GGG is - at the very least - the Greatest middleweight since Hagler

Well if you could give Golokvin the same roids Jones Junior took Triple G would dominate the 90's as well.

 

Steroids don't give you the attributes that Roy possessed.

It's not Harry Potter.

 

It's close. In terms of greatness I think it's between Hopkins and Golovkin as best middleweight since Hagler. I have Hopkins ahead but only just - in the future that could change.

 

You are more deluded than kanye West.

 

Right.

Thanks for letting me know.

You're a true credit to the forum.

Where would we be without you and Todd?

It's a real privilege to have you both here.

 

You are a plague that refuses to acknowledge that Roy's attributes are PED fueled. Give Golovkin the same impunity with Steroids and he will run through the 90's. Dont be acrimonious, just accept it.

 

good thing hes talking about roys attributes when he was prime then. and a shame 4 u that you are talking about todays roy.

I can see why he certainly must be a plague to you if this is how u fail so bad.


3G, drew with canelo, his only elite to date at age 35.

jones at age 30 = 5 elites, 3 divisions.

the only question here is - why r u actually even trying?

 

If we aren't talking literally and you are pulling in Jones' greatness from other weight classes; than yes, absolutely you can pull in the Griffin fight and use it to argue Jones may not be able to replicate Golovkin's long term success. Jones had an off night in his prime and suffered a loss as a result.

While past his physical prime in his mid 30s, I think he probably loses these fights or barely scraps by. He was losing to Tarver and Johnson at this stage of his career.

But at some point he would have an off night like the fist Allen fight, and may not be able to find a way out of it.

His longevity and dominance is remarkable.

Lemiuex is a rare KO artist at MW
Jacobs is another KO artist at MW, who held every physical advantage over Golovkin
Canelo is a pound for pound rated fighter, almost a decade younger.

Pretty special wins if you ask me.

Toney was a decade younger than the 36 year old former Junior Middle McCallum, scraped by him in their first fight and got out boxed in their second fight. I have a feeling if Golovkin duplicated that result it would be ripped apart by people on here. Same goes for Toney's unofficial loss to Tiberi.

And I think Johnson, old McCallum, and Kalambay are not that much better than Jacobs or Canelo. None of them in their time were as highly regarded as Canelo has been in his.

Nunn and Canelo were both rated P4P, and held in similar regard. The difference is Toney wasn't 35 year old when he fought him.

The early 90s only looked strong because Hagler wasn't there to clean up. It's almost always the case when the dominant guy goes, things become more competitive, guys take more risks, and fighters starts to look better.

If Hagler was there. Kalambay doesn't win a belt, McCallum isn't moving up to target the vulnerable looking Kalambay for his belt...etc.

He was a great fighter past his prime but the MW division you are building up was considered so weak at the time, a 34-36 year old fighter moving up was favored over these younger bigger guys.

He moved up to challenge Kalambay whom he was expected to easily beat for a belt. But he lost the first fight.

McCallum was a 5-2 favorite over Toney in their first fight and he got a draw most observers felt he lost.

So you are giving Golovkin a hard time for doing what he was expected to do, but giving McCallum a pass when he failed several times to do what he was expected to do.

 

Yeah, Roy's magical "Royds" would have given him better head movement and a better defence, and he'd have crushed Nunn, Toney, McCallum, Benn, Gerald and Jackson etc.

Time for your MEDS again.

 

Thats all I need to know, by refusing to acknowledge that PED's give you an edge, it only verified that you live in your own little world. No wonder you dropped out of medical school.

 

The Kentucky Cobra,

My point was crystal clear.

If Roy could have remained at MW his whole career, and he'd have fought GG's opposition in the same order, he'd also have beaten all of them.

It's very simple.

The greatest MW's of all time should be able to beat the Lemiuex's and Murray's of the world, fighting 2-4 times per year.

Regarding Griffin, he pulled himself off of the canvas and won on a technicality. Only a fool could class that as a clear win. Again, it was also up at LHW. Yes, every fighter can have an off day. Yes, everybody can meet someone who presents them with a tough match up stylistically. Montell was a small, defensive counter puncher, who was trained by Eddie Futch. But which one of GG's opponents would have caused Roy huge stylistic problems? Roy would have toyed with the majority of GG's opponents, if not all of them.

We all know that Roy's unorthadox style was based around his great athleticism and reflexes etc.

Yes, the wheels came off at GG's current age. That's a fair point. But he'd fought 50 fights at that point, across 5 weight classes, which included going up to HW and back. Look what happened to Tarver, Byrd and Dawson. They all suffered the same fate.

It's more than possible that Roy could have had better longevity had he have fought less fights and not jumped up and down in weight.

Maybe, maybe not.

I would have fancied him against GG's opposition.

His longevity needs to be respected. But again, his resume isn't remarkable.

There's nothing special about Lemieux.

Canelo is a very good fighter, but he's a former JMW who struggled with the likes of Lara. At this stage, we don't know how good a MW he is. We can only judge him off of one fight.

Jacobs is also a good fighter. He's very big and strong at the weight. But he's nothing special, and he gave GG all he could handle.

So whilst those wins have to be respected, what's remarkable about them?

Saying they're special is an exaggeration.

Roy blasted out Tate in 2 rounds like he was nothing.

He comfortably beat Bernard with a fractured hand.

Yes, he scraped by him. But Mike was truly a great fighter. He was elite.

Please.

Sumbu Kalambay was a great fighter.

I'm a big fan of Danny's, but he hasn't done that much.

Canelo has had one official fight at MW.

Canelo is not regarded as a better MW than Kalambay.

Don't confuse ability with popularity.

Nunn was an elite MW, with great skills and reflexes.

Again, Canelo has had just one fight at MW.

Nonsense.

Marvin would have had huge difficulties with all of those MW's of the early 90's.

Just look at the guys who fought there.

The reason it looked a strong era, was because: It was a strong era.

The division was stacked:

Gerald
Jackson
Graham
Kalambay
Toney
Nunn
Benn
Watson
Eubank
Roy
Johnson
Collins
McCallum etc.

Why not?

There's no reason why Kalambay couldn't have beaten Marvin.

I don't have to build it up.

It speaks for itself.

It was much stronger than today's era. See above.

Fighting peak versions of Sumbu Kalambay and James Toney, is harder than fighting guys like Murray and Lemiuex etc.

I'm not giving GG a hard time.

I'm a big fan of his.

I just don't see how his resume is remarkable.

Considering he's had tough fights with Canelo and Jacobs, then it's safe to say that he wouldn't have enjoyed his current level of dominance had he have fought the likes of: Nunn, McCallum, Kalambay and Toney etc.

Once again, everything has to be put into context.

Joe Calzaghe went 46-0. A great achievement. But could he have gone 46-0 following someone else's timeline?

Rocky Marciano went 49-0. Mike Tyson, Muhammad Ali and Lennox Lewis couldn't replicate that. They weren't as dominant as Rocky was. But so what? They could have been following his exact same timeline. And I don't think Rocky would have made it to 49-0 following their timelines.

Dominance has to be respected. But again, you have to look at who's been dominated and in what manner. The thing with GG, is that he's not dominating a particularly strong era, nor is he dominating all of his opposition, in a way that clearly shows that he's a level above them. Neither of those things has happened.

He's currently ruling nothing more than a decent division, and he's had competitive fights against his best 2 opponents. So what's remarkable about that?

Again, under different circumstances, many of those MW's of the early 90's could have followed his timeline.

 

I didn't attend medical school.

Like I said earlier, we're truly blessed to have you here.

 

I agree with the first part.

 

I'm that not smart?

Ha!

Good one.

I'm sure that was a typo though.

 

You ****ers cannot rank GGG above Hopkins get real.