"Alot of fighters talk to only be heard. I don't listen!"-GGG

Ggg's last fight on HBO did an underwhelming 800K views. His last and only U.S. PPV did a pathetic 98K-150K.

While true that Lara doesn't bring money, fans, or even a style to showcase Golovkin, he DOES IN FACT bring CREDIBILITY, which is what Ggg needs. Credibility will get Ggg the attention, the fans, and the money he lacks.

Canelo did not have to fight Trout or Lara, yet he did, despite the low reward that came at a very high risk. Why? Because he actually wants to prove he's the best or one of the best fighters p4p.

Ggg on the other hand seems to always have issues with money, weight, and in the case of Lara and Trout, amnesia.

 

The irony...

Kind of like conforming to fighting low caliber fighters insead of doing whatever it takes to secure a legitamate opponent.

 

Ggg on the other hand seems to always have issues with money, weight, and in the case of Lara and Trout, amnesia.

Ggg on the other hand seems to always have issues with money, weight, and in the case of Lara and Trout, amnesia.

Ggg on the other hand seems to always have issues with money, weight, and in the case of Lara and Trout, amnesia.

mhmmm

 

GGG has been clearly avoided, i blame for not taking any purse and just fight to get the win so he could get some good pays in the future, but i'm talking more about performances.

 

Canelo could have suggested that Lara, Trout did not bring enough fans or money. Canelo could have suggested Miguel Cotto outpriced himself by asking for the Lion's share by a large margin. Canelo could have offered Ggg the same deal Cotto offered Canelo and it would have been more than fair when you consider each man's popularity yet offered Ggg twice what Canelo got for Cotto.

Clearly one fighter will compromise to make a fight and the other has his excuses as to why he can't make fights happen.

 

Sorry but there's no excuses for Lara after his last run of fights, the same with Rigondeaux, i really like both but they aren't doing anything to be considered avoided, i can agree with the fact that GGG should have take it the fight with Canelo for not so good money only because a win would elevate his status and payments, but there's no argument with Lara.

 

Agree Dren. GGG is alongside Hagler and Monzon as the GOAT 160s

And dont the rest of the division know it

 

I have lived in the U.S. all my life and never heard "fade" used to describe a fight but then again I am not some brainwashed slave to pop or hip hop culture.

The very fact that you give credence to Lara's challenges while playing the resume card with Golovkin shows a level of cognitive dissonance that can not be addressed through such a medium as this board so you may have to live with a few random albeit sophomoric barbs.

Ya dig, breh?

 

LOL This thread is awesome . Autistic Isal hijacked this abortion of a thread and made it about Cucknelo.

This place never fails to disappoint......

 

Golovkin does not talk trash, he does his talking in the ring, exciting fighter. I am very disappointed in Golovkin's inactivity lately though, it's time Jacobs takes a Valium and fights him................El Pollo will never fight him..............with or without Valium.............

 

So you have nothing to say about the actual content of what I said? Okay.

 

Is Lara willing to go up? if so why not , give him a shot. Not worth it to come down unless it is for big $$ though.

 

Oh , he has a belt now. But that belt becomes worthless when he demands more than a 25% cut doesn't it.

Golovkin already has the WBA belt dummy. How can he want TWO WBA belts? What an absolute JOKE.

 

Canelo doesn't have a single fight at 160. Canelo's record against MWs is 0-0-0

 

Fade is a pretty common term. A person doesn't even have to be from a certain background to use it. If you are going to to criticize then you may as well critique every single word a person uses while they conversing. Your argument is silly. Who gives a **** what colloquialisms are person chooses? It was very clear from the context what he was saying and if it wasn't then it is you who is at fault for not being able to catch on to basic context clues. Now if you did understand the message and decided to take that poster's word selection as an indication of their status/character then that says much about you than it does about them.