"Golovkin has to move up" -wrong. Lemme cut you off there. He actually doesn't, ever.

Or you move up if your division truly is a) barren of challenges and b) directly antecedent to a CLEARLY stronger division wherein more serious challenges do in fact exist.

Haters claim the above is true in Golovkin's case but they are wrong about BOTH conditions being met. A might be, and IMO probably is, but condition B is very arguably not. There is no great challenge (worth abandoning his MW legacy over) for Golovkin unless he leaps up two divisions/ 15lbs.

 

Well, being that we're now a few decades removed from his time, of course nobody under a certain age is going to be very familiar with the cast of good but not great contenders that were contemporary to him and form the crux of his résumé, unless they happen to be major boxing history nerds and do their research on them.

Likewise, though, how much likelier are the likes of Bute/DeGale/Jack/Groves to be considered household names in the long run than any of Golovkin's best challengers at middleweight? Particularly let's say in thirty years, to make it apples to apples with the Escopeta comparison.

Even if they are bigger names at the moment, it certainly isn't by wide enough a margin that over that broad a timeline - such as three decades - whatever gap exists between them won't shrink to statistical insignificance so they blend together and occupy more or less the same degree of status - namely that of Monzón's challengers: good but not great fighters of their day.

 

Not in a blanket sense, no. Depends on whom exactly we are talking about.

I consider Lara or J-Rock bigger stylistic threats and would be inclined to give more credit for Golovkin dominating either than DeGale/Jack/Bute/Groves.

 

Stop with that. Not everything relates to or needs to circle back to Mayweather.

He is held to a higher standard and put under heavier scrutiny because he is EXCEPTIONAL - not the normative standard by which everybody should be fairly judged. That comes with being the best, just part of the deal, you get held to different standards. Nothing unfair about it. So cut it out with this irrelevant point about networks or "what flies in the Mayweather era". He is a man (an exceptionally gifted man, the greatest boxer of his generation and up there all-time) - not the defining mile-marker for an era of lesser champs.

Monzon fought perfectly reasonably opposition by any era's standards, including this one (internet, PPV, whle kit and kaboodle, doesn't matter). The overwhelming majority of champions - even HOF or ATG caliber ones - don't have magical unicorn resumes stacked with huge names of fellow HOF members in their primes. The formula of longevity/consistency times reasonably solid quality is enough to equate to greatness - in ANY era. Hasn't changed.