Is GGG An Alltime Great?

Dont forget this with a Prime Golovkin....

This content is protected

 

Anyone who thinks canelo won either of the first two fights is on crack cocaine.

 

If it was not for Adelaide Byrd and absolute corruption we would not be having thiis discussion....ATG No argument.!!!

 

At least based on official results, resume-wise he falls short, but H2H, a prime GGG (and he was prime for quite a period) is a handful for any middleweight in history.

His resume would change significantly without the 2 (arguably 3!) Canelo travesties

 

I can tell that the butthurt of the Canelo losses still stings.

It seems that more group therapy is needed to help GGG fans cope with loss. @IsaL

I'm a little worried about Vegan Beast, talking about crack cocaine in reference to what Canelo did to GGG. This suggests that Vegan Beast is suffering from deep seeded trauma. But drugs are never the answer. Rather than turn to drugs, we can talk about what happened in the comfort of a safe and professional therapeutic environment. I know what Canelo did to GGG was traumatic but you can overcome the losses by putting your endless days and sleepless nights of delusion behind you and coming to terms with what happened.

 

I personally consider him an ATG despite coming up short x3 against Canelo. He was a force of nature during his reign at Middleweight and the KO streak alone showed ATG level dominance. Granted the competition during that run wasn't the best but that's not his fault. He dominated against the best MW had to offer during that time.

And while he fell short each time he fought Canelo, the first two were extremely close. And while I thought Canelo was the rightful winner each time, the first two are very debatable and many thought GGG won them. Being on the wrong end of close decisions against another ATG like Canelo doesn't do anything but enhance your resume.

So yes, in my mind, he's an ATG. Close decisions against the best fighter he ever fought doesn't stop him from being an ATG. Those first 2 could have gone either way, but GGG shouldn't be punished for those results. And GGG fans shouldn't try to spin them as wins either. A draw and a close loss are still respectable results against Canelo. He was never knocked down in his entire career and had a legendary MW run.

 

Canelo definitely won the 3rd fight, but GGG was shot.

I watched both the first two fights numerous times, and I struggle to make an argument as to how the **** canelo won either.

GGG's jab was clearly superior.

 

Tough case. He blew out contenders and is at least 1-1-1 w prime Canelo but he also had so-so/debatable wins against Jacobs and Dervenchenko neither of which were evee regarded as MW kings themselves. But that was old GGG...who was ducked but also came to US late (28 years old).

Tough case and neither side is wrong. I give GGG fringe ATG status.

 

Geale took the big money fight against Mundine in preference to defending the WBA tile for less. Geale got his revenge against Mundine and then fought GGG three fights later.

 

This tells you all when rating Golovkin

 

The jab is only part of the equation. Canelo's power punching and body punching was superior in both of the first two fights. He lit GGG up on numerous occassions in the first fight, he also outboxed him for much of the first 6 rounds, before coming on strong in rounds 10-12. As I've said numerous times, I have no issues with anyone who scored the first 2 for GGG, but to not recognize how close each of them were is inexcusable.

 

He's a good fighter.

 

My answer to this question is always: Find Hopkins and slot GGG ahead of him in whatever list you have

 

There is literally no argument for putting Golovkin ahead of Hopkins.