If his body allows, Triple GGG should stay at 160 indefinitely, till' retirement

[Kigali]

I can't call someone a HOF or ATG fghter whose best win is still Martin Murray at the age of 34... sorry
maybe if he can up his competition level in the next few years but not before it and he has less and less time

It's not his fault that he was born into a trash MW era but historical places are given by resumes and cold hard facts not about shoulda-woulda fantasy things...

Can you tell me a fighter who is remembered as an ATG or HOF member and his best win is on the level of Martin Murray? Cause I can't think of one right now...

Many journalists and fans simply overlook the most important part, the resume when they rate Golovkin and they solely base on hype and eye test.
Golovkin hasn't got a better resume than 2 years ago just he kept beating lower tier opposition by KOs and the hype got bigger and bigger to a point where (almost) everybody felt that he can get the pass for the not so strong resume and he should be placed n P4P top 5 and stuff like that... Or the ones who didn't feel like that simply put him there cause they obeyed to the hype and popularity ad thought that they must rate him that high without any truly significant win.

there are at least 15-20 active fighters whose best wins trump GGG's best.
I don't say that only resumes count but those should be the most important by a pretty wide margin. Eye tests and other fantasy things only after that. And popularity/hype shouldn't be included at all but I know that's a big ask...

The dreaded Martin Murray.

I tremble just typing his name.

The very though of him fills me with dread.

[Kigali]

nice try to pretend that formal BS like being a "glamour division" matter more than the quality of the fighters in the weight class.
All those fighters who you listed had better competition in their divisions at those times that's why they didn't move not because it was "middleweight".

Cut out the bull**** please... You cherry picked some middleweights who didn't move up but you just simply skipped the fact that any of those 4 has at least one or two significant wins on their resume whereas Golovkin lacks that.

the point is not the name of the weight class but the quality of it and the names he beat and his reputation compared to that. The two are not in accordance with each other.

You can't put someone whose best win is Murray on the same page as Hopkins, Monzon or Hagler. Period.

You're killing that mofo...

[Robbie Barrett]

He only weighed 162 a week before the fight. It's obvious he makes 160 with ease and has no business fighting above that weight. Middleweight has always been the glamour division, not 168 or 175. If he stays at 160 and continues to dominate that weight until he retires that's great. It was good enough for Hagler, Monzon and Zale. Hopkins stayed at middleweight until he was 41 years old. The only reason GGG haters want him to move up to a higher weight is they hope a naturally bigger man can beat GGG because no boxer in the world his same weight can beat him.

Canelo weighed 158.8 a week before the Khan fight. Those weights don't mean ****.

[j0zef]

I disagree with the general sentiment. You're absolutely right in your analysis. Smw is a garbage division right now, and he will be a lesser version of himself as he moves up.

However in my eyes, I will be sincerely disappointed if he never fights Ward, kovalev, Ramirez, or DeGale /jack winner. Those fights are too interesting not to make.

I definitely don't want him to move up right now, as those other options are establishing themselves and have unresolved issues. But if he can unify all titles, and defend them all a few times, I want him to permanently jump to smw then to LHW. I'm thinking late 2018.

[HEND]

You're committing a logical fallacy here, on purpose or by accident perhaps, so lets try to stir you back in the right direction.

You're comparing a finished body of work of a retired fighter VS a fighter who still has many fights left in him at 35-0.

Secondly, quality of opposition is subjective. All of Hagler's opponents might be considered better in hindsight, now that it's been over 30 years. In foresight a victory over Thomas Hearns or Duran was no better than a hypothetical victory over Miguel Cotto, Canelo, Brooks or Floyd Mayweather for GGG. All smaller great fighters who tried to grab the Middleweight division.

Hagler hung around for damn 4 years after prospects of a Hagler-Leonard fight and it still came through as he didn't move up and probably didn't outgrow his division (otherwise his performance would have suffered).

I compared it in reaction that some people already put Golovkin on the same page as those fighters... And while his style is not built on speed or athleticism he is still 34 year old so we can't know how much time he has to prove himself


secondly...
the Duran win maybe, with Hearns you dare not right imo. Cause he was really small there.

Hearsn though... He was a gigantic welterweight, after moving up from welter he campaigned for years in 154 and collected belts there, he was already a very proven fighter and THEN as a natural next step he moved up to middleweight.
Not like Brook who eve in his own weightclass was't that established, His only real achievement is literally that he scraped through Porter on an ugly fight. Then without further proving himself or campaigning in 154 before he jumped up to middleweight for one fight. Totally different cases. NOt to mention that Hearns was an easily better fighter than Kell Brook is now.
Mayweather contrary to Hearns was a smaller fighter eve in welterweight and the man was n his late 30's when Golovkin blew up. Hearns was 27 years old when he fought Hagler.
Cotto is rather a natural sww now, he was clearly too small n middleweight plus he is past his prime and I think even in his prime he wasn't the as good as Hearns was.

I can give Canelo to you (he wouldn't be as big of a win as Hars was to Hagler but a really good win nevertheless) he is a P4P top 10 fighter today who is close to Golovkin in size. Beating him would give Golovkin those bragging rights but as of right now...

also Hagler beat Mugabi too who was a better fighter than anyone on Golovkin's resume and was a natural middleweight but as I said beating Hearns dwarfs anything Golovkin did so far and would dwarf most of his hypothetical wins over the fighters you mentioned.

[HEND]

First of all, the reason he is already 34 with not as much of an accomplished resume is because he is a late starter as a lot of Eastern European's are. If he were brought up in the Mexican circuit, he would have turned pro at 16, feasting on at least 30 bums, building up a 30-0 record before moving up the level of competition slightly. He'd have over 50 wins under his belt by the time he is 34. But most of them turn pro at their mid 20's or even late 20's.

Even Cuban Amateur fighters. Gamboa and Rigo only have a few prime years to play around with.

And you keep name dropping Martin Murray. Every fighter from the past has had a martin murray career win at some point. You just can't see it now because you're looking from the prism of the past. When it happened right there and then, someone in that time viewed that opponent the same way you view Murray.

And GGG isn't even mentioning retirement yet, so what's the point? He may even go on to fight as long as Hopkins with success which could mean at least 10 meaningful wins under his belt.

I really can't do anything with EE fghters turn pro later. Maybe they should turn pro earlier... Some of them already started and frankly nobody bans them from turning pro earlier. It's a personal decision.
Cubans are a little different cause they literally have to flee from their country i order to go pro.

but regardless of when they turn pro I can't give them a pass just because of that. That's a shoulda-woulda fantasy thing again. "What if he would have turned pro 16 years old"... He didn't. Period. But he still had more than enough time in the pros and as you said his career still didn't come to an end.


He may... let's see. Hopkins s a very rare example though bu we shall see

[Trs45]

His clearly the best at 160. Nobody wants to fight him. So what does he do he fights anybody and they aren't very good. I want him to move up a weight division to fight different and tougher competition if his just going through everyone at 160. Not to see him lose.

If his trainer is saying he is beating his bigger sparring opponents. He doesn't need to need gain a lot of weight and he can fight at 160 and 168 as he is now. He knows his thr best at 160 and nobody will beat him so they are going to stick where they are most comfortable avoid any real challenges.

It's not his fault everyone at 160 is a coward and won't fight him. They know they'll lose. But what's ggg going to do wait around until his 50 years old before they agree to fight him.

It's not ggg's fault. If everyone was fighting each other as they should and the big fights were happening then he should stay at 160 and beat the 2nd best fighters in the division and carry on ruling it because his earned it. Not earn it because of how many people have avoided fighting him

[Craveman]

Mayweather never fought out of his comfort zone except at 154lbs. He just grew into upper weight classes. At least that's what I think.

[cupocity303]

I compared it in reaction that some people already put Golovkin on the same page as those fighters... And while his style is not built on speed or athleticism he is still 34 year old so we can't know how much time he has to prove himself


secondly...
the Duran win maybe, with Hearns you dare not right imo. Cause he was really small there.

Hearsn though... He was a gigantic welterweight, after moving up from welter he campaigned for years in 154 and collected belts there, he was already a very proven fighter and THEN as a natural next step he moved up to middleweight.
Not like Brook who eve in his own weightclass was't that established, His only real achievement is literally that he scraped through Porter on an ugly fight. Then without further proving himself or campaigning in 154 before he jumped up to middleweight for one fight. Totally different cases. NOt to mention that Hearns was an easily better fighter than Kell Brook is now.
Mayweather contrary to Hearns was a smaller fighter eve in welterweight and the man was n his late 30's when Golovkin blew up. Hearns was 27 years old when he fought Hagler.
Cotto is rather a natural sww now, he was clearly too small n middleweight plus he is past his prime and I think even in his prime he wasn't the as good as Hearns was.

I can give Canelo to you (he wouldn't be as big of a win as Hars was to Hagler but a really good win nevertheless) he is a P4P top 10 fighter today who is close to Golovkin in size. Beating him would give Golovkin those bragging rights but as of right now...

also Hagler beat Mugabi too who was a better fighter than anyone on Golovkin's resume and was a natural middleweight but as I said beating Hearns dwarfs anything Golovkin did so far and would dwarf most of his hypothetical wins over the fighters you mentioned.

Do you realize how ridiculous you sound, comparing it point by point like that.

The generalities are all the same. All long-term Champions at one weight class face the same problem. They run out of great contenders at their division and end up fighting great little champions. And here you are breaking it down who is a bit taller, and who has a few more fights than the other as if everything has to be the same. Which is impossible.

But it is the same. Hagler went through the same cycles that GGG will go through. Contenders, contenders, top contenders, top contenders, title defenses, mandatories, smaller great fighter, smaller past prime great fighter, ONE GREAT-ish fighter of the same size and weightclass etc,. Hopkins went through the same cycle unifying belts before he knocked off a few smaller great fighters (one at his prime but smaller in Tito, and one past his prime and smaller in Oscar etc,) followed up by more title defenses.

And then when GGG is retired and his whole body of work is set in stone and people can digest it properly, then one may make a definitive statement on his legacy. Not get hung up on Martin Murray who was a stay busy fight, after which he fought someone else a mere THREE MONTHS LATER. That's how much the fight meant to him.

[b00g13man]

"I love you GGG. Please don't take a risk and dare to be great".

Nice try OP.