Two controversial losses to the same guy will never sit right with fans of big name fighters. If the right verdict was given in the first fight, the fans would only have to argue about one fight, which wouldn't be nearly as bad, but two is just over the top. Imagine if Tommy Hearns was robbed twice vs Ray Leonard, same thing, you don't ruin the memory of two fights with obvious corruption. One is bad enough.
The draw was controversial. The second fight was a close fight with the right winner for me. And the third wasn’t that close
Good stuff! I understand your positions on ceding recognition to officially constituted organizations. I just have a different stance. At some future point, I might rewatch the GGG Canelo fights for the umpteenth time. Keep on postin'
Totally fair assessment and I’m a huge Golovkin fan. However, I still think he deserved a close score in the second bout. Had he been given the proper respect and decision he deserved in the first flight, there probably isn’t a second or third fight.
Yeah he won the first fight and second fight was close. The person I feel most sorry for was Kovalev in the first Ward fight. Ward was undefeated and that wasn’t a close fight at all. Kovalev was robbed
Huge Golovkin fan but I have to be honest his career has been disappointing.. some of it out of his hands but some of it his own doing.. I know a lot of people will disagree but he's probably a cert for the Hall of fame now tho.. he's been too big a figure in this era not to be.. but regardless, aside from the two Canelo wins I think he deserves there's nothing else really that's outstanding, and that is disappointing for such a long career.. he could have moved up, could have been matched better.... I do think he was avoided in his prime and that is not his fault, but apart from the Canelo Saga (he shouldnt have given him the 3rd encounter) and the longevity of his career theres nothing really outstanding.. Jacobs, Murray, Dchenko, Murata, Lemieux etc.. solid fighters but not remotely top tier... he is a great fighter but there was potential there to be greater.. I'd have favoured him over the likes of Martinez but unfortunately it never panned out.. just like the Pirog or Cotto fights..
I don't think the second Canelo fight was close I thought GGG won it convincingly, in fact I think he did better than the first one , i can't score either of those two fights for the Mexican no matter how many times I watch them.. Kovalev was jobbed badly too I agree.. those couple of years were a terrible period in boxing f****** disgusting , legacies being robbed all over the place..
Even at 41, I'd love to see him come over to the UK and fight again. A fight with the winner of the Liam Smith v Chris Eubank rematch would be great.
So GGG also vacated the IBF title in February, so now he's a man with just a name. I wonder what big money fight he's going to chase now? Munguia? Charlo?
He needs to retire. He lost his sweetheart DAZN deal and isn't going to see that type of money again, so what's the point? It's either retire or get fed to a prospect. Hopefully he doesn't need the money.
For me, im not so sure going up to super middleweight was necessary out side of the trilogy fight. GGG is clearly a natural middleweight, he doesn't carry extra weight all that well.I think he would have destroyed Martinez, stopped Quillin, dismantled Chavez jr, Sturm, and Lee. Saunders really arrived on the scene during the all Canelo faze of GGG'S career, 2017 and 2018, then Saunders went up to 168lbs. Obviously i favor GGG over the tricky Saunders as well. All other contenders and champs he either destroyed or defeated. I rate Jacobs, Derevyanchenko as top level contenders, the others you mentioned, Murata, Lemieux, and Murray were strong solid contenders in my opinion. He was a destroyer, but his best win or wins, depending on how you view it was vs Canelo, who turned out to be the star of this generation.
