Froch would've beaten Golovkin, right?

have you got a link to those offers? We know of the Smith offer but had not heard of Andrade and Charlo?

 

a quick google search should do the trick, I believe Charlo and Andrade was actually offered the Kovalev spot. Not the Saunders spot for May I do kno last the offer for Andrade was confirmed by both Hoya and Hearns about 7mil

 

It's unusual to see a Golovkin supporter cite him as a big enough middleweight to outsize a Jermain Taylor. They much more often trade on the argument that he's small at the weight, in order to mitigate his/Loeffler's catchweight proposals (Ward at 164, specifically), his hitherto nonexistent record at 168 and the very competitive nature of his battles with Canelo. I myself don't believe him particularly big or small at the weight, more a physically solid career 160 whose frame is enough to comfortably bear a move one division north – I don't think there's too much to pick between Taylor and Golovkin either way in size terms.

"Too big & too strong" is Froch boiling the equation down to simple terms. It's not purely a matter of size. Froch was a very, very good overall fighter, also. Underrated skillset, awesome intangibles.

As for generally predicating a Golovkin victory on Taylor's temporary success, I dunno about that. One could say that Golovkin got all he could handle early in his title run from a shopworn (toking!) Kassim Ouma who was 2 for 7 coming in. That might just be more damning an omen than Froch – who, like Golovkin, was still finding his championship feet after stepping up from the British/Euro level just a few months before (he admitted to having been inhibited by nerves early against Taylor, travelling to a name foe's yard in only his second title bout) – having some trouble with a speedy Taylor whose last significant bout had been a close decision loss to Kelly Pavlik (I seem to recall a significant number of observers thinking Taylor might've won that one, too).

That Taylor fight was getting closer and closer in the late going, by the way. It's certainly fair to have Taylor ahead going into the 12th, but the gap had narrowed, and not wholly on account of Taylor's documented stamina breaks (Froch had found some answers, besides).

But Golovkin is not Taylor and Froch is not Ouma and both Golovkin and Froch were veterans of title fights by the time a fight between them was mooted.

 

So, Golovkin at 35/36 was a pale shadow of his former brilliance. That's why he didn't roll right over Canelo, right? But Carl Froch at age 38 would've been a scalp to crow about and by which to tout Golovkin's greatness. That's how this works, isn't it?

Myself, I think Froch was still very capable based on his last outing (though he hadn't fought for around a year when a Golovkin bout was being talked up, and had obviously had his eye on retirement for a while). I also think Golovkin was still around his best form going into those Canelo fights. Neither guy looked anything like a physically spent force to me, but you can make a better case for Froch being shopworn.

If Froch can still be G2G in terms of representing a creditable scalp for Golovkin in 2015 after the attrition he'd clocked up against Pascal, Taylor, Kessler X2 and Groves I, why is Golovkin portrayed as a shadow of himself as soon as Canelo enters the frame, despite a comparatively less damaging, less testing run as a pro up 'til that point? Must be those brutal combinations from Willieboy that he offered his face up for (Mayorga-Trinidad reincarnated), or maybe those couple rounds of shots Brook cracked him with that his fans claim didn't even slightly rock him? Maybe the volume of clean belts he took in the Ouma fight that his fans swear has been overstated in order to discredit him (though they have a "flu" excuse at the ready just the same)?

 

Joshua has beaten Wlad, Povetkin, Whyte, Parker, Ruiz, Breazeale, Takam, etc he will retire head and shoulders above the Kazakhstan. Canelo, the smaller man, beat him comprehensively in the rematch. Only fangirls cannot accept this.

 

I had that one a draw. I had both fights even, in fact. Stick a gun to my head and I'll award a slight edge to Golovkin in terms of who might be more deserving of having won those bouts, but neither guy clearly seperated himself from the other in terms of overall class.

Canelo has seperated himself from Golovkin in terms of iniative. I have an issue with the layers of political protection around Canelo (though, let's face it, Golovkin himself would enjoy the leverage and the benefit of the doubt over most guys), but at least Alvarez is busy doing things instead of sniping and skulking around like a surly teenager.

 

I felt it was a clear Alvarez win based on clean effective punching, GGG fell back on his accurate jab as usual but it wasn’t enough to negate Canelo’s flush power shots, to head and body.

 

All matches like this are purely hypothetical. I believe GGG's power and amateur pedigree will carry him to victory. You do not. In the end it's just a matter of opinion.

 

Clutch that straw!!

 

Yeah, I wasn't extending an invitation to discuss his résumé so much as making a point about arbitrary double standards, e.g. 38 y/o Froch being a valid scalp for Golovkin in the eyes of the same group who claim Golovkin himself was too washed at 35/36 to deal with Canelo in the emphatic style a 2012 version supposedly would have.

 

You're not just woofin'.


I've got Froch, anyway. Teak beard, much more skillful, crafty and adaptable than given credit for, didn't outrageously excel in many areas but was very capable in a whole bunch of them, along with awesome intangible strengths. A contrary style could make him look bad (somone mentioned Dirrell, as if Golovkin is a trackstar), he could get ragged when he wasn't switched on, but when he respected his opponent and had his tunnel vision locked in he was a force. He'd jab Golovkin, mess his timing up with awkward rhythm and judicious ambushes, rough him up a bit in close and probably take him aback when giving him a taste of the power. If a relative slob like Lemieux can get Golovkin's attention enough to prompt a clinic after promising "streetfight", I'm sure a hard-hitting Froch can make him leery, difference being that Froch isn't as eminently outboxable.

 

You are absolutely delusional. Wlad, Povetkin both way past it. Ruiz KTFO out Joshua and he'll never go down as anything special. Whyte, Parker, Breazeale, Takam... the last two are hilarious. Two bums. absolute.

No, AJ will be a footnote. He'll never come close to the resume of a Wlad or GGG. Blown out by a short fat guy who he ran terrified from in the rematch.....lmao

 

That's a fair point. As @Bustajay said, Froch lost a lot of confidence after clearly losing the Ward fight - and Golovkin was another top-class amateur who was at his prime. There is also something scary about an undefeated prime fighter who is knocking everyone out with relative ease.

After seeing the Canelo fights, doubtless Froch figured that he could have actually beaten Golovkin, hence his insistence that he would have won, which he insists upon and brings up frequently.

However, my other line of reasoning is that if the fight did happen it was an older Froch vs a close-to-prime Golovkin. We don't even know what that older Froch looked like as he chose to retire. He came of a spectacular KO but nothing says he could even keep the same level in his next fight.