Who's Greater? Gennady Golovkin or Jung Koo Chang?

I using facts which all seem to be on my side and 3rd party data that's revenant as I don't make it up. Try it sometime.

Chang's boy fans: Chang is among the best flyweight's ever!

Facts:

1 ) Chang never won a match at flyweight!
2 ) It took him a long time to make the hall of fame. It won't for GGG once he retires and becomes eligible.
3 ) Chang didn't beat as many Ring Magazine ranked opponents. GGG beat more
4 ) GGG ranked way higher in a pound for pound sense.
5 ) GGG lost a lot less in roughly the same amount of fights, and tough t at an age 10 years past when Chang retired.
6 ) 108 pounds was a new division. Did Chang even unify?

Using facts, its easier to say who is the better fighter is! With 5-6 Chang " expert's " here, where are there facts? They have next to none, which is why they high five each other after baseless insults. Hmmmmm.....

3rd party data:

1 ) He didn't even make the cut in a historians poll of 105-112...not even in the top 25.
2 ) He wasn't even an after though in McGrain's flyweight fantasy tournament, which this board enjoyed.

Opinions:

1 ) His fans have a lot of excuses for him.

2 ) Most GGG fans if they participated in this thread would have the Chang fans on defense, though its not really needed I'm doing just fine by myself.

Common ground:

1 ) He was entertaining. I agree there. So was Gatti.


See how that works, FighterInTheWind? Ignoring a debate is the weakest kind. I thought better of you.


PS: I was a boxing fan in the 80s, and have some really good lower weight fighter on film from 100 years past or more. With the internet, which was available in the 1990's, isn't not to hard to see what you might have missed or trade for fights.

 

Yeah, kinda like asking for Western media sources that declared Chang the winner in Zapata I when virtually no Western media covered that fight!

 

Yeah, and why the western bias? If a fight occurs in the East, why do you need publications from the West? If we know German Torres is a frightful puncher, who cares about his KO%?

Simply questions like that almost completely debunk the 'facts' he uses to push his agenda.

 

Yeah, he doesn't take into account that Charles would school and stop GGG. GGG would be similar size (180lbs) on fight night, and wouldn't even be in his top 10 wins.

GGG is absolutely better lol.

Although GGG has one loss.

 

Oh that was just for Flea Man. I highly recommend his book, how no to win friends and influence people. Look I'm pragmatic about these things, and even give him a thumbs up when I think he has a good post. The same for you, in other thread you're okay with me. Not that I pay attention to who gives me thumbs up but I've seen them in my posts from you.

GGG's one loss by the way is controversial, and IMO a bad decision. I can only hope one of Chang's fans can quantify why he's better with something besides they think so. Too much to ask?

 

^^^^ This ^^^^

 

Gatti got in before Booker, Cocoa Kid etc; Canastota is a bit of a joke like that and a poor reference point.

 

@FighterInTheWind

I thought to myself, why not see some of Changs fights since it's been a while. He was as I remembered.

He had better/faster footwork and balance than his opponents. He went to the body really well, especially with his long loping left, and had flashy in fighting skills. The diversity of Chang's opponent pretty much features guys who could not punch hard and lacked the hand speed to match up speed, giving Chang a green light to wade in and unload. I never said Chang could fight, just wasn't as good many flyweights or nearly as accomplished as GGG. Why not give him some bonus points for a good 80's hair style.

Because he had really short arms ( what is his real reach, 64"? ), he had to press it, and like I said he didn't really face his biggest punchers until later. If he fought a guy with a much longer quality jab, I think it would be difficult for him to overcome. His power is only above average for his weight. You can see why he steered clear of flyweight, until the end where he was 0-2 in title fights at that weight. IMO he'd lost both fights at whatever age his best was. He just didn't have the reach or power. 4 pounds north of 108 which could be a very good meal for some people was just too much of a jump for him.

When matched vs. Gonzlaez, a legitimate puncher you can see the problems Chang had. And this was magnified by the fight with Kittikasm, a fighter that Mike Carbajal calls the hardest puncher he faced. Chang's short arms and lack of an outside game clearly cost him here. The ending was brutal. I never saw a 112 pound guy get up from a knock down, lose his balance and fall into the ropes that hard.

 

You're kidding right?

H2H R.Gonzales, H.Gonzalez, Carbajal, Lopez, and Saman would all be favored maybe Inoue too.

And resume wise H.Gonzalez and Carbajal are head and shoulders above anyone at light fly

 

Bump for one of classics classics. Oh the hilarity my ribs are killing me.

 

I put on some ****ing schoolings in this thread.

 

You were on fire mate, absolutely on fire.

 

Great thread. Read through it earlier.

@FighterInTheWind You’ve mentioned several times how Chang was not at his best for the initial Zapata fight due to injury. Were you aware of Zapata’s circumstances right around the time of the rematch?

 

Jung Koo Chang.

 

Jesus, like Chernobyl in here.