Is GGG is an all-time top 5 middleweight?

So when did Canelo become good or proven in your eyes then?

 

Negative.

Overturning a loss or disputed decision in a rematch is a mark of true greatness.

There are a few reasons for this-
Mental state is stronger , the desire to want it more.
The ability to adjust and fight a different gamelan.

Govovkin demonstrated neither of these things.

Before the Canelo fights , it would be laughed at if anybody said Golovkin's best strategy would be to try and outbox Canelo. He had the aggression , size and power to take matters into his own hands which is why many people were convinced Canelo was going to lose (including myself actually).

After the first result nobody would ever have said it would be a good idea to try and out box Canelo again. He had to up the stakes and thats exactly what his fans expected him to do.

Nobody expected him to bottle it , to shell up and retreat against a more aggressive Canelo. They all said if Canelo came forward GGG would knock him out.

A true ATG takes risks , he isn't afraid to take a hit to land a hit. Golovkin had to fight outside of his comfort zone but never did. He was too worried about being landed on. He though he could beat Canelo boxing the same way he did against Jacobs , Lemieux etc.
Real ATGs up the stakes in the big fights. It was Canelo who fought with vigour , gusto , courage and bravery. Thats why he won and thats why GGG has faded into obscurity.

 

Are you actually reading what I'm posting? Not sure what you're responding to.

 

I am responding to your statement that at the time (of the Hopkins fight) Trinidad was a better fighter than Canelo (of the Golovkin fights).
I am not disagreeing, just questioning whether you really mean/believe it.

 

Well, if that's what you asking why don't you just do that?

What you actually did ask me was "So when did Canelo become good or proven in your eyes then?" And that I think he wasn't as proven going into GGG as a great fighter like Tito was at his peak is of course not nearly the same as saying he wasn't good/proven. When you fail to make that distinction it leaves me kind of wondering what you're on about.

Tito was The Ring's nr 2 p4p at the end of 2000, before the fight with Joppy, so it wouldn't surprise me one bit if he was nr 1 going into the fight with Hopkins (but don't have the monthly rating). This was in competition with guys like Jones, Mosley and DLH still in their primes, so not because of a weak era by any means. Not being as good or proven as Tito was at that time doesn't mean that you're not good or proven by any stretch.

Canelo was nr. 8 at the end of 2016, before the GGG fight. He would rise to nr. 5 by the end of the year not much by his own effort but rather by guys ahead retiring, but all in all I think the rise from nr. 8 ahead of the first GGG fight to nr. 1 now is a fairly good track of his improvement since then.

 

Those ATG’s had many more miles on the clock.

Greb had 300 fights. And if he hadn’t have died, he’d no doubt have had more.

Hagler had 67 fights.

Monzon had 100 fights.

GGG has had 43 fights.

 

Well how may amateur fights did they have? Most of the fights ever easy like for these legends and I am talking about age. By the way GGG was 345-5 in the amateurs. That counts for something.

 

Training and fighting will cause wear and tear on anybody. But there’s a significant difference between fighting 3-4 round amateur fights, and fighting 10-15 round professional fights.

 

Most of those fights are under 10 rounds, but I agree with the wear and tear comment.

 

It counts for absolutely nothing when talking ATG positions in the professional game. Nothing at all.

 

Well, neither do ranks between fighters who never meet each other. I was talking abut GGG's age. Well past the point of ATG's retirement and the fact that he won all of those matches at that age suggests greatness and yes he beat Canelo.

 

What you do in the pro's is what you do in the pro's regardless of age or amateur flash.

 

Your are missing my point. Again 350 amateur fights is a lot. Wear and tear. What a fighter does all and mid point in his career does not elevate him as there are lots of fights vs. nobodies. GGG has noteworthy wins vs men past the age of Greb, Hagler's and Monzon retirement point. Beating ranked men at this age show his quality. He how many title defenses? More than Monzon for sure and I don't see a big difference in the quality of fighters fought. Is he top 5? I don't know. I say among the greats and leave it at that.

 

A technically sound boxer with punching power and a granite chin. Only if he had lost his titles to a welterweight coming out of retirement.