Golovkin Against The Bodysnatcher..?

Top 5 opponent.

 

GGG was better than Jackson.

We need to consider a lot more than that though.

 

Such a silly, ignorant comment.

Zero context applied.

 

It isn’t a fair point at all.

It’s actually a completely irrelevant point.

 

I agree.

What a bizarre comment that he made.

Absolutely ridiculous.

 

Absurd comment. This comment feels like it was made by a boxing hippie jaunting along the lane singing Mary Had a Little Lamb. Laughable.

 

No, he’s not wrong.

Why on earth would he be calling James Toney and Sumbu Kalambay mediocre fighters?

Where does this thinking even come from?

We know that you’re a great fan of GGG, and we know why. But you can’t start making ridiculous comments, based upon statistics, without applying any context.

Your logic is way off, and the example that he gave you was 100% accurate.


First of all, although GGG was a fine fighter, he didn’t do anything particularly special at the weight.

Yes, he has all of those title defences. But many other great MW’s could have replicated those results, had they have had that SAME OPPORTUNITY.

The same also applies to Bernard Hopkins.


The statement you have made would be like saying “If Roy and Toney were so great, then they’d have made those record number of defences that he did”

Yet, it’s just circumstances isn’t it.

Both of them passed through the division etc.


Yes, those title defences and longevity deserve respect.

However, when looking at a fight against Mike, you should be analysing their skill sets, and looking at how they’d have matched up on the night stylistically etc.

You need to apply context.

Yes, Mike didn’t make those number of defences. But then there’s a world of difference between prime versions of James Toney and Sumbu Kalambay etc, to the B and C level guys who GGG mostly fought.

Like I said to you the last time this was debated, swap round their opponents and then look at what you think would have happened.

GGG barely beat Jacobs and Derev, and never saw guys like who Mike fought.


GGG has never done anything in his career for anybody to think that he’d have beaten Mike convincingly.

 

Another ignorant statement.

Especially when he’s simply never fought anybody like that.

 

Why don’t you come back and have an actual debate.

Analyse their skill sets.

Their resumes.

How they’d realistically have matched up on the night stylistically.

Much better than making ridiculous, casual fan type comments with zero context applied.

 

Well to be fair Golovkin was 35 years old by the time he beat Jacobs. As a matter of fact I looked at that fight as the one where GGG starting to slip.

 

More than possible. But for me, guys like Derev and Jacobs would always have given him issues. I think they were just good and skilled, physically imposing guys who couldn’t be bullied.

I like GGG.

I like everything he stands for. And it’s not his fault that he was ducked and that he fought in a weaker era than some of the others that we’ve seen.

To me, GGG comes across as the kind of guy who’d have relished testing his abilities against the past greats.

But at the end of the day, we can only look at what he actually did.

And I don’t see anything that even suggests that he’d have beaten Mike convincingly.

And comparing their stats, but without applying any context, is both pointless and cringeworthy. It’s something that a new fan or a casual would put forward.

 

Because Golovkin would beat them.

21 title defences isn't anything special? C R I N G E

DEY WUZ ROBBED omg they hit the glass boxing ceiling and couldn't go any further. What a ripoff. Meanwhile in real life Golovkin was being held back by his promoters for years and being fed crumbs while people like Sturm were being protected from him.

Hopkins had the great ability to fight Antwun Echols three times ... etc ...

Go ahead. I await your technical analysis.

Prime James Toney

This content is protected

Meanwhile ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duane_Thomas_(boxer)

\
I happen to rate both those guys highly. And, in the spirit of your own criteria you are ignoring context.

Oh I think he'd have beaten McCallum alright.

 

You rate Jacobs and Derevyanchenko very highly yet don't rate Toney and Kalambay, whatever next lol.

 

No MW in history has it totally their own way against McCallum at his best IMO.

 

Power is the last thing to trouble Mc Callum. I think Mc Callum, the superior technician, wins a close decision.