GGG already has a better legacy than Floyd and Pacquiao

People ****ting on GGG's resume and legacy are ridiculous.

Let's look at it objectively and see if we can bring any arguments as to why GGG's legacy is supposedly weaker against other ATG-level fighters of our era.

Floyd and Pacquiao are the best examples of how hype and being popular in the USA can boost your boxing legacy in the eyes of many boxing fans. Then everyone just repeats the same **** over and over again and no one dares to speak against it.

GGG on the other hand isn't popular in the USA and isn't from a nation with big boxing fanbase, that's why he's constantly underrated and bashed by haters.

If you take all the hype and notoriety away from them (created by careful marketing and fabricated drama and build up for the fight between the two), Pacman and Floyd have nothing on GGG as boxers.

First of all, it's blatantly obvious that both Pacquiao and Floyd were roided cheaters yet people ignore this as if it never happened. Two roided midgets who fought a lot of catchweights, all those "moving up weightclasses" bull**** doesn't mean ****. 160 division is one of the most prestigious and historic in boxing and GGG rules it with an iron fist. How is going up and down with the help of roids fighting catchweights superior? By your logic heavyweights should never get any recognition because they don't beat champs from multiple divisions. GGG is a pure 160 fighter and beat everyone there was to beat (other than those who blatantly and obviously ducked him)

Another thing is that people look at a fighter's resume and care more about the names on the resume other than the circumstances and even more important: the way that the fighter has won his fights.

Knockouts always were and always will be the most prestigious, dominant and respectable way to win the fight. Floyd and Pacquiao have more good names on the resume (although many of them hypejobs of their own like Cotto, Canelo...), but if you look at the manner of their wins Floyd is a decisionator runner (and a couple of those decisions were controversial) and Pacquiao doesn't have that many knockouts either. Also, Pacquiao tasted the darkness of being knocked out and was sonned by Marquez. GGG's knockout ratio and his iron chin speak for themselves.

For the last 7 years GGG has finished EVERYONE who dared to step in the ring with him and he did it in a brutal malicious life shortening devastating fashion. People who **** on the fighters GGG beat are re****s, those guys are the top fighters in his division. What makes guys like Ortiz, Maidana, Algieri and Rios better than them? Yet Floyd and Pacman couldn't beat them as convincingly as GGG runs through the 160 division.

Demolishing good fighters is superior to getting boring decisions against only marginally better opponents who happen to have more recognition (but were often drained and past their primes, especially in Floyd's case). I think that all things being equal fighters who have shown the will to knockout people deserve more recognition and respect because boxing is a form of fighting. GGG is has won every single FIGHT he has been in as a pro, Floyd for example was essentially beaten up by Maidana even if he controversially won on points.

I see GGG smashing Rubio as a superior win to say Floyd winning the decision against past prime De La Hoya, even though De La Hoya is the more renowned boxer. It's the way you win fights that matters too.

Then there's the amateur background, 345-5. The iron chin, GGG never been knocked down in his career and the power, two things that people want the most in the boxer.

Take the resume away and GGG is more skilled than the both of them, his technical skills are clearly superior. Both Floyd and Pacman relied on their genetic gifts a lot (speed, reflexes...), GGG is pure boxing technical skills. His power isn't so much genetic but a result of perfect technique.

The problem is that most people don't take the time and don't do a proper research to see through the hype and just take the popular opinions and repeat them. The way that Pacquiao and Floyd are still hyped while we have a greater boxer than them in his prime is one of the most annoying and bizarre things in boxing.

Show me one good argument that makes those two drama queens better than GGG

 

You take away all the hype and yes it essentially is.

People underrate GGG like crazy.

91% KO percentage, 345-5, 34-0, never even knocked down. Absolutely butchered everyone in the MW division other than those who openly duck him.

Those are facts.

Floyd and Pacman are roided midget cheats who had carefully planned their catchweights and careers.

I fail to see how people can respect these two more than GGG, one of the best knockout artists in the sport ever.

 

Pacquiao built much of his career on that 8 division champ ****. He was knocked out multiple times, lost some big fights, was roided to the gills and still couldn't KO many of the bums they put in front of him. They also created some BS sob story about him.

Floyd cherrypicked and used his A-side status to get whatever he wanted. Also blatantly roided. Basically built his career and hype around American obsession with pro wrestling heels and villains.

Those two guys hyped each other and got a lot of attention because the boxing public was for some reason interested in a fight between these two even though it was obvious it's going to be boring for 99% of boxing fans.

Now we finally have a real boxer, a real fighter who has an absolutely brilliant amateur record, an iron chin and great power, has better technical skills than anybody, has absolutely demolished his division and dealt with his opponents in brutal fashion. Yet somehow he doesn't get 1% of the hype Floyd and Pacman get.