which wasn’t held against him, but there wasn’t another Roy, Toney, Nunn or Hopkins at 160 to create a “Fab 4” the 80’s produced. He had to do more, with less and make the best out of what was available to carve out his legacy. He made history and dominated for a long time. All great accomplishments that shouldn’t be discredited.

He lost to Taylor, twice and that could have been more detrimental to his legacy at 160 had he not come back and beat Pavlik so comprehensively in a Boxing display that can only be described as a “masterful Boxing clinic”. I think the Taylor fights happened at a time when Bhop was in a rut in that phase of his career. Or, it could have been just a bad style for Hopkins. He was talking retirement prior to his bouts with Taylor so that mind set for a fighter can be a huge liability.

The Tito win is when Hopkins finally got a BIG name to create the kind of buzz all great fighters need in their careers. Yes, Trinidad was a welterweight prior to moving up to 160 test the waters....but he completely lumped up a very good Middleweight champion in William Joppy before being completely taken apart at the hands of Bernard Hopkins. It was a great win....mainly due to the fact of how he absolutely dominated in the biggest fight of his career at that time.

The debate of matching all the best Middleweight champions from every era is interesting. It’s a tough discussion because it’s one of those things that has so many dynamics that are unknown. Much of how we believe those fights play out are educated guesses or visceral, inate feelings that shape our opinions.

Most of the times, great fighters step up when they face higher levels of competition...or show special qualities when they are up against seemingly, insurmountable odds. Then we factor in intangibles like what physical attributes one fighter has vs the other, what style causes issues for that style etc...If you are in the top 10 all time, chances are, all of these guys have a chance at beating anyone who are on the list on any given night. Sure, the fighters ranking higher on that list have reasons they are viewed through that lens, but you have to be truly special just to be in the top 10.

GGG is still active and fighting so it’s hard to really be viewed through the rosed colored lens that our ATG retired boxers are typically analyzed through. History is more kind to our elder pugilists who made their mark in the sport we love. So when GGG is 10, 15....20 years retired, he most likely will have more respect for his dominance we are right in the middle of now. If he keeps on winning...barring incredibly incompetent judging and absolutely disgraceful decisions...He will have etched our quite a legacy for himself. Will he surpass Hopkins or Hagler? Probably not but he is special enough to be mentioned in the same breath. That in itself is validating and an accomplishment in itself.

The difference between GGG vs Alvarez and Hopkins vs Trinidad is vast. The styles match up were similar but the fighters mentalities played crucial roles in how these fights unfolded.

Both GGG and Hopkins won in clear fashion...obviously Hopkins a lot more clearly than Golovkin. The key factor impacting how these two fights unfolded had everything to do with Tito’s mentality to “fight”, even if it meant going out on his shield. Golovkin and Hopkins had the same mentality.....Alvarez, not so much. He’s a great boxer with an abundance of skills, but he was more in tune of going the distance and less concerned with looking to score a decisive victory over GGG. It made for a fight that was more of a “cat & mouse” kind of boxing match vs the battle and tactical war the Hopkins and Trinidad fight resembled.

To me, GGG vs Alvarez official decision was a debacle. I had Golovkin winning 9-3 or 8-4 being generous. How Alvarez opted to fight that night against Golovkin was unlike any other fight he had before. He back peddled so much It looked like Alvarez was looking to get in some road work. He did do well in spots, but not nearly enough to wrestle control away from GGG who controlled the pace, range and tempo the entire night.

There were not a lot of people who gave all the championship rounds to Alvarez. Not in totality that is. Out of 100, maybe 5 agreed with a draw. That’s a drop in the bucket. The overwhelming consensus had GGG winning clearly which I think depicts just how bad that decision was. Most of the time when there’s such a one sided account from fans seeing it one way, its a clear indication that the decision was bogus.

 

There's a reason why you have over 3000 posts and 88 likes. It's because you DKSAB.

 

The Hopkins that lost to Kovalev was shot. Sure GGG possibly beats him, but then again GGG isnt nearly as big as Kovalev.

 

No doubt about it. Definitely a close fight indeed. For anyone to deny this really can't be taken seriously. It's really sad for some of these characters to be so wrapped up in their Triple G fandom that they can't stay neutral or open minded when it comes to scoring. You have to be really closed-minded and / or extremely biased to not admit that the fight was close.

 

You've really been unraveling in recent days. I used to have more respect for you, but it seems like you've reached a breaking point over the last several days and are just posting jibberish at this point. You might wanna get your act together and come back when you're ready to have serious talks.

And I'm still waiting for your ranking of the best punches landed in Rounds 8 & 9 like you promised. Maybe one day you'll get around to it.

 

Or Mike was a JWW Champion who chose not relinquish his title for a MW ranking until he thought he had a gimme.

Here we go with that meaningless careful language again. That statement means absolutely nothing, Mugabi had a chance, so what.

Hagler fought 2 mandatory contenders from 84-86, in addition to the two voluntaries against JWW Champions: Hearns and Duran.

Let's bring up the feared Mugabi. The #1 JWW who held no title, long time mandatory to Hearns, he moved up, and got a Hagler fight without trouble. So that just shoots your whole argument to ****.

[url]https://media.giphy.com/media/5gw0VWGbgNm8w/giphy.gif[/url]

And Herol like Minter has nothing to keep a prime Hagler off him. Like I said Jackson KO all over again.

Yet, I actually applied context and you did not.

 

"Any verdict that was not a Golovkin win" ?

If that doesn't scream biased in one's fandom I don't know does. Clearly the controversey was due to the wideness of Byrd's card, for you to actually argue that it wasn't because she had it 118-110 but because she didn't have G winning is truly extraordinary.

 

That post was on the same level as your junk about "GGG fans"

You may want to type more slowly and concentrate on COMPREHENSION. Especially since the post that you cited about "terrified GGG fans" COMPLETELY CONTRADICTS what you claimed. LMAO.

Round 9. Trackback and you'll see.

 

YES.

I don't rate resumes on single wins.

In truth, they were not.

Well I can't remember your old post but I recall you listed maybe 10 fighters in what would have only been a two year span.

He did.

Three of the guys you are championing were a part of Hagler's era, and were not rated as highly as the men Hagler actually fought.

 

I got Bhop, RJJ and Toney ahead of GGG, I have the cerebral B-Hop ahead of Hagler . RJJ did his best work at Light Heavy but your argument is sound. Toney was a beast at Middle.
Martinez though I have my doubts, GGG chin would have stood up to Martinez and his dart in and out style of fighting IMO would have played into GGG ability to cut off the ring and GGG timing. B-Hop, Hagler, RJJ (If he stayed at middle) Toney , GGG then Martinez.... but that is just my opinion on the matter. A crafty dude that can keep GGG in the middle of the ring and not let him stalk his opponent can beat him IMO. Pavlic and JT would have been KOd...... in my mind anyway