Is Kovalev's P4P power up there with Matthysse and Golovkin?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by janeschicken, Aug 13, 2013.


  1. janeschicken

    janeschicken hard work! deadicayshin! Full Member

    20,570
    19
    Nov 10, 2007
    I think it may very well be. Dude is a wrecking machine. A lot of times when he lands knockdowns his feet aren't even fully planted, and he takes guys out even when they have the earmuffs on.
     
  2. IntentionalButt

    IntentionalButt Guy wants to name his çock 'macho' that's ok by me

    400,057
    81,992
    Nov 30, 2006
    I would rephrase that question:

    Is Golovkin's p4p power up there with Matthysse and Kovalev?

    A: I'm not sure, close maybe. :good

    Golovkin is probably the best all-around fighter in the group, but in terms of pure TNT pound for pound in their respective divisions I think both Matthysse and Kovalev have an edge on him.
     
  3. witschnerd1

    witschnerd1 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,569
    0
    Jun 23, 2013
    Kovalev and GGG are similar, not explosive just hard every time, 90% of all their punches are power shots, including half their jabs.
     
  4. Adil

    Adil Active Member Full Member

    1,122
    36
    Sep 16, 2012
    Golovkin told in one of the interviews that he never lifted weights:)
     
  5. Magges

    Magges Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,887
    3
    Jul 27, 2008
    Nah I don't think so, Kovalev is more of an accumulation puncher, who happens to to be just naturally heavy handed. He throws a lot of shots, many of them get in since he is pretty accurate and his opponents so far were spent early.

    Matthyssee and GGG can knok people into next week with single shots.
     
  6. No one around this division has a similar punching power as Golovkin. He hits stronger than Wach, Povetkin and Perez.
     
  7. elchivito

    elchivito master betty Full Member

    27,489
    439
    Sep 27, 2008
    Kovalev is very heavy handed, for being very anti-slick, he is very, VERY underated in the skills dept. As in punching power or chin, tho, I rate GGG alittle higher. Kov seemed hurt and slightly wobbled by his last opponent. GGG is more explosive too.
     
  8. BlizzyBlizz

    BlizzyBlizz Loyal Member Full Member

    31,293
    3,510
    Jun 25, 2013
    Matthysse has fought some good guys so his power is legit. GG and Kovalev have beaten bums. One beat Macklin, and the other beat Boone.
     
  9. assasin

    assasin Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,315
    13
    Feb 21, 2010
    P4P, GGG and Matthysse hit much harder than does Kovalev.

    i don't consider Sergey to be a big puncher, just a very good one.
     
  10. elchivito

    elchivito master betty Full Member

    27,489
    439
    Sep 27, 2008
    I wouldnt call Macklin a bum. He lost a controversial decision to Sturm, so Macklin should of been champ. Campillo lost a controversial fight to Cloud, and Kovalev blasted him out in 3. Maybe not elite fighters, but not bums either.
     
  11. Cletis VanDamme

    Cletis VanDamme Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,429
    452
    Jun 5, 2012
    The translation must have been wrong. You don't develop significant muscles just by shadow boxing and hitting the bag.
    Then again, doing push ups is kinda similar to lifting weight but in Golovkin's case, if he's as strong as they say, he should have a too easy time lifting his own weight.
     
  12. BlizzyBlizz

    BlizzyBlizz Loyal Member Full Member

    31,293
    3,510
    Jun 25, 2013
    In the right universe you are correct. Kovalev and GG can't be judged. They have not been hit hard yet or been in with a guy who will force them to win using their will. i just can't brag about guys like that-yet.
     
  13. witschnerd1

    witschnerd1 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,569
    0
    Jun 23, 2013
    I agree, they are both good and I think they have the stuff but it is too soon to tell. Lucky for Kovalev, he gets a shot at cleverly.
    Cleverly is not a bum, if Kovalev beats him by KO or wide points, he will have proven himself. IMO