Gennady Golovkin: Tell me about him

You forgot the Canelo lost the first fight clearly, then GGG was robbed part of the story. With the proper winner in the first fight there would be less anger about the controversial 2nd fight. Of coarse if GGG wins vs Murata and then against Canelo for all the belts at 168lbs then the injustice will be water under the bridge, and GGG may or may not give Canelo a fourth fight.

 

They didn’t call him Bumluvkin for nothing.

 

One of the greatest MW Champions all-time.

 

So you're basing your world view on a localized conversation in a construction site break room. So you're talking about maybe 5 or 6 Mexican Americans who thought GGG won, and then 1 guy disagreed with them and said Canelo won then they ganged up on that one guy who said Canelo won and said "no Canelo got his ass kicked". This is your problem, you are trying to project your tiny bubble of opinions from your life experience on to the whole world. There's a reason why statistics require a high sample size in order to make conclusions from a data set. There's also a cultural difference between Mexican Americans and actual Mexicans (who live in Mexico).

Some Mexicans may have been inclined to side with GGG after the first match due to a style preference and the fact that GGG made a big hissy fit about how Canelo didn't fight "Mexican Style" the first time. I bet plenty of Mexican Americans would have been affected by that narrative and it may have caused them to say GGG should have won, because he was coming forward and fighting more like how their hero Chavez fought. Mexicans (in Mexico) who watched the fight on Mexican TV wouldn't have the same reaction to the decision that American audiences had which garnered more controversy. We don't get to hear about the opinions from boxing fans who live in Mexico because most don't speak english, and for you to base your view of what they believe on a handful of Mexican Americans at your job site is incredibly short sighted. How we view boxing matches comes down to our own personal interpretation of what happened, it's entirely subjective, but when I score matches I try to filter out all external stimuli and just focus on who is performed better and who landed the cleaner more significant punches. In the first match, it was very apparent to me and many others that was Canelo, but I understand that you disagree and see it differently. I have no problem with that, the world would be a boring place if we agreed on everything.

 

I had many such bubbles and they were all the same. Most were Mexicans from Mexico. Also I trust my own judgment. I thought Canelo did a great job in the first fight but clearly not enough. The 2nd fight was a real war that I thought GGG won down the stretch, by about 2 rounds on fight night, but I thought he won by even more when watching it real close. GGG does alot of subtle things, to go along with jabbing Canelo's head off the hinges. Both fights were great by two great fighters.

 

That's what I was gonna ask you about - how well did you think Canelo performed in that first match. He did do a great job, and not only that but he performed in a way that many didn't expect, using his footwork, etc. Both do a lot of subtle things in there, I think a lot of the problem is that each side doesn't really focus on what the other fighter does. GGG with his subtle glove and elbow placement, Canelo with his slipping of punches and upper body movement. The first match was more of a chess match than the rematch which as you've attested to was more of a war. But it was only war because Canelo made it a war by coming forward. GGG in my estimation in the rematch wasn't keen on matching Canelo toe to toe but was in more of a survival mode, and was really struggling in the middle rounds, you know around the time when Abel said to him in the corner that was losing. GGG did rally late though making it very close in the end, but it wasn't so close after 7 or 8 rounds. Whereas in the first match it was Canelo at times in survival mode, gassing in the middle rounds, fighting cautious, setting traps, using the sweet science and well timed counters. But it made sense for him to fight that way the first time, given how heavy handed GGG was said to be.

So I think we can both agree that both matches were great, evenly matched, highly competitive affairs. I don't see why we can't hold our own beliefs about who deserved to win while respecting each others viewpoint. The only problems I have with you and others like you is trying to act like it was abundantly clear that GGG won either match and how you speak about it matter of factly like GGG won when that's not the case. You can believe that you thought GGG did enough to win, I can accept that you saw it that way, and we can discuss why you believe that, but it's so over the top when I hear you pretending like it was so obvious that GGG won, that's where you cross the line.

No matter who you thought won, we should all be able to recognize how close both fights were and how debatable they are as far as who won. And when somebody pretends like it was so clear and obvious that GGG, I just say to myself "what fight were you watching". You can't have it both ways, either you recognize it was close and debatable or you don't. So you believing GGG won either match, perfectly fine with me. I get that's what a lot of fans believe, but you acting like it was so obvious that he won and that you can't fathom a Canelo victory, that just too much for me. But again, however we scored it, there should be a level of respect between us for our viewpoints. That's it's not just fanboy biased views, but that we each have genuine reasons for how we scored it. That should be respected, and I've always tried to show GGG fans that respect, but that same respect isn't given to those that scored it for Canelo, and that's the main problem in my estimation. And appealing to so-called popular opinion as you have done is in my view taking the easy way out and recognizing how debatable the scoring is.

 

Girls from his hood used to say he would speak perfect English during intimate moments like "I respect your box."

 

The problem is GGG was robbed of a career defining fight to go along with his title defense record. The guy who won deserves the credit. Kovalev was robbed as well in his first fight with Ward. At least they didnt rob GGG worse and actually take GGG'S belts and ruin his title defense streak. It was bad and not fair but it could have been worse. Just like when Hearns beat SRL in the 2nd fight and got a draw, he was happy he didnt get a loss. That's the way it is when you fight the cash cow.

 

Life isn't fair OK, it's time for you to get over it. I know how you feel about it, but it doesn't do you any good to cry about it every day. And for goodness sake, comparing Canelo GGG 1 to SRL Hearns 2 is utterly ridiculous!! That was a clear victory for Hearns, he was robbed of that win, and remember Hearns scored multiple knockdowns there and was clearly ahead. It was only a draw because a judge scored that last round 10-8 SRL, it was a hell of a round for SRL but it was still a clear win for Hearns based on what happened earlier with an emphasis on the knockdowns. So Canelo GGG 1 was nothing like SRL Hearns 2, if anything it's the complete opposite in a way, with SRL looking much father past his prime than Hearns, but hanging in there and coming up with some fireworks in that last round. Please don't ever try making that comparison again because it makes you look stupid. It's almost as bad as the people who compared Canelo GGG 1 to the Sweet Pea Chavez draw or Holyfield Lewis 1.

This is just bonkers to take the most controversial draws of all-time and pretend those were anything like Canelo GGG 1. This is the kind of reasoning that drives me up a wall, I can't let people get off the hook when making atrocious comparisons like that. Please do better.

 

I'm long over it, both huge fights , both career defining, both robberies. That's the similarity though. Cash cow got the benefit of the doubt in both.
There is alot more important things going on in these insane times, just shooting the breeze. Kind of like those old cartoons with the coyote and the sheepdog clocking in and clocking out.

 

Unfortunately he was never the MW champion.

 

Sure was dipshyte. Defended the title 20x. Well recognized as such you sniveling moron.

 

I’m talking real champion not beltholder.

Big difference.

 

The so called real champ Canelo laid down his WBC belt to avoid GGG, Unified supposed real champ Geale laid down his belt rather than fight GGG.we all know what happend when they fought. Supposed real champ Sturm lost to Geale. Quit with the real champ nonsense.

 

Yes they ducked him.But that doesnt make you the champ.
Sonny Liston had been the no 1 contender for over a year until Patterson finally relented and fought him.If he had not Sonny wouldnt have been champ,it s as simple as that.
Golovkin didnget to fight for the belt twice and weather you think he won or not oficially he didnt get the W.