Gennady Golovkin's reign surpasses Marvin Hagler's reign

Fair points.

Fighters who enjoy long reigns as champion often have a string of no hopers on their record. I don't think Golovkin's run is really any worse than Hopkins or Calzaghe. He did dispatch most of them quite easily, however and I always think that lesser champions usually end up losing to lesser opposition at some point.

Golovkin has been pretty good, I think. I'm not sure what more he could have achieved given the era and the opportunities he's had.

I think we may have seen the best of him, however. He's 35 now and does seem to be slowing down. While I credit Jacobs with putting on a great performance, Golovkin did look quite ordinary last time out.

Nonetheless if Golovkin gets past Canelo and then gets a few more wins I think he will earn a significant place in our memories and in boxing history.

No worries on the crazy humour, it's to be expected on this site!

 

well thats becos he doesnt actually have a long reign. 2013-2017 is very decent but not long yet.I tihnk he will get there.

calzaghe is no that similar. most of his reign was unrecognised at the time f course. without recognition his wbo reign is from 2004 -2007, just under 4 years. 3G has already topped that.

hopkins run is however genuine, his wbo title was in addition to major titles.

3g's allout style does him no favours, he will need to be looking at packing in soon.

 

Didn't Golovkin win his first WBA belt back in 2010? His other belts are more recent I know.

Pretty sure it was the same for Hopkins. Wasn't he IBF champion for ages, only picking up the other belts later into his reign?

In any case I think Golovkin is the most dominant middleweight we've had since Hopkins. The opposition hasn't been great, but that was true for Hopkins, too.

You're right about Golovkin's style. He's a war horse and they don't age well. He won't go on for much longer I'm sure.

 

2013. his reg was 2nd fiddle belt, not the world belt.

He is best since Martinez, but is closing on him in duration terms and has surpassed him in unification terms.

 

No, your understanding of what "lineal" is, is what's so hilarious. You're trying so hard to apply a disclaimer that the term "lineal title" doesn't exist, lmao. Don't play us stupid, GG is not the lineal champion. You do know what "lineal" means right? Lol @tangibly lol...

 

Hagler was the lineal champion for 7 years, and the "so called" undisputed champion for how ever long you believe he was, lmao.

 

BlizzyBliz got the worst FKN grill set up ever in his avatar....BAHAAAAAA.....
What ya cooking?? Big Hands

 

It is amusing people are trying to detract from GGG for not holding the lineal middleweight title.

Hard to win something nobody is prepared to let you compete for. In any case, just how 'lineal' is the middleweight title?

The concept of the lineal title is 'the man who beat the man who beat the man' and in a perfect world it would consist of an unbroken chain from the first champion to the reigning champion.

The reality is the chain of the linear middleweight title has about 8 broken links in it. Just as one example, between 1993 when Toney vacated, and 2001 when Hopkins was anointed, there wasn't even a lineal middleweight champion in place.

So the lineal title notionally held by Canelo only has 5 links with history:

Alvarez - Cotto - Martinez - Pavlik - Taylor - Hopkins - then there's an 8 year back hole back to Toney vacating the title.

 

Pointless moot point rummy

 

He's not unified. What belt has he held that long, the ****ing IBO? that is a cracker jack belt

 

The concept of the lineal title is 'the man who beat the man who beat the man' and in a perfect world it would consist of an unbroken chain from the first champion to the current one.

However, the linear middleweight title is a chain riddled with broken links. All up it has about 8 breaks in its continuity.

Consequently the lineal middleweight title notionally held by Canelo really only has 5 links with history:

Alvarez - Cotto - Martinez - Pavlik - Taylor - Hopkins - then there's an 8 year back hole back to Toney vacating the title.

 

You know what he meant.

Today's boxing world, politics, number of belts are alot more different than Hagler's days. So you can't compare apples and oranges.

Same goes for Hopkins era.

The fact is that GGG has rained supreme as "the man" in the division longer than Hagler has.

Now this is the key rummy. It's irrelevant what you want to call it. Undisputed. Unified. Multiple belt champ. Ring champion.

Whatever you want to call him it irelevant, the point is he has been the man @ 160lb. A linchpin , by which all MW have been measured with.

So your splitting hairs in this instance is moot for the point of this thread.

 

At this point having fought zero BIG names, GGG telling his grand kids stories of being the undisputed champ is not a million miles away from Charles martin telling his he was once the heavyweight champ. Now of course GGG's resume is far better than martins but the point remains.

GGG should accept goldenboy's offer because legacy is worth more than the money, If floyd mayweather ego can allow him to accept being the B side in exchange for a chance of changing your legacy anybody can do it. Defeat canelo, get the other belt from saunders, the only worthy fight at middle weight is then eubank, The division is weak as **** maybe give Jacobs a rematch and move up beat an andre ward, kovavel, adonis etc before you can even start mentioning his name with the likes of hagler.

GGG has not beat a single true world champion, regardless of who ever had a belt, Saunders is not a real world champion lets be real, jacobs isn't quite one either imo. GGG IS one but hes not fought another one. ward is one, kovlev is one even if he no longer has a belt, hes world level no doubt.

 

I'm not trying hard. It's actually a simple concept. There is no such thing as a lineal champion. It does not exist. It's not tangible.