I disagree. A solid amateur,lost a razor close debatable decision to Jacobs,same eith Golovkin and went competitive with Charlo. He was universally top 10 ranked at the time. You sound very bias btw.
GGG is a HOF fighter not really an atg. He wasted so much time in the amateurs and never really had that legacy defining victory. He was avoided no doubt but his ridiculously long amateur career did not help at all.
I like GGG man, I just wish he did more with his career. He could of done wonders at 168 but the Canelo fights haunt him, I don't think he should be defined by that.
Agreed. Really he is defined by those fights yeah but in a sense I would define him by his spectacular KO run 2010-2017. Should have done more yeah but it is what it is.
Do you rate Rocky Juarez? Most including me had him winning the 1st Barrera fight and everyone thought he should of got the W in his draw with an undefeated Chris John. Should we rewrite boxing history because a close with didn't go GGG's way?
The first fight was clear as daylight. I'll disregard obvious boxing robberies thanks you and not pretend that the wrong man rightfully won because of curroption. It's rewriting history to pretend Canelo deserved it.
How on earth is a guy who qualified for the Olympic team in the toughest, deepest amateur scene on the planet, won two AIBA world championships and got robbed against the three best middleweights in the division a glorified journeyman? It makes no sense.
I'm not really interested in amateur accomplishments when concerning pro boxing, pro boxing has proved 234234234234 different times that amateur success doesn't equate to pro success. What exactly has Dervychenko done in the pro ranks besides lose? But you're right though, journeyman wasn't the quite the right word, glorified gatekeeper is more like it.