1991 James Toney vs GGG Golovkin right now

And funny thing is McCallum for all his talent wasn't even viewed as a star in his era. Golovkin is being hailed as the second coming of Jesus Christ.

 

Magoo, If i'd compare what Golovkin has done so far and his circumstances in being avoided etc to someone from that era 'd compare him to Herol Graham's career from 78-87.

Graham was unbeaten during that time, but had a tough time getting meaningful fights most of the time.He was seen by the boxing hardcore that had actually watched him a fair amount, as a talented fighter with the potential to do something at world class, but not yet proven.

And this was the right viewpoint.Yet if you look at his record in that time, he's actually beaten better fighters(and in as dominant a fashion) than Golovkin has...Lindell Holmes, Mark Kaylor, faded Kalule, Sanderline Williams(when still a contender, not yet a journeyman) all at least as good as any of GGG's wins so far.

yet if you were to suggest that body of work before his first loss to Kalambay, was that of someone who had proven enough to be already matching up to the middleweight greats, you would have been rightly rebuked.

That's the kind of rough level of achievement and in ring ability displayed(in fact a notch below it imo) that Golovkin is at right now.But luckily he has a weak division for now, in front of him.But he's no spring chicken and has to get moving.

Talk of him blasting out Hagler, Hopkins, etc is going seriously out on a limb imo.

 

True, the avoiding of him has been laughable at times.But i guess when contenders see the likes of Cotto get title shots for next to nothing, it might take some of the desire to really prove yourself against the toughest tests available away.

I think Contenders tend to fight each other more freely when there is a strong feared champion or two around.When you've got an ordinary\weak one like an aging Martinez, Cotto etc then everyone tends to want to angle for the safest way to a shot.

 

agreed. Until he fights at least someone like Peter Quillen and beats him convincingly it shouldn't even be discussed.

 

And Hagler was 'supposedly " only 33 in 1987 when he lost to Ray, so if this Borat looking dude is 33 now, he will ONLY have about 3 or 4 prime years in the sun..

Longevity is NOT on the guy's side..

he fights Murray in a week..

 

Great, great, great post.

 

Well here's a question then.

WHO would Golovkin have to beat that's around today for him to be mentioned together with the ATG's?

Is there even enough talent at MW for that to happen? It would be kind of sucky for GGG to clean out MW (and I have no doubt that he could) and people still go 'meh'.

Would he HAVE to step up to SMW to get the fights to impress people?

 

I'd pick a motivated Toney by clear decision.

 

I love GGG. I'm not sure he's any more impressive than Rodrigo Valdez when he was knocking guys out left and right.

 

So, has Cotto refused to fight this Golovkin ?

 

Yeah, but Valdez was a round snoozer whose prime was short. Early career where he lost to average fighters, his prime where he was an assassin, car accident that mangled his hand then giving a good account of himself past his best against Monzon.

GGG is bigger and of course of a different school. His chin appears to be iron, though Briscoe's was too.

 

I do hope Golovkin manages to become "the man" at 160 and carve out a strong run for himself.We could be doing with a good clear cut champ for one of boxings flagship divisions.

 

I suspect he will, For being 32 or 33 years old he's looking about as fresh as anyone can and thus far no one has even given him a fight. The only thing that may prevent him from getting true respect from his critics is that there is no one on the horizon at 160 who people perceive as being an exceptional challenger. Virgil Hill faced a similar situation both prior and after his defeat to Hearns.

 

He's holding out for Mayweather or Pacquaio I imagine. Which honestly he should.