Rethinking GGG's Legacy ..

What a cop out, garbage reply.

No one is obligated to move up in weight.

 

If 90% of a group scores a fight 7-5 to fighter A, it means fighter A should have won despite the narrow score. It would still be a robbery if that many scored a fight for someone percentage wise.

 

A close fight is NEVER a robbery. That "90%" group was 1 round away from scoring it a draw, which is how the judges had it. I was one of the "90%" group that scored it close for GGG. NO Robbery at all.

 

You do realize all because a fight is close numerically doesn’t mean it has to be close, right? If a fighter definitively wins seven rounds, where all seven rounds were clear cut, and they coasted the other five, it’s still a clear win.

 

90%? LOL

 

We're talking specifically about Canelo/GGG, nobody coasted for 5 rounds. It was a close fight deal with it.

 

I couldn't care less about what it says about Canelo. Or what the "boxing pundits" thought they saw.

The bottom line is that there were plenty of backers for the Golovkin win - a fair few predicting a KO victory. But Golovkin couldn't do enough to separate himself from Canelo. He hadn't really done so against Jacobs, either.

Perhaps, it just turned out that Golovkin wasn't as good as his fan-base had thought he was.

 

Roughly 70% thought GGG won and about another 15% felt the verdict of draw was fair, meaning only 15% of the scorecards felt Canelo won and there was some biases of origin in their cards as they were based in Mexico to connected to Canelo. These aren't exact numbers but they are close to the media cards.

 

%90 is pretty accurate actually. And that’s not just the fans, over %90 of the boxers/trainers had GGG winning the first fight. There’s a long running thread about it, you can check it name by name.

Though I think Canelo had the slight edge among pros for the rematch.

 

If GGG had beaten, say, Sturm, tthen won the title from Pavlik and defended against Williams, Martinez and Pirog, and all those wins were clear, I guess he could be looking at the top 5. Do I think he could have done this? Yes. But I don't give points for hypothetical wins.

So it could well be that it's matchmaking that stands between GGG and a higher ranking. It could also be that he'd struggle with some of those guys (Martinez and Pirog would have given him the most problems imi) and then there would be no what if card to play. We'll never know.

 

Sure, but your claim was that he "steamrolled almost every fighter in the top 10". He didn't. Eight top 10 fighters over about as many years is very good, but it's not "almost every fighter in the top 10". That was my simple point. So just man up and admit that you were wrong.

 

Hes an ATG because he can fight In any era.

 

He beat the guy that beat Sturm, and with no problems at all.

 

I think Pavlik would have knocked GGGS block off prime for prime. PAVLIK was a hell of a fighter at 160.