People rate GGG above Froch??

Pretty good read thus far....

 

If you use Football as an ****ogy this logic would mean ****nal are the best team in the premier league because they often "Look" the best despite not actually winning many titles

 

Froch-Murray would be a pretty close fight. That's all you really need to understand.

 

no man, according to me broner was ****ing idiot for fighting chino at 147, and felt it was a very dangerous fight since the second it was announced.

for me resume mean nothing when ranking fighters and judging their in ring abilities.

this is so dumb, you have your opinion and I have mine, its possible we see different things in the ring and a fighters resume never ever enters my mind unless I know nothing of a fighter and want to see who he faced.

people like you, who CLAIM their opinion is anyone that rates ggg higher than froch is an idiot, I feel anyone that rates froch higher than ggg is an idiot.

my reasoning is based of how much of a better, more powerful, light years more skilled, with a much better chin and all around durability GGG has over froch.

you guys try to rate froch over ggg because he lost to a couple better fighters than ggg has been able to get in the ring as of yet. been high risk low reward until recently. I've seen ggg in against every single type of fighter that I need to, I've seen him take clean power shots off the chin without flinching, something froch has never done, I've seen froch hurt from much lighter hitters than stevens. not rating stevens outside his power and a little speed.

all i'm telling you is resume means nothing to me, would not change my opinion of any fighter if I have a good feeling I know enough about said fighter.

me saying I've seen ggg in enough with world class talent to know what he is has nothing to do with his resume. the reading comprehension on this board is unbelievable, yes my English writing sucks but at least I can understand what i'm reading. you guys twist everything you read to make nothing make sense.

some people aren't as blessed with picking up on fighters talents while watching them live, certain fans need to see who won to have their opinion made for them.

No, I have not seen ggg in with elite fighters yet, the only one around his weight is ward and he is taking the long road back. If ggg destroyed froch then destroyed ward I guarantee your opinion of him would change because he now has "names" on his resume while I would not think anything different of him at all.

I know what he is, and he is way better h2h or as a career when all is said and between him and froch. froch doesn't deserve to even be talked about between those two fighters ggg is so far superior it's a useless discussion.

Trip G is a true A level Elite talent with everything while froch is NOT on that level

 

Froch would probably stop Murray quicker than GGG did

 

that's your opinion and I respect that, IMO I don't think froch stops murray at all, I believe that would be a very close fight, very close that could easily go either was with a north side of 35 froch

murray could fight him at 68 too

 

don't do it to yourself!

 

this thread just keeps on giving!

 

Seriously the most delusional people seem to congregate on here.

 

The whole Broner-Maidana an1alogy went right over your head didn't it.....

 

GGG doesn't rank anywhere yet

 

So I missed your disguised intention.

 

no it was just stupid. you think because broner looked great against below average fighters people thought he could beat chino.

I knew better, I go off what I see in the ring and I had seen plenty from both broner and especially chino.

this whole bullsh!it discussion went way over your head. we use different tools in the way we rank fighters. I go off breaking down multiple fights of theirs while you go off ones resume.

that's what you're failing to grasp when I say resume IMO mean nothing. I don't use them as a tool in determining anything about a fighter. I use the rounds they actually put work in there not off outcomes.

when the outcomes are 90% foregone conclusions even for fighters at the top. beating a fighter means everything to you, how they beat them and exactly what happens in said fights his how I come to my conclusions.

 

Broner was beating and looking very good against sub par opposition. He was the favorite. Maidana had fought better comp and had losses to better fighters like you said losses don't mean anything.
Broner by fighting weak comp looked amazing and a lot more skilled than Maidana. Resumes are based off how fighters performed against the best, average, and worst. It's just not a name and a check in the box.