Roy Jones Jr vs vs Saul "Canelo" Alvarez At 168

In the quotes above you fixate strongly on the point that GGG was aged and not at his best. I'm pretty sure I've seen you argue extremely soundly that GGG was likely still going strong and the rise in quality of opponent may have had more to do with his harder fights than anything else. I think therefore we can call it a very good version of GGG that Canelo beat.

Roberto Duran at 37, up in the weights and all the rest of it surely has to be taken into account no matter how brilliant and stirring the victory was. He was tagged a helluva lot and i'd be extremely confident Canelo would be hit flush far less often and win the fight in easier fashion.

That's up for debate. Ring rates him #1 so that's something.

I think Barkley would do reasonably well, absolutely. This of course has nothing to do with how well he does against Canelo.

Foreman went rather well against guys that beat Ali, like say Frazier and Norton. We all know how that turned out.

I wouldn't take Hamsho to beat GGG, heavens no. He'd be cut up. Watts would end up on his back.

 

Just on the highlighted Philly - It was actually said. I think it was KO Magazine that went into great detail and bullet points as to why Barkley fought a perfect fight that night. It including utilizing the jab plenty, setting a fast pace against the old man, working the body to slow him down late and a couple of other things. It was actually bang on. He did all of these things and it was a great fight plan and well adhered to. He just wasn't quite good enough.

 

Barkley rips his head off

 

It would be an interesting fight. I don't know how the styles would gel.
Barkley lost to some good fighters and beat some slick ones too. Canelo's obviously a top level fighter and has excellent method of offense and defense. It would be a good match up/

 

Barkley would certainly seriously challenge Canelo. Alvarez lives from his power and physical strength. That would not bother Iran that much.Canelo's accurate shots against Barkley's workrate. That fight would be fought in close quarters and leave not much distance for the more skilled Canelo. I favour Barkley by close decision in case the fight is judged fairly.

I highly doubt Alvarez would put on a Nunn or Kalamby boxing exhibition, he is not in that class.

 

Hey John - you're right, I have argued along those lines before and I stand by that case. Nothing I write above contradicts this view, by the way.

I think you will find that the argument was first put forward in relation to Golovkin/Jacobs (when GGG was 33; just a month, maybe two shy of his 34th birthday) and even then, in a relative comparison to a 40-Something BHop, if I recall. It might also have focused on specific variables, e.g. Golovkin's speed.

Golovkin was 35 and well into his 36th year, when he re-matched Canelo in 2018.

Additionally, I have, in the past, acknowledged Golovkin must have been past his prime, albeit not ring-worn, by the time he faced genuinely world class opposition, and have commented more than once on the difficulty there is in assessing Golovkin against elite fighters of the past, due to him not meeting anyone of that level in his prime. (This happens to align with one of the quotes from me you have posted above.)

I would also add that I haven't implied Golovkin was decrepit and not going strong in any of the quotes you have referenced above. There's' no fixation on Golovkin being past his best (although, that should be inferred - unless one thinks otherwise); merely a reiteration of the version of Golovkin being discussed here, i.e. the version Canelo beat.

Of course, that's an opinion you are entitled to hold and share, but it doesn't relate to the wider point I was making. Indeed, it leans more towards a separate thread in its own right, I suspect. The quality of the Duran / Barkley bout speaks for itself. It was listed inside the Ring's 100 Greatest Title Fights of All Time (#49).

A 'fancy' that might leave me short in the wallet department, granted. But I've never been impressed with Golovkin or the bulk of his opposition, as you well know.

Both Hamsho and Watts, at their respective bests, were easily in the kind of class or better than that of Jacobs and Derevyanchenko, in terms of ability. They were certainly well ahead of the Rosados, Geales, Murrays and Monroe Juniors on Golovkin's ledger.

A win for both against a 2018 Golovkin is not an absurd punt, in my opinion.

 

I honestly think Canelo lost both times against GGG. Now that we got rid of Mendoza, I can admit that.

And also GGG was still very good, he was hardly prime. With Canelo, I see a very good fighter that is perfectly managed. I like the way he has improved and keeps busy these days, that is really good for boxing. That being said IMO, he would have lost against the likes of Toney, Jones, Hopkins or Calzaghe.

 

He's durable for sure. He'd still be there at the end against Jones. Losing nearly every round imo to

 

It is not even for sure.Do not forget Toney was a slick MOF. Roy at 168 was unbelievable

 

You and I had a heated debate on the topic of the Golovkin/Canelo (II) bout, at the time.

Whilst I still stand by my scoring of both GGG/Canelo bouts, I have to admit that I was less aware, at the time, of the "perfectly managed" aspect of Canelo's career and have become a little more skeptical since - perhaps a lot more skeptical, to be honest.

 

Yeah sure he does LOL

 

I'm hearing you but i'm still seeing Canelo being a top shelf counter puncher with power and Barkley will be predictable enough in there for Canelo to really time him as the bout goes on.

 

Hey all good MM. I have to admit i'm not passionate about present day boxing to mount a debate but i think we've reached a point where we know where each other is at.

Perhaps i am guilty of trying too hard to make something of present day boxing. I really do however think Barkley is RIGHT inside Canelo's wheelhouse and would get pumped by the time the dust settled.

 

Aye - All good.

I guess a good number of the fights from yesteryear just look that much better to me, compared with many of today's matches. I'm not entirely disenchanted by the present-day game, but the memorable bouts are becoming fewer and further between.

I'd love a Barkley-type fighter, complete with the 'attitude', to arrive on the 160+ scene today, to test your theory .

 

Beat better fighters at 160 and was better in every department except defence, he sure does indeed!

Barkely would out work Canelo even if he needed a decision but he'd win by knockout.
Canelo ain't knocking Barkley out.
Canelo could hit Barkley, but he leaves himself open to counters, especially hooks, when he looks for his big shots. The B level trash he's mostly fought are afraid to death of punching with him. Golovkin beat him, Trout beat Him, Lara would beat him. Barkley was a live specimen 1985-88 he'd take Canelo out.
If there's one fighter who wouldn't be afraid of punching with him it is Barkley.
Barkley KO within 5.