How do you rate Golovkins resume?

Hopkins’s opposition during his MW reign was pretty bad too.

 

The names on his resume are not all glitter covered superstars but what his resume says to me is that he has totally dominated his division for quite a while and all worthy opposition has been faced and beaten, the only Boxers people can moan he could or should of faced are from different divisions, Floyd, Ward mainly. Only 1 person remains to be put on that resume and that is Billy Joe.

Anyway resumes can only say so much about a fighter. Most people who get into the hall of fame or on ATG lists get there because people see them in action and you know when you are watching something special or on another level or hall of fame worthy.

 

I’m not trying to grant him anything, I started digging trough this thinking his belt was fake and he’s actually got 3 defenses less.

Couldnt care less how you see things or what you’re “gunna give GGG”, if you want facts they’re there for everyone to see.

If you read my comments, you should get why Charrs belt is “interim”. Ignorance is bliss i guess.

Going by this logic, Lewis, Mayweather and few others also had fake belts, since they got them as gifts lol

 

A few years ago, I was convinced he'd move up to SMW, but now I'm not so sure.

I really don't know if he'd wreck the SMW division. I think fights against the likes of Ramirez and Groves would be difficult.

 

What's great about it?

Very good, sure.

His longevity has to be respected. But there's nothing great about it.

 

How do you define a legacy?

GGG has either broken ( Hopkins has a No Contest counted as a title defense ) or will break the record for successful middle weigh title defenses. Currently he's at 20.

He has never been floored, and owns one of the best KO% records among division champions. Very rare.

He's also one of a few middle weight champions to reach the top in the pound for pound status rankings.

I bet a good amount of money he's a first ballot hall of fame enshrine.

#1, #2 and #3 are facts. #4 very likely. Who in history can match this at any weight? If you can't mention many fighters, and those you do are only the very best, it means GGG belongs. Please do come up with the names. I'd like to read them, honest and if you can up with a few, my hat is off to you.

If he retires undefeated, as no other middleweight champion has, it only adds more to his resume.
Sugar Ray Leonard probably has the best collection of wins since he retired. I agree.

In GGG's case, famous lower weight fighters like Mayweather, or Cotto were not going to meet him. In Hagler's and Monzon's case, they did. Different times.

Unlike Monzon or Hagler, two certifiable top great at middleweight, Golovkin never lost to a lesser fighter. So weight that as part of the process.

A resume is best judged by wins and losses. While GGG doesn't have a Sugar Ray Leonard on his resume, he didn't lose to a lesser fighters either ( Hagler and Monzon did ) , and IMO blew out top ten opponents better than just about anyone at 160 pounds including Hagler and Monzon who retied long before age 36.

 

Your posts are great. But it just reminds us what a mess boxing is in at the moment.

 

Good but not great resume. No big defining fight...he had his chance vs Clenelo but blew it; meaning he didn't ktfo the best opponent he faced.

If....IF....there is a rematch, he needs to ignore anything Alvarped throws at him and brutalize him. That's what ATG's do in their defining fight.

 

No where near as bad as Golovkin's

 

Thanks mate
It really is a mess right now, too many loop holes and gray areas, no one to rein in the alphabets etc.

I wonder if the mess with titles started with WBC (surprise, surprise) being sued for 30+ milions in 2003 or 2004. Would explain the way theyre protecting their champs (avoiding another lawsuit) too.

 

Hopkins spent more years as #1 MW.
He was also Ring and Lineal MW Champ for 4 years whereas Golovkin has never held that honor.
Im sure you'l come back with some rant about big bad dino , but that won't change the facts , ok?

 

Again, I respect everything that you've written. But I can't rate a guy as highly as you do based on statistics.

If he breaks Bernard's number of defences, I would still have to put both of them under the microscope before I rank them.

Numbers alone don't cut it for me.

Despite your facts, he has had close fights with Jacobs and Canelo, and most of his wins have been over B class fighters.

I'm honestly a fan myself. I think he's a throwback fighter. I think he'll fight anyone in his weight division and his resume would have been better had he have been able to secure other fights. But at the end of the day, his resume is nothing special. And I think that under different circumstances, other MW's of the past could have replicated what he has done. Of course, that is only my opinion. I can't prove it. But I honestly believe it.

One of my favourite fighters is Mike McCallum. So let's use him as an example. Although he can't match the statistics that you've got for GG, there's no reason why he couldn't have remained undefeated following GG's exact timeline. And I also think that guys like Roy and Bernard could also have remained undefeated having followed it, and possibly even Toney. And then you've got to ask the question:

"What if GG had followed Mike and Toney's timelines?"

Of course, it's all subjective. But even as a fan, I couldn't say with confidence that GG would still be undefeated had he have fought the likes of: Jackson, Kalambay, Graham, Watson, Collins and Nunn, as well as Mike and Toney themselves.

For me, who you fight and at one point, has to trump title defences etc.

I could never rank Sven Ottke higher than guys like Roy, Joe and Andre at SMW.

 

Charr has the regular belt, the same version that GGG has.

Mayweather and Lewis all had the full title

 

How do you define a legacy?

GGG has either broken ( Hopkins has a No Contest counted as a title defense ) or will break the record for successful middle weigh title defenses. Currently he's at 20.

He has never been floored, and owns one of the best KO% records among division champions. Very rare.

He's also one of a few middle weight champions to reach the top in the pound for pound status rankings.

I bet a good amount of money he's a first ballot hall of fame enshrine.

#1, #2 and #3 are facts. #4 very likely. Who in history can match this at any weight? If you can't mention many fighters, and those you do are only the very best, it means GGG belongs. Please do come up with the names. I'd like to read them, honest and if you can up with a few, my hat is off to you.

If he retires undefeated, as no other middleweight champion has, it only adds more to his resume.
Sugar Ray Leonard probably has the best collection of wins since he retired. I agree.

In GGG's case, famous lower weight fighters like Mayweather, or Cotto were not going to meet him. In Hagler's and Monzon's case, they did. Different times.

Unlike Monzon or Hagler, two certifiable top great at middleweight, Golovkin never lost to a lesser fighter. So weight that as part of the process.

A resume is best judged by wins and losses. While GGG doesn't have a Sugar Ray Leonard on his resume, he didn't lose to a lesser fighters either ( Hagler and Monzon did ) , and IMO blew out top ten opponents better than just about anyone at 160 pounds including Hagler and Monzon who retied long before age 36. -Mendoza

Thanks.

Ottke doesn't belong with Roy, or Joe. Most objective observers think GGG belongs vs the best at 160 pounds.

As we know GGG was outside of his prime, at an age when Hagler and Monzon retired when he meet Jacobs and Canelo, I think you have to factor that in. He's usually beating his opposition in their home base too which is odd for a fighter of his accomplishment.

A class or B class is fine, no one did better class B, and I think you have to weigh in the losses too, which I did not see in your reply.

Mike McCallum lost his biggest matches and barley won some of his most significant wins. I don't think he's undefeated vs all of GGG's opponents.

Yes, I think GGG beats James Toney. On styles, and activity.

For class B examples, James Toney really lost to Dave Tiberi ( a horrible robbery ), and drew with Sanderline Williams? Who was Williams??? Do you think GGG would have similar results vs these two? No. That's how I judge a resume. You have to balance the good with the bad. When you never lose, you were never really bad.

 

Mendoza,

I don't have an issue with him being ranked amongst them, I just don't think he has a great resume. I also don't think he's accomplished anything remarkable.

I can certainly respect his longevity, but Hagler fought nearly 70 times, and Monzon fought 100 times.

Of course you have to note the losses. But you have to note who they were against and what the circumstances were.

Yes, but fighting a peak, motivated Toney, is someone who GG's never seen. And how do we know for sure that GG would have beaten Kalambay and Graham? Now maybe he'd have blasted them both. But we simply don't know. We have never seen him face anyone with the styles and skill of a guy like Graham. Graham had a 77" reach, and he was an elusive southpaw with great speed and skills. We can't just look on BoxRec and assume GG would have beaten him. For all of his great attributes, he's there to be hit. So if guys like Canelo and Brook could land combinations on him, what would a guy like Graham or Nunn have done? Kell is a former WW with a 69" reach. Look at how easily he tagged him. Like Graham, Nunn also had a 77" reach combined with great skills and athleticism. So could we say with confidence he'd still be undefeated having followed Mike and Toney's timelines? I couldn't.

Just out of interest, which of GG's opponents do you think would have beaten Mike?

I would have to have favoured Toney if he'd have been motivated and he'd have fought to his full capabilities.

I'd have to think that GG would have beaten those guys. But this is why it's so interesting to compare their circumstances and look at their timelines etc.

We know that Toney had off nights and lost to guys he shouldn't have done. But he'd already fought 46 pro fights before he fought Roy at just 26. And he'd fought some very good-great fighters. As it stands, GG is 10 years older, yet has fought 8 times less. Again, we simply don't know how he'd have fared had he have fought the guys on James' resume in the exact same time frame. Maybe he wouldn't have had the same longevity. Now maybe he'd have beaten everyone on James' resume with ease. But we don't know. But the point is, you can't put too much emphasis on statistics alone. For me, he's struggled with the 2 best guys he's fought, and his other wins should have been routine enough for any of the other great MW's of the past.