Gennady Golovkin: Tell me about him

Boxers give a damn about belts. For some, it's their only introduction to the lime light, as well as opportunities for fame and fortune. Fans can poo-poo belts all they want. Fans don't do anything but complain for the most part.

Just don't ever say the word 'Champion' if belts mean nothing to you.

 

He says that he gives no importance to the belts.

Yet he obviously gives huge importance to the WBC belt.

I understand the tradition.

The lineage.

The prestige.

I get it.

But how could Cotto have been ‘The Man’ at MW for beating Martinez?

How could Canelo have been ‘The Man’ at MW for beating Cotto at a C-W?

Unless you beat a long reigning king in Hopkins like Taylor did, then surely you have to do more than just claim the WBC belt, in order to become ‘The Man’?

 

Because Martinez was "The Man" and Cotto beat him.

Because Cotto was "The Man" and Canelo beat him.

Simple as that. Lineality isn't affected by injury or catchweights. Yes there were extenuating circumstances in those matches, but they still happened.

All due respect, that's not how it works. The Lineal Title can only change hands via an in-ring encounter. For a new lineage to be established, the #1 or #2 ranked MW must meet in the squared circle. That never happened. Canelo remained the #1 challenger after vacating the belt, so GGG needed to fight him and beat a him in order to become Lineal Champ a.k.a. "The Man".

 

I honestly hate the whole "The Man" crap It's about as bad as the mythical P4P #1 title.

I understand the importance of a linear title line. But it's been broken in pretty much every weight class already. It has to be established whether someone wants to poo-poo this or that guy because he only beat a contender some poster doesn't think much of.

If belts don't matter to some fans, champs shouldn't matter either. Craziness!

 

Yes!Cotto was the champ at that time.The guy who s the champ is not always the best guy in the division.
Joe Louis was obviously the best HW in the world quite q while before he beat Braddock.
It s context of when you get or not get your shot.
Yes,initially Canelo ****ed Golovkin but YOU CANT HAVE HIM AS CHAMPION AFTER!That s not how it works.You either win it in the ring or not.
I gave you an example-Harry Wills was ducked for years by Jack Dempsey due to financial issues and racism.Did that take the best away from Dempsey?No,offcourse not.Demosey finally signed off to fight at some point but it didnt happen due to some other behind the scenes BS.
Countless similar examples in history.Hell,Charley Burley(a HOF fighter) never got a title shot…EVER!
This GGG situation is no different.

 

I dont disagree with anything you said.

 

I know exactly how it works mate.

It doesn’t need explaining to me.

I’ve been a fan for over 30 years.

I understand perfectly everything you and G Man have said. But nobody could really have thought that Miguel Cotto was ‘The Man’ at MW for having beaten a faded and injured Sergio Martinez.

Nobody could have thought that Canelo was ‘The Man’ at MW for having beaten Cotto at a C-W.

Sure, they were the lineal champions officially.

But in today’s day and age, to me, these guys were no more than WBC belt holders.

In order to become the true ‘Man’ of the division, they needed to prove that by securing the other belts, and clearing out the top 10 and beating the best of the other fighters at the weight.

GG stepped aside to let the Cotto-Canelo fight happen.

Cotto wouldn’t fight GG.

GG stepped aside to let the Canelo-Khan happen.

Canelo wouldn’t fight GG.

By the time they did fight, GG had cleaned out the rest of the division and secured the other belts.

Again, I understand how the linage works. But Canelo gave up his right to be considered ‘The Man’ the day he gave up the belt to fight guys from the lower weights.

So whilst I understand the history of the sport and its traditions, you, G Man and nobody else should have an issue with anyone else having declared GG as being ‘The Man’ at MW.

 

Is that what you understood?
I dont give a damn about the WBC belt.

 

Your changing things as you wish.
To you The Man is the best guy right?Well it doesnt work that way abd I explained that.
Context ad circumstances.
The Champ is not always the best guy in the division and gave you some examples.

 

I understand perfectly.

Nobody has claimed that GG was the lineal champion.

But he had the right to be classed as ‘The Man’ at MW, as-in THE best fighter at the weight, when the other guys wouldn’t fight him and he’d mopped up the rest.

It’s as simple as that.

If you want to argue that he wasn’t the true lineal champ, then that’s cool.

But going into the fight with Canelo, he was rightly classed by many as being the best man at the weight.

So that’s obviously where you differ.

It’s the terminology.

He wasn’t the true lineal champ, but when Canelo wouldn’t fight him and he’d done everything else he could, he was declared as being the best man in the division.

That is my definition.

‘The Man’ is the best guy at the weight, not just the lineal champion.

So I’m not splitting hairs, but by the time Canelo had ran off to fight the likes of Liam Williams, GG was the MW king.

 

I meant the WBC/lineal champion.

The circumstances have to matter, no?

 

Yeah.
If THE MAN in YOUR definition is the best guy in the division IN YOUR OPINION then yeah he was The Man.
However The Man in boxing terms differs to your definition of it.So you should word it differently.

 

Lineal only.
WBC was circumstancial.
It could have been either of those alphabet baubles.

 

I’m not changing anything.

The context and the circumstances matter.

A poster has said that GGG was ‘The Man’ at MW, on the grounds that the other champs ran for the hills and he mopped up the rest.

Yet you won’t let the guy refer to GG as being ‘The Man’ as he didn’t fight Canelo.

Fine. But he wouldn’t fight him.

So why can’t GG have been declared as ‘The Man’ under those circumstances?

The lineal is nonsense these days.

A faded JMW targeting Martinez because he had bad knees?

Two guys then fighting for the lineal title at a catch-weight, with NO INTENTION of fighting their mandatory and fellow MW champ in GG afterwards?

You can’t support that.

And that’s the only issue that I have with your post.

And as far as I’m concerned, their should be a new lineage if someone gives up their belt.

What it comes down to is this:

Me and the other guy think that GG was ‘The Man’ at the weight, as in the MW king, with you saying that he couldn’t be declared so, without having beaten Canelo in the ring.

I don’t agree with that and I’ve supported my argument.

I understand the traditions and the lineage, but today it’s not worth anything.

 

It was obvious what the guy was saying.

He backed it up by saying that the other guys ran for the hills, which they did.

So you should have had no issue with his claim.