Iran Barkley v. Gennady Golovkin?

GGG hasn't fought anyone with a pulse. Barkley's wins over Hearns are better than anything GGG has done in his entire career.

 

Man I respect what everyone is saying, I like Golovkin in this one and in 5 years time people probably won't have to go back on their pick, however there are better fighters we could have picked that don't pose as much of a threat as Barkley does. Not sure he should be wrote off as easily as some are.

 

I think it would look like Toney vs. Barkley, but worse for Iran, because GGG, although smaller, hits a lot harder.
Mind you, Barkley could hit back, and just like that haymaker that found Hearns in the 1st fight, it would not be impossible to see him landing something, but I would expect 9 times out of 10 GGG clubs him like a baby seal.
Would rather see GGG vs. Benn.....

 

I'd say the Norton's victory over Ali is better than any victory Louis has. Doesn't mean I'd favor Norton over Louis.

Douglas also has a better victory than quite a few HWs I'd favor over him.

 

But what speaks in Barkley's favor apart from the fact that Golovkin hasn't faced that strong opposition yet?

Can anyone see Barkley outpoint Golovkin? Or even KO him?

 

i wouldn't write off the ko, i'm not picking it but golovkin isn't unhittable and hasn't been hit as hard as barkley could.

 

Completely different principle. Joe Louis, Norton, and Douglas fought actual top ranked guys/ATGs. Lemieux is the best guy that GGG as fought and he's overwhelmingly 1 dimensional. No way does GGG or Barkley equate to those guys.

 

No, the principle is the same. A better win doesn't necessarily make a better fighter. And it has even less bearing on who wins between two fighters. Hell, Cotto has a single better win than Golovkin. That's why saying "Barkley has the much better top win" doesn't say much.

I rather look on the fighters in question, their skills and style. And here I don't see many upsides for Barkley.

 

I didn't say that Barkley is better than Golovkin. Read my post. Barkley is proven against an ATG while Golovkin is proven against tomato cans. Anybody can look good against bums. Liston looked terrifying until he got in with Ali. Not to say Liston fought bums but you get the picture.

 

I envision a GGG win but I certainly don't see a blow out, unless GGG catches him early. Unlike Kevin I think Barkley has plenty of power, not GGG type power but enough to hurt GGG if he hits him cleanly a few times. But I pretty much agree GGG would probably win by late stoppage but I also think he would get tested a few times in this fight.

 

Well, I agree that Golovkin hasn't met great opposition yet. But I wouldn't call all of them bums. Quite a few have been ranked after all. And I don't think Barkley is so superior to them that it's impossible to say how Golovkin would fare against him. And while Hearns is an ATG p4p, I don't think he is at MW.

No matter what you think of Golovkin's opponents, I don't think you'd disagree when I say that Golovkin has superior defence, offence and ring intelligence while being at least equal in terms of power and probably also chin. This should, as I see it, lead to him landing substantially more clean blows with enough precision and power for it not being viable for Barkley in the end to be second best in most exchanges.

 

I think The Blade has GGG type power. He's just a bit more wild and inconsistent.

I agree that Barkley would test GGG big time and would hurt him early and often. But GGG would prevail because his better fundamentals would see him rise above. That's if he passes those scary tests.

 

Hearns was a true MW whether people like it or not. He was HUGE for WW and obviously a late bloomer physically. He went all the way up to Cruiserweight. You don't just get there by eating it has to come naturally to a certain extent.