You are fooled if you think Golovkin has a bad defense

Yeah, and when did Golovkin lose many fights?

 

When has this happened with GGG?

He walked Brook down and made him Quit. Seems Brook is the one with the problem(s) not GGG

Every fighter gets hit. Willie Pep got hit. SRR got hit. There is no perfect infallible fighter out there. Everyone is going to get hit as Brook found out last night. He bottled it when he got hit. That is the difference in someone like GGG and Brook. Again, people on here are trying to overthink this. It didn't matter one iota that GGG was "getting hit" because his opponent wasn't willing to try and go the distance to make it relevant.

 

What has that got to do with what I was saying? I'm talking about measuring defensive ability.

According to you we can't tell if Golovkin has good or bad defense until he is old anyway.

 

GGG is clearly willing to take punches to land his own. He's fought like this for years. The Whitaker/Mayweather Brigade will never accept the wisdom of this strategy, despite all the results to the contrary.

GGG doesn't even know how to shake his head and go "nah nah" when he gets hit. This fool actually nods his head and congratulates his opponent!

 

Never but that's because he doesn't have "no defense". If he had no defense (and fought top opposition) he would be much more likely to lose.

 

I'm saying that's the best way to tell. You can talk all day about someone's "great defensive ability" but if they end up punch drunk, they obviously weren't defensive enough.
What I'm saying is, there's 'getting hit', and there's getting hit and damaged. That's when you really did get hit too much.
The idea of boxing is to not get hit. But everyone gets hit.
The BEST reason not to get hit is because getting hit is BAD for you. Therefore the ultimate measure of whether you got hit TOO MUCH is how you end up. This is simple.

But, anyway, while he's still fighting we measure it by the other points i mentioned :
Knocked out ?
Knocked down?
Outpointed ?
Badly cut/busted up?

 

But this is a boxing forum so we are talking about boxing. In boxing terms if you get hit so much that it causes you to lose fights then your defense is bad regardless of whether you get brain damage or not.

In boxing terms if your defense is good enough that you don't get hit much and win fights because of that then your defense is good.

It's not just defensive ability that contributes to brain damage. Your physiology, quality of opposition, number of fights etc all factor in also.

 

Ok, so Golovkin's defense is good then?

 

I think so yeah, I said so on page 1 but you seem to think we have to wait to see if he seems brain damaged in future to find out.

 

noice

 

I think his Defense is good enough. Not saying he is Willie Pep or even close. With his Chin it doesn't really matter anyway. It is refreshing to see a guy who isn't scared to walk though some punches to land his own. I mean people credit Rigo as some defensive master and all he does is circle the ring with his back to the ropes throwing 12 punches a round. Would you rather GGG do that instead?

 

having good chin is not good defense

 

Golovkin has very average defence. Anybody who understands the sport can clearly see he does not exhibit a lot of defensive manoeuvres. It will be his undoing if he faces an elite lever boxer with power.
Fast straight leads down the middle are his worst nightmare. This is why he's avoiding Lara like the plague.

 

I agree that GGG has an average defence ( chin, power and heart are not debatable), but ducking Lara - it is funny to imagine...

 

Well said. Well said. Woman on the street saying he has a triple D to go with his triple G.