Fighters you are astounded are considered ATGs?

I asked who was better then Golovkin at middleweight at the time and instead of answering you're pivoting. Almost like you know he was the best but can't admit it. I wonder why........

 

Who did Golovkin fail to beat?

I guess admitting to who proved to be the better is too painful for you.

But your love for Golovkin aside, this is why Undisputed Championships matter.

Nice Alt, by the way. It's suits your tendency towards self-aggrandizement.

Does the 458 represent how many times you aim to be banned during your lifetime?

It's a tall order but, if anyone can do it, you can

 

Canelo and even then GGG clearly beat him in the first if you're being objective. Also while Canelo is the greater fighter all time I wouldn't say he was better at middleweight just because he doesn't have the same body of work at that weight class.
No idea what you're talking about nice ad hominem though

 

It clearly wasn't "clearly".

What has Canelo's "body of work" at 160 got to do with who was the better Middleweight? You seem to be conflating All-Time ratings with who was "better". Canelo's All-Time Middleweight rating is not part of the discussion.

But, as to who was the better... that question was settled in the ring - and Canelo won.

It's only a matter of time... ... ... ... ...

 

If you took out your bias glasses and watched the fight objectively GGG clearly won 7 maybe 8 rounds. Clearly when it comes to Eastern European fighters you can't do that as you have shown a number of times.

Oh so now you don't conflate the two when it suits your bias man funny. Not clearly considering he lost the first and second was close as hell and this was a past his best GGG prime GGG would have most likely beat him clearly. And since you admit that GGG was a better Middleweight all time kinda shows he was the best at that point.

 

I really don't care how you scored it. It is a fact that Golovkin has not registered a win against Canelo.

Clearly, you do not know what "Clearly" means.

You are demonstrating a lack of intelligence here.

Clearly, you do not know what "Clearly" means.

Have you lapsed on your meds?

 

Who’s alt is it?

 

Whatever, talking to this person on two different threads shows he has no idea what he's talking about and has an inherent bias against Eastern European boxers so not going to bother with him anymore

 

Michael? Really?

Dominated a great era at 175, never losing there, jumped to heavyweight in one fight and took THE title from a great. Even without getting into detail, that’s all-time great stuff there as nobody has ever done that. Bob Fitzsimmons being the only other (he did it in reverse) lineal 175 & heavy champ.

 

Andre Ward is one for me who’s over the top praise baffles me. Good fighter, but I don’t see “great.” Golovkin as well, sure, another good one and I do have him winning the Canelo series and yes, he was past prime, but I don’t see all-time greatness there either.

 

I can agree with Ward he fouled in pretty much every fight he fought and rarely fought outside his hometown. He got pretty much ever benefit a fighter could get and still should have probably lost to Sergey Kovalev

 

I know what the facts are. You cannot refute them but, at the same time, you cannot accept them either. Instead, you want to create your own version of events to support your ideas and complain when someone doesn't share your made up view of the world.

I have no issue with people having different opinions but expecting others to be on board with them, particularly when they contradict the facts that you find too difficult to work with, is problematic. And, to claim that those who disagree with you have "no idea", because they prefer to stick to the facts, is plainly puerile.

This is simply old-fashioned slander on your part. Accusations of prejudice of this kind are not welcome here, unacceptable in general and certainly not acceptable to me.

 

Hey Loudon - Are you not able to accept PMs?

 

Not that I’m aware of mate.

I used to receive them.

 

Strange - For whatever reason, the site will not let me send one to you.