The old line I need to see more of him to judge.

And that's exactly why it's such a useless concept when it comes to comparing fighters of different eras.

 

The real issue is revisionism. Trying to alter known history.
The trainers and experts who rated Johnson an ATG were not long removed from the trainers and experts that labeled Dempsey an ATG as a classic example.

 

But in reality his dominance is none existent.

Hopkins dominated the division when he won the tournament. He lost to Taylor who lost to Pavlik who lost to Martinez who lost to Cotto who lost to Canelo.

In a world with only one championship Golovkin would have never held it.

So if he loses when he's finally got his shot at the lineal champ, it makes you wonder how good he ever was in the first place.

Likewise if he wins his championship shot then his hype is justified.

Like I said, Liston if he lost to Patterson. He knocked out a swathe of top ranked opponents over a number of years before Patterson finally fought him. Winning that fight meant he went down as an ATG, if he got knocked out by Patterson he wouldn't have been an ATG

 

I don't put much value in "lineal championships" when another man is clearly the best in the division (especially when the lineal champions are unwilling to fight him).

"ATG" is just a subjective label that doesn't really explain whether one fighter is actually better or more talented than another. BTW, in your opinion, would Liston be an ATG if he never won the lineal belt but knocked out Patterson twice before Patterson became the champ? Or what if he'd knocked out Floyd right after Floyd's loss to Johannson, before Floyd regained the title?

 

Liston is not an ATG hwt champion.

 

Do you think that he would lose to all of the ATG heavyweight champions?

 

When I say ATG I'm always talking about h2h ability.

I know it's hard valuing the lineal championship in any form today due to the multitude of titles. But it's also hard to value the championship claim of one man when there's another in the same division with a valid lineage that can be traced.

For me, ranking Golovkin is entirely contingent on this Canelo fight. And it's quite a sever swing. Knock Canelo out, he's top 3 MW. Get beaten, it's hard to say whether I'd event bother ranking him or not.

Would Liston be an ATG without that championship round his waist? Certainly not as well regarded as he is with it.

 

So it was his knocking out a 189-lb man who'd already been sparked early by Ingemar Johannson revealed to you that Liston had ATG h2h ability at heavyweight?

 

That does not matter.

 

Then what's the significance of being an "ATG" if there are non-ATGs like Liston who would likely knock them out?

 

ATG in terms of the worlds hwt championship in part includes attributes. One attribute is the ability to fight a tough fight absorbing punishment and not quit. Certainly this would expand to include not giving up your worlds hwt championship while sitting on your stool. Scenarios can be constructed where a non ATG could beat an ATG but that would not negate the ATG champions status. As an example if Jones was given the decision vs Ali does that make Jones an ATG automatically? Of course not. Does this lone loss to a non ATG negate Ali's ATG status? Of course not.

 

If Golovkin loses to Alvarez his rating doesn't go down. Whether he's an ATG I don't know but at his age and career stage losing to a younger fighter won't effect that.
Even taking a very traditionalist line concerning lineal championship, he'll fit in nicely as a feared top contender who was left on the shelf until a bit safer to face.

Alvarez isn't exactly a convincing middleweight champion anyway. So if you're unsure about Golovkin based on resume and opposition I don't think beating Alvarez solves that issue either.

 

That makes no sense.
Alvarez has done nothing to prove himself a formidable middleweight champion. He beat Cotto who beat the old injury-ravaged Martinez. It's a clear low point in lineal middleweight so I can't see how you can justify making it so historically significant.

 

Liston might not be an all time great.
It's debatable whether he'd beat any all time greats.
I'd pick him to beat Frazier and Marciano, who I rate as ATGs, but it's debatable.

 

In an ATG context "I need to see more of him to judge makes sense" if we're comparing some paper alphabet champ of the modern era against fighters of yesteryear who have dozens of fights against ranked fighters.