Golovkin KO'S Ishida.

What sport have you been watching? Why should the lineal champion at 160 take a fight against a guy who hasn't beaten a single top contender at that weight? And why should he do it for a low payday.

HBO could easily bankroll that fight, so why do you think they aren't?

 

If him and Sergio fought now, Sergio would batter him and then everyone would say that Golovkin was an unproven hypejob who hadn't defeated anyone.

 

For all this talk of money, lets not forget Golovkin is the WBA champion of the world at the moment. That is an opportunity in itself for somebody, if they want to take it. Put it this way, if Golovkin was pretty average I think a few people would be willing to maybe take a little pay cut, or not quite get what they want/expect for a title fight. But alas, that ain't the case.

I happen to think they're doing an okay job with him at the moment. His profile is growing slowly, I just hope it comes to fruition very soon. Fighting 4/5 times a year and racking up dramatic stoppages is catching some attention. He's in a better position now than he was fighting in Germany against complete non-entities.

 

I know you like to take this exasperated tone, as if you see the truth and everyone else is clueless, but it doesn't really hold weight with me.

Golovkin can clearly crack, but that's largely been against smaller men regardless of whether they're tough. My question is simple and empirical - so I'm astounded you can't see that.

What clear evidence is there that Golovkin is a huge puncher at 160? What world-class 160 fighter has he stopped that makes you think this is out of the ordinary?

Your second paragraph is weird and completely pointless. At what point did I say Martinez wasn't human? He's a former LMW too and we've seen him hurt and staggered. And your point is just as true for Golovkin. What's to say that Martinez can't sit down on his shots and get him out of there?

The difference is that we've SEEN Martinez beat bigger men, some with solid chins like Williams (who he flattened), some who he absolutely worked over (Chavez and Pavlik). We've also seen him badly hurt but come back.

At least, empirically, I can look at Sergio's strengths and weaknesses. Golovkin is a much harder package to assess.

Simple enough for you?

 

Do you realise it's this attitude that turns off the casual viewer? The amount of ducking that goes on is incredible.

GGG is the best challenger out there and deserves his chance. You keep going on and on about 'who has he faced?' etc, yet refuse to accept time and again that anyone he could potentially face isn't interested as they know the risks are too high.

We all complain about wanting to see the best fight each other in one sentence, then justify others not getting on in the very next sentence. It's bizarre.

 

I don't think Sergio would batter him. Golovkin is a very smart, capable fighter and has the skills to give the sexy one fits. But seeing people saying "He'll KO Martinez!" with no real basis for that opinion is just annoying.

Chances are, if Sergio's knee is fully healed then, after smashing Murray, he'll likely rematch Chavez and retire. So Golovkin's probably got a bit more waiting to do.

 

Imagine you're Sergio Martinez. You take punches to the head for a living. You can either fight Julio Cesar Chavez Jr for $2m or you can fight Gennady Golovkin for $1m. One is tough but crude and you know you can control him. The other is much more skilled and would be a big ask at this stage of your career.

The Golovkin fight will still be there after Chavez. But the Chavez fight wouldn't be there if you lost to Golovkin.

So potentially $3m or $1m?

What would you do?

 

Yeah, i was going OTT to get my point across and can't disagree with the above.

I think he'll have a couple of fights after the inevitable Chavez rematch though, possibly a payday in Argentina after seeing how well the Murray fight has sold (over 50,000 seats apparently).

 

In your opinion, how much difference would it make to Martinez to have $1m extra at this stage of his career?

I've no issues with him fighting Chavez and then Golovkin after - but do you think that will happen?

Who is the tougher fight in your opinion? Chavez or Golovkin?

 

Martinez only started making big purses in the last three years. He wants to retire and focus on his charity projects. I think $1m would make a big difference to anyone!

If Golovkin has beaten a bigger name or two - or even Macklin for example to have that direct comparison - then I could see Sergio taking the fight. But I think he's near done. That injury in the Chavez fight is a major issue for a mover like Martinez - will he be the same? If not, he's smart enough to walk away.

Golovkin's a much tougher prospect than Chavez. All Julio has got is size, a good left hook and industry. Golovkin is a good example of a boxer-puncher. He cuts the ring off well, he stays on balance and keeps his hands in position, and he sets his work up really well. That's going to be a challenge to someone who likes to move across the ring and keep his hands low.

 

Tone? Stick to the content rather than going off on tangents. I prefer to talk about boxing rather than getting involved in those sideshows any longer. If I indulge you in that point and start to criticize your "forum personality" is that going to add anything to this topic or is it completely pointless...

The clear evidence is clear on sheer weight, there is no one thing you're going to look at and think "he stopped him so he must be a huge puncher." Generally, stopping one guy that might be perceived as having a good chin and being top level doesn't automatically make you a massive puncher anyway. For example, I still wouldn't call Marquez a massive puncher at 147 because he stopped Pac. There is as much if not more uncertainty in that methodology than considering a weight of evidence that may be based on lower level opposition, so if Golovkin came along and stopped Martinez it would only be an addition to the growing weight of evidence not evidence in and of itself. Whereas from your viewpoint you'd probably see him as a massive puncher if he did happen to do that, I'd just see that as adding to a growing body of evidence that makes little sense to ignore.

The evidence is this...

- He's stopped durable opponents. I don't really buy that Ishida and Ouma aren't durable at 160 because they're 154lb'ers, I think put them in with anybody except maybe Martinez and they last the distance. They have top durability plain and simple, there is nothing scary in the division power wise except Golovkin. Nor do I think its a huge jump in current boxing.
- He stopped a lot of people in the amateurs where it is difficult to do so, including good fighters.
- He's sparking people out cold, not relying on stunning an opponent and a ref jumping in. Against any opponents thats a rare thing in modern boxing.

We could go into gym reports but I generally don't give much credence to that because its not something we can demonstrate other than with hearsay.

I see no good reason to ignore the 3 factors above. They are clear indications. Ultimately the choice is down to you as an individual as to how much weight you give them. Nobody is going to be able to stop you from taking the stance he has to knockout Martinez or somebody to be a massive puncher now you've outlined your viewpoint. My thing is that fighting Martinez makes no difference to whether he is a puncher or not, he already is or isn't, and the evidence to infer from is already available.

 

The point I'm trying to make is that how does one have a better boxing CV when everyone they try to make fights with avoids them?

I agree with your points, but it's a shame that the sole reason the fight won't be made is money/exposure/risk.

I want to see the best fighting each other and all the bull**** politics that stop that aren't good for the sport.

 

Who, in the middleweight division, do you consider gatekeepers?

 

Someone like Andy Lee or Marco Antonio Rubio. Neither are good enough to be a world champion really, but they're fringe world class and decent enough to expose you if you're not world level, especially Rubio.

 

Proksa has a better single win in Sylvester than Andy Lee whose best win is probably Vera who he's 1-1 with.

Kassim Ouma is basically the very definition of a gatekeeper. He's given successful guys like Jermaine Taylor tough fights.

Strange logic that you consider Lee a gatekeeper but some of Golovkin's opponents not to be.

I agree with your point though, just think your criticism is somewhat excessive.