GGG vs. Marvin Hagler's competition

Probably similar- maybe identical? Hagler was better then the era he inhabited.

 

Golovkin beats everyone that Hagler fought.

 

Whilst Golovkin should be the favourite over all of Hagler's opposition. Golovkin never actually beat anyone on the level of Duran, Hearns. Even though Middleweight wasn't their best weightclass. I think Duran's boxing skills vs Golovkin would be interesting, it would be quite similar to Golovkin/Canelo 1. And whilst Golovkin has shown a very good chin in his career, it still would be interesting to see how Golovkin takes a right hand bomb from Hearns.

Also could Leonard of outboxed Golovkin on the outside ? That's another question.

 

GGG never beat anyone remotely close to the P4P greatness of Duran, or even Hearns, I agree.

I'd tentatively favour a Jacobs that was likely 180lbs in the ring & Canelo from their 1st fight (GGG won on a fair scorecard) over Duran. Duran was way better than both, but both were way bigger than him.

Hearns would likely outbox GGG early & would have a punchers chance, but I suspect the telling difference would be a prime GGG's vastly superior chin for a come from behind KO. I agree Hearns should be favoured over any GGG opponent at 160lbs, though.

I'd take a 32-year old GGG over SRL, but to be fair, GGG started out much later than Hagler. I'd tentatively favour a SRL via narrow points decision over a GGG that was as far removed from his prime as the Hagler that fought SRL was, which is probably the GGG from around Canelo 2, where he wasn't shot, but was clearly slowing down & losing explosivity.

 

He would do pretty well. But, he would likely have lost a few along the way. GGG was no Hagler. The competition that GGG beat was really pretty dreadful. Not that all of the blame was on him, but, the fact remains that Golovkin beat very few elite fighters. When Danny Jacobs is one of your best wins...

 

Which fighter did Hagler beat who was substantially better than Jacobs and Canelo (GGG won their 1st fight on a fair scorecard) at MW?

Hagler is obviously the greater MW and by quite a distance, but there are some vague similarities between the two in the sense that both have relatively deep resumes, whilst both lack a great middlewight. Duran and Hearns are ATGs, but not great MWs.

Both were consistently dominant against a decent quantity of top 10 MWs, Hagler proved himself the premier MW in the world for longer and in a more unequivocal fashion than GGG.

 

But Golovkin doesn't have any win over any highly rated P4P fighter, whilst Hagler has 2 in Duran, Hearns. And whilst both fighters wern't at their best at Middleweight, they were still dangerous at the weight.

I would also argue that Hagler fought in a deeper/tougher Middleweight era than Golovkin. Theres fighters like Fletcher, Parker, who were very tough fighters. Who never received a title shot because they got beat at final hurdle, that just shows you how many tough contenders there were in that era.

And whilst you bring up Golovkin deserving the decision vs Canelo the 1st time which he probably did. He still lost the other 2 fights fair and square, and also received 2 close decisions himself against Jacobs, Derevyanchenko, with the latter being highly controversial.

 

There's a few caveats.

1) Golovkin's 160 is not Hagler's 160 due to different rehydration rules. GGG is probably 10lb heavier on fight night than Hagler's division average. You can see this when you notice how quick some of those guys were. They are more like today's 154 division.
2) We never really saw the best of Golovkin because he started so late. Hagler retired at 32. Golovkin was just getting started at 32.
3) Hagler was kind of green in his early career. He picked up losses that I believe a prime Hagler would not have. Golovkin was a beast the moment he stepped into middleweight thanks to his extensive amateur experience.

So a straight up evaluation is not so simple.

Honestly I think GGG would have done just fine if you are plopping him as he was in his own career into Hagler's career. He already is a pulverising puncher at 'his' 160. Give him 10lb on his opponents and the power factor alone might be enough to carry him through.

I think the smart boxers like Leonard might be his hardest challenges, guys that minimize the length of engagement and keep moving. I don't fancy the chances of anybody who wants to trade with him.

 

I'm not arguing GGG over Hagler at MW. Hagler is my #3 all time and GGG my #13, based solely on fights in and around MW. Substantial daylight between them.

Smoking Bert described GGG's competition as dreadful and pointed to Jacobs being his best official win as indicative of that. So, I pointed out that like Hagler, GGG has plenty of dominant wins over top 10 MWs and asked which Hagler opponent was substantially better than Jacobs and Canelo, as a middlewight.

I agree Canelo 2, Jacobs and Dereyvanchenko were all close fights that could credibly be scored either way. GGG won Canelo 1 on a fair scorecard. He was past prime for all these fights (Jacobs, only just).

Canelo 3 is irrelevant to GGG's standing at MW as it was contested at SMW and if it has any impact towards his p4p standing (it shouldn't, imo), at 40, stepping up a division to take on the unified and lineal champ, a top 5 p4p fighter, and finishing the stronger in an 8-4 type defeat, should only enhance it.

 

Daniel Jacobs is his only stand out win though, unless you count the Kell Brook mismatch.

For me Hagler fought in a deeper tougher era, and beat his most dangerous opponents more impressively.

I scored Golovkin vs Canelo 1 recently I had it 7-5 Golovkin, it was a close competitive fight. And I wouldn't say a draw is the worst decision ever, had Canelo won the fight I agree it would've been a robbery, because I can't see 7 rounds for Canelo. But I can definitely see an argument for Canelo winning 6 rounds and earning a draw.

The Derevyanchenko fight is just as controversial as Canelo/Golovkin 1. I scored it 114-113 Derevyanchenko and so did many other people, there was also no rematch either.

So whilst people say a win over Canelo would of heightened Golovkin's resume which I agree with. But on the flip side Golovkin received 2 close decisions himself, and you could easily say if he lost even 1 of them it would of hurt his legacy aswell.

 

I think we also need to consider that Golovkin was out of his prime for the Canelo fights, the dude was 36-37 years old when it happened. I can't see Canelo beating a 2015 Golovkin.

 

I think he could whip Alan Minter but not someone like Roldan

 

I agree that whilst GGG has a deep resume with lots of dominant wins over good fighters, he is short on elite wins.

I agree Hagler's win resume is better than GGG's.

Fan polls for GGG vs Canelo 2, Jacobs and Derevychenko all narrowly favoured GGG, if I recall correctly. They could all credibly be scored either way. GGG vs Canelo 1 was c.90%+ for GGG. GGG was clearly the superior fighter on the night.

GGG's legacy will always have an element of unfulfilled potential for me. He was 1-month shy of his 35th birthday by the time of the Jacob's fight, 35 and 36 vs Canelo, and clearly past his absolute best. Getting the better of Canelo aged 35 hints at him being a great fighter in his prime, but he sadly didn't face good enough opposition in his prime to prove it.

 

Well we have to judge Golovkin on the best opponents he fought, because his resume is lacking stand out names. The fact is when he stepped up a slightly higher level he looked more beatable, and whilst we do have to into account he was in his mid 30s. He also didn't really have any wear and tear being in hard fights, and after losing to Canelo went on to destroy Murata.