Gennady Golovkin vs Mike Gibbons.

I have been accused of lauding the "old-time " fighters of the past over the weak crop of middleweights of today.I plead guilty of this because of the richer crop of fighters of yesterday that had to beat so many top fighters to rule their division, unlike today...But watching GGG today completely dominate any MW thus far who has the cujones to fight Golovkin, getting destroyed in the process, I ask this question..If a Hagler, a Giardello or what not somehow were to fight now the very SAME opponents that GGG beat up, WHAT MORE can a young Hagler have done more effectively than GGG, except KILL THEM ? In any generation a fighter can arrive latent with talent that transcends their division
and makes them competitive even in a richer era of top MWs. Pure and simple.
If a Joe Louis or SRR were born 25 years ago they would be in their efforts no better against GGG's opponents then Golovkin has been thus far...Give GGG his well earned due, he is not a flash in the pan slugger in a weak division. He is
most likely an all-time great talent, not to be blamed for scaring off today's opposition...Yes Hagler was GREAT, but I cannot envision a cut prone Vito Antueformo lasting 15 rounds with the well rounded murderous punching GGG. Not at all...GGG's beaten everyone he faced. What more can a man do ???

 

I think we have to say Gibbons at this stage, but Golovkin is not a finished work yet.

I do regard Golovkin as a great middleweight.

He is so far ahead of the recent lineal champions, that the lineal title has become a bit of a joke, like something out of the Harry Greb era!

 

Great post, Burt. If Louis, SRR, or other greats were born 25 years ago, I imagine that many of the posters here would be watching (or reading about) their fights skeptically and dismissively, arguing that they only look great because they haven't fought any live bodies, etc. It's too bad.

 

The lineal title really needs to win Gennady Golovkin, not the other way round!

 

Sure, there would certainly be question marks. But that wouldn't make it insensible or illogical to favor them in hypothetical fights against more established past greats. We would still be able to recognize Louis' power and combination punching, and Robinsons' all around skills and talents. Some people here think that we can't really know anything at all about a fighter until we see him in against great opponents (with greatness defined in ways that are biased in favor of past fighters).

 

We are basically saying that he is half right here.

If Golovkin fell under a bus tomorrow, his stock would rise in later years.

People would look back and say “those guys were all ranked” and “he saw all of the top contenders who would fight him”.

He could even end up as a Les Darcy figure.

 

It is not so much seeing them up against a great fighter for me.

I am very sceptical of fighters who have not beaten somebody who was genuinely elite, and elite based on where they stood at the time.

 

Man that's some good s*it righ there. The link is directing to a Dervyanchenko highlights clip though. The fight itself is on the WSB channel.

 

I have Golovkin winning by decision due to his size advantage, but Mike can win it himself. He overcame Dillon’s size advantages, after all. I doubt Golovkin was on another level to Dillon