Figured could spark a very interesting debate among "Factions" here simple question maybe no so simple answer. What IN YOUR OPINION is the more legit claim Broners. 4 division title's or Golovkins MW Defense record. For clarification i think both are bs but biggest reason why one can be considered bs. A.Broner technically it can't be debated him owning 4 weight titles but his quality of comp as well as stature of Champ makes it hollow i mean look at his WBA JWW Title shot. G.Golovkin technically he is closing in on the record of defenses for some type of title but out of his current 15 they list 10 of them weren't even a real championship and was an interim/ jr title can't really defend a title if you aren't even the Legit Champ but i dont know? Either well fellas which is the more legit accomplishment and why.
Hopkins won all of those belts off of other fighters and defended them against ATG's and Hall of Fame boxers, but he also fought a lot of lower tier guys too. Golovkin has won 1 belt off of a career journeyman and 35 lower tier fighters that is the only difference. To be honest, guys at Middleweight should be thanking their luck stars for the hype that GGG has brought to the division. 160 was on life support 140-154 was hot for the last decade because of Mayweather and Pacquiao, no one was talking about 160. No one was trying to unify titles since Pavlik back in 2010
Broner has been spoon fed easy comp since Super Feather Weight. Every time he steps up he looks bad. He might as well just cash his name out for what it's worth and start fighting anyone with a name. Khan in England Brook in England. Garcia in Vegas. Thurman in New York. Crawford in Vegas. Just go out and take those ass beatings that await him. "Funny Money" Broner
I sometimes wonder if even Broner remembers whom he beat for his first belt So, Broner beat Vicente Martin Rodriguez for a vacant 130lb title. A complete mismatch that was followed by more mismatches disguised as title fights. Fact remains that Broner never climbed the top at 130 and he grew out of the division in the year that followed. Then came Broners best performance to date, a complete destruction of Antonio DeMarco to win the WBC 135 title. Many held DeMarco as the top dog at 135 and Broner showed class. In 2013 Broner skipped the 140lb division and challanged Paulie Malignaggi at 147 for the latters WBA crown. Broner escaped with a SD and claimed his third title. Malignaggi however was not the best fighter at 147, and nor was he even close to. In 2015 Broner climbed back down to 140 for the second time, only for a vacant title shot this time. He completely outclassed Khabib Allakhverdiev and took home the WBA 140lb belt. One of Broners more underrated victories. (Not sure if Danny Garcia still helt the Super title at that point) Broner has campaigned in 4 divisions, but arguably only once climbed to the very top. He twice won vacant titles. How ANYONE can count Golovkins days as the WBA regular champion, is beyond me. 16 title defences sounds impressive, but that means he defended one of FIVE possible titles! That´s like giving credit to Ricky Hatton for defending his World Boxing Union title 15 times. :roll: Golovkin beat Milton Nunez for the interim WBA title and shortly after got elevated to regular WBA titlist. Both belts are without a doubt money grabs. As Golovkin piled up "defences", he earned a mandatory shot at Sturm. Unfortunately that was something that never happened. After Geale beat Sturm, he was eventually ordered to fight Golovkin. However Geale opted to rematch Mundine in a money grab and Golovkin was now the full WBA champion. This was right before Golovkin faced Gabriel Rosado. So at this point, Golovkin held claim to 5 title defences, with only having fought ONE top 10 middleweight - that being Grzegorz Proksa.
Forgot to mention - this is a stupid and pointless thread. Two completely different things, and how anyone could ever compare those two is beyond me.
There literally wasn't a point or purpose behind it, just thought it would be funny to see argument put up for either lighten up.
dang bro everything doesn't have to be serious all the time, and even if it was made for entertainment reasons it's not like it isn't an legitimate question of fighter accomplishments which is more legit.
