Is Golovkin an ATG if he beats Canelo?

Jake lamotta

Jake lamotta ,?,

How many defences did he make,
Sugar ray Robinson was a better welter and so was Lenard , I am Lenard fan , and his career at middleweight was weak, Gerald mcclean was good, but never went on any type of championship run ,

Only names that stand next to GGG are Hopkins at middleweight, I'm not a fan of Roy due to him being on roids, jones pfp is good though, not at middleweight his legacy was made through jumping weights,

GGG stands with them easily and ranks higher then them all accept Hopkins , only argument is Hagler, and he lost to a inactive welter in ray, Ray made his name from Hagler, GGG has put a stop to welters moving up ala del Hoya and Trinidad v Hopkins , anyway GGG is highly regarded amongst fighters legacy sealed

 

They know he a great, just like the Floyd haters know that Floyd was an ATG, talent Cannot be hated on, you can't change what your eyes see.GGG one of the greatest middleweights of all time . Let the haters be mad

 

One win does not make someone an all time great. Your entire body of work decides your greatness. Buster Douglass beating Tyson didnt propel him to ATG status. I cant think of an ATG that is considered so based on one win.
If he crushes Canelo and then destroys Jacobs in a rematch, goes on to move up in weight and beats Ward, Kov and possibly Beterbiev and end his career undefeated then hes ATG material. I like GGG but his resume is a bit weak unless he goes on to smash everything in his path and retires undefeated.

 

He has as much of a claim of ATGness as Deontay Wilder as far as I'm concerned, similar levels of competition. Wilder dominates harder though, GGG probably a little better in terms of competition.

37 ko's in 38 fights, something GGG can't claim.

 

While that may look good to the untrained eye, the reality is that the quality of fights is what defines a fighters legacy.

Defending your title 20 times is a nice feature and in a way its impressive because 20 defenses in a single division isn't very common. Why it isn't common is another topic but easy to explain.

Lets take Oscar De La Hoya, the man has about 30 title fights, compared to Golovkin's supposed 17 world title defenses. Amongst ODLH 30 title fights he's fought great opposition more frequently than if he would have stood in a single division.

Just comparing Oscar's opponents to Golovkin's, Hopkin's at MW or Tszyu there is no comparison. Oscar has 24 title fights won under his belt, of those 24 title fights he has names like Ike Rafael Ruelas, Genaro Gonzalez, Ike Quartey, Fernando Vargas, Ricardo Mayorga, JCC, Whitaker, and his robberies Mosley rematch and Tito. Why? Because moving up in weight gives you access to more fighters and more opportunities to create a legacy worth remembering.

Good for GGG and his title defenses, like I said, its a nice feature, but the quality of opposition cannot be ignored.

Hopkins wouldn't have been as appreciated had he just beat Oscar and Tito and called it a day, even with his 20 defenses. Once Hopkins started moving up, he gained access to better opposition carving himself out a nice legacy and cementing himself into the ATG status and earned the respect of the public as a true legend. All based on his performances against quality fighters, on his ability to remain relevant for so long, and of course the MW title defenses that helped him get started in his journey to legendery status.

 

Similar indeed.

Golovkin has also been champion 5 years longer than Wilder.

 

Did this individual seriously compare a three belt champion to Deontay "bum squad" Wilder? When Wilder has three straps around his waist, get back to us. Also, Dustin Nichols wants his rematch

 

Nope, sorry. I don't need any lectures or history lessons on boxing from you or anyone else, thanks.

GGG's already in the record books and will remain so. The only question now is how far up the ranks does he climb? He's ranked the top PFP fighter in the sport by ESPN and has reigned for more than 6 years. He's had 18 successful defenses of his titles, I believe.

But I'm talking to someone who just joined Wednesday. I guess that kind of speaks for itself, and I probably shouldn't expect too much from you.

Golovkin is one of the best who ever did it, and would be so if he never fought Canelo. Hopefully it will be a good fight, but Golovkin's legacy has long been secure without needing any particular fight or fighter on his resume.

 

Whats this history book you keep repeating dummy? Wikiapedia? lololol

I don't see the man on any ATG list so prove me wrong?

And he don't have no 20 defences either.. He has EIGHT. Not one body he beat was ranked top 10 while he held the mickey mouse WBA regular plastic belt.
Sturm was the WBA champ , not GGG , therefore his defence count begins when he acquired the full title and that was against useless bum Danny Geale.

No real boxing historian will over look this. Stupid fanboys like you won't be the judge of where this guy stands in history.

 

Settle down dandy. I have nothing against Golovkin. He's a highly skilled MW thats best of his era , but the mantle of ATG isn't just handed out like candy.

Just because somebody doesn't recognize him as an ATG doesn't mean they hate him.

Fools in this thread think he can lose to Canelo and still be an ATG. You must understand that these idiots are not real boxing fans.

 

Time will tell. He is a sure HOF

 

Possibly.

DM and Zolt are not hall of famers . They have similar records but were also lineal champions.

 

canelo is not accomplished to be a ladder for greatness. he doesn't even have a fight of the year game. he is overhyped for business purposes and his countrymen know it. he is far from the mexican warriors' mentality and greatness.

 

To be an ATG you have to beat other ATG's or the best out there in your era, Canelos best win is cotto, GGG's best win is jacobs, Sorry but nobody can be considered an ATG with such resumes.

They both need each other in this fight to enter the conversation of ATG, But one fight does not cement it, I won't even begin to consider either ATG unless the winner gose on and beat eubank jr and billy joe saunders but even then i don't rate those two that highly, eubank jr and belly joe saunders is hardly the resume of an ATG is it?

This is not to say either is not good enough right now to be an ATG but like i say you have to beat all of the best out there, Weather it looks like you can beat them dose not count. I believe Anthony Joshua could beat almost every ATG heavy weight in history maybe even them all but i don't consider him an ATG for one second at this point in his career because his best win is an old version of klitchko, its still a VERY good win but one fight does not make you an ATG and its the same with canleo Vs GGG, I think both of them could beat many ATG middle weights but that' doesn't make them ATG, its a new era and they have to go out and fight and beat the best in it. This fight is the first true legacy defining fight of their careers, THE FIRST, You need more than one of these fights to cement your self an ATG

 

Please name the HOF's GGG has fought that puts him on par or higher than the fighters I listed. Don't let your love for GGG get in the way, how can you compare GGG to ATG's when his best win is a WW that went up two divisions and a B level fighter in Jacobs.

I'll give you the point that he has defended his titles but besides that, what has he done?