GGG is overrated.

I think his resume could have been better if he came off to a faster start, like Rigo, Loma or Usyk. He started facing ranked fighters fairly late, and that was at a point when the division was in a bit of transition.

Not saying it was his fault. Don't really know why it took so long for him to face the better guys of the division. During his first five years as a pro you had a fairly good crop of Sturm, Taylor, Pavlik, Abrams, Williams and Martinez and during the last five there's been BJS, Andrade and Charlo.

Pirog was about to happen and it's a great shame that Pirog's injury problems put a stop to it.

A handful of these names on his resume would certainly make it better. I know some of them wanted nothing to do with him, but too bad that none of them happened.

His best opponents were Canelo, Jacobs and Derveynchenko imo, but they were all very close fights as well. I don't think you can say with too much conviction that GGG was terribly unlucky in losing just one out of these four fights.

 

Golovkin / Canelo 1 is widely considered a robbery too. In fact something like 85-90% of the people polled on this site thought that Golovkin won.

It proves that GGG is considered as much better than Dariusz. Find me somebody that rates DM in the top ten LHW. Go for it.

Meanwhile here are people that rate GGG at #6 all-time:

"Golovkin gets the number six spot in his favorite division because of his fantastic run since 2010. Picking up the WBA “secondary” strap, “GGG” went on to claim the IBO version when that sanctioning body was still a significant organization with fans.The Kazakh puncher then made it his mission to add more as he went on a campaign of terror."

https://www.*****.net/2021/07/01/gennadiy-golovkin-wbc-rated-canelo/

Number of defences, the way that he won and the quality of the defences.

It's a defence.

That's your opinion. In my opinion guys like Jacobs, Derevyanchenko or Canelo would have whipped Trinidad.

 

Golovkin's promotional problems with the German handlers at the time are well known. Sturm wouldn't face GGG for his weight in gold. Golovkin was Sturm's mandatory and iirc they literally made another belt for Sturm so he didnt have to face him. This sort of thing is old news when GGG is concerned

 

Well i personally wouldn't class it as a robbery nor in the same vein as Jones vs Park, i'll agree it was a controversial decision. But Canelo was still very competitive in the fight and did win his fair share of rounds.

How does that prove he's much better than Michalczewski ? your basing your argument on 1 person's opinion. And secondly Golovkin is a Middleweight and Michalczewski is a Light Heavyweight, lets rate them on a P4P basis and really looking at their achievements and their best wins. Michalczewski had 23 title defences 48-2 record and a better single win with a victory over Virgil Hill, so again i fail to see where Golovkin is much more superior than Michalczewski.

The quality of defences ? well @Man_Machine already shut down that argument.

Yes but a defence he "did not win" as i keep repeating, i don't know why you keep holding onto that so dearly. The fact is Golovkin never beat Canelo in 3 attempts, getting a draw and 2 losses to Canelo doesn't improve his standing when ranking him it does the opposite.

Whether or not you believe those 3 fighters beat Trinidad is irrelevant, Trinidad was much more highly regarded than Jacobs, Derevyanchenko, and is considered a great fighter. And the argument i keep bringing to you is that Golovkin failed to beat a great fighter, and no a draw against Canelo doesn't count.

 

So I guess we're stuck with Park whooping RJJ. That's the decision. That's what it is. Who am I to argue. Obviously the judge had it right.

That's two sites now, one of which reflects the opinion of the WBC. And here's another. They reckon Golovkin is #5 all-time middleweight

https://www.sportsunfold.com/web-stories/top-10-middleweight-boxers-of-all-time/

I'm still waiting for you to find me some sort of credible boxing authority that rates DM as top 10 LHW ever. I've found you 3 sources that reckon GGG is top 10. Want more?

Hopkins has a NC as a defence

At lower divisions. Sometimes greatness comes with a fighter. Sometimes it does not. Trinidad proved very little at 160. Golovkin gets flak for taking out 38-0 Brook who was also from a lower division. I'm not going to claim Brook was a great middleweight.

 

Here's a 4th opinion. GGG = #7

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/box...ovkin-canelo-alvarez/qbsee6xsqdhqgng0iaayuiwc

 

I'd forgotten that Trinidad was perceived as the Pound-for-Pound #2 at the time.
IIRC Hopkins was also the underdog going into the Trinidad bout.

The Hopkins/Trinidad and Golovkin/Canelo bouts bear similar hallmarks, in terms of their championship significance; former Welterweights, turned Light Middleweights, then aiming at the Undisputed Middleweight Championship and both of them being the younger men, in their prime, going against established elder statesmen.

Both had limited exposure in the 160 division, but I'd take Trindad's victory against Joppy over Canelo's wins vs Cotto, Khan and JCC Jr, any day of the week. And - yes - Trinidad's Joppy win is a better single victory than appears on Golovkin's entire ledger.

In any event, Hopkins emerged victorious; Golovkin did not - and this makes the gap between the two very clear, for mine.


What this thread is demonstrating is the difference between arguments, based on facts, and those made by guessing about what might have been. Seems this level of speculation applies not only to Golovkin himself, but also extends to what Golovkin's opponents might have done, in Hopkins' and Trinidad's day.

Dreamers can dream, I suppose... ... ...

 

Again what is your obsession with Jones vs Park ? and how is it relevant to this discussion ? one is considered an outright robbery in which Jones dominated. The other is considered a competitive but "controversial" decision. Again the term controversial and robbery is different, and there is an argument for Canelo winning against Golovkin.

What did i say previously in this thread ? i said i "personally" wouldn't have Golovkin in my top 10. I could pull out many articles that don't have Golovkin in the top 10. Again what does it prove ? it's just someone's opinion just like mine and yours. If you want to have Golovkin in your top 10 i told you that's your opinion which your entitled to but i don't agree with it. My main gripe is your trying to claim Golovkin could be rated above Hopkins. And funnily enough that article also rates Hopkins above Golovkin.

Again Michalczewski is in a "different weightclass" you have to rate them on a P4P basis. And again i have yet to hear why Golovkin is so superior to Michalczewski ? Michalczewski made 23 title defences and has the best win out of the two fighters with a victory over Virgil Hill. So again i ask why is Golovkin's resume so superior to Michalczewski's ?

And ? he had a legitimate injury after he had a nasty fall out of the ring, and quickly rematched Allen and erased any doubt about the NC.

Please do not insult my intelligence trying to compare Brook and Trinidad, Brook moved up two weightclasses and was well out of his depth vs Golovkin.

Let me put it simply for you is Brook considered a great fighter ? was he ranked in the top 10 P4P ? did he beat a world class Middleweight prior to facing Golovkin ? was Golovkin considered the underdog against Brook ?

 

Clearly there is an argument for Park beating RJJ since he got the official W.

Ohhh I get it, you're a Borenard hugger. Well say no more. I'll not molest you any further on the subject after this post.

Because people rate GGG in the top 10 MW and DM isn't on the same level. I'm still waiting for any shred of evidence from you to that effect.

And GGG has a defence against Canelo. It's one of his many that put his defences into the most numerous in MW history. Get over it.

Trinidad moved up and was out of his depth against Hopkins

 

Not even going to bother to reply to this sarcastic comment.

"Molest" "Borenard hugger" really ? just for information as i'm not gonna go back forth with childish insults, you haven't "molested" anyone. I thought we were having a conversation on a boxing forum but ok. And as for the "Borenard hugger" comment i'm not even a fan of Hopkins but ok.

Again how many times do i have to repeat myself ? both fighters are in different weightclasses. Therefore you compare them on a P4P basis, and i've already told you countless times about the achievements and resume of Michalczewski. And yet for some reason you keep ignoring it, and want to keep quoting an article of someone's opinion.

It's pretty simple so let me explain it once more because this is my last response, Michalczewski had more title defences than Golovkin. Had the best win between the two fighters beating Virgil Hill who is better than anyone on Golovkin's resume, went 48-0 before his 1st loss and reigned for 9 years. So on a "P4P basis" based on their achievements and resume they're comparable i hope that's clear enough for you.

Again when did i say he didn't ? so clearly i don't have to "get over anything". My argument is that the best fighter Golovkin faced clearly was Canelo, and he failed to get a win against him in 3 fights. So when ranking him against other ATG Middleweights that should count against him, as Golovkin failed to beat any great fighters.

Well clearly that's not what people thought at the time, as Trinidad was the favourite and rated P4P number 2 in the world. Comparing Trinidad to Brook is utterly ridiculous.

And finally i will no longer be commenting on this thread, as i feel like this has somehow taken a turn for the worse. And i don't wish to argue with you or anyone over the internet. So i'll leave it there and yeah i hope there's no ill feelings.

 

Eh, we just disagree on most of this, no worries.

FWIW I'm of the opinion that RJJ beat Park. My point is that judges, for whatever reasons, often get the wrong results and sometimes vicariously so. Which is what I think happened in GGGs first 2 fights against Canelo. You clearly disagree so, ok. TY for the hat tip at the end, no hard feelings

 

I said i wouldn't reply again but i appreciate you responding in a nice way, no hard feels buddy i certainly don't want to argue with you. I feel like we're both passionate boxing and want our opinions to be heard nothing in that.

Again if you feel like Golovkin is in the top 10 i may not necessarily agree, but i can definitely see an argument for him being in the top 10.

And finally you know what's funny ? we've been debating over Canelo/Golovkin 1. I actually did think Golovkin won their 1st meeting by 2 rounds i believe ? Unfortunately Golovkin didn't get the nod and i feel like that hurts him a bit when ranking him, but again if you feel differently about it that's entirely up to you.

PS glad we could come to peaceful conclusion, and now for real this time i'm gonna take myself out of this thread good day to you.

 

"NO P4P" elite? P4P is an absurd ranking, it's idiotic in its idea. The one more stupid is who's the PPV star, but there're people who believe that this matters, even a forum user who takes that very seriously can be found here, no wonder if he recognizes himself in my post and reply the usual gibberish.

Golovkin is going to be ATG, as he is a legend already.

 

If you even consider that as a reasonable comparison to Canelo-GGG 1 or 2, you're so deluded with GGG fandom that any discussion with you on the subject is pointless.

 

Exactly, you mean also 85 % of the boxing world as well .... .. dont listen to these other dumb ****s who cant CLEARLY see that GGG got robbed ... you rank accordingly to that imo .. and hes a H2H monster ,, which is how some here also rank .. thats the thing about the atg tag? it means different to different posters .. but yes you are right on the money with GGG analysis ... he is 50-50 against all the other ATGS on an average .. thats answers the question right there for me