The Official Daniel "The Real Deal" Geale vs Gennady "GGG" Golovkin Fight Thread

[S. Saddler 1310]

Originally Posted by Russian Crushin

Yet he hasnt, so you cant call him better. At this point we have to see who beat the better fighters, unless they fight to prove who better between them

urm, what? yes, i can. Kermit Cintron had faced better comp than Saul Alvarez, for instance, had more wins over top 154 contenders than Saul did, but who thought Cintron was the better fighter before he got beaten down? nobody.

it's called perceiving attributes and degrees and nuances of ability, and it is done all the time, sometimes correctly and sometimes not. i may be wrong about N'Dam, which could be proven in time - but if he does get some more opportunities and ends up with a better CV than Geale, does that mean i will be 'correct' then while being 'incorrect' now? i guess you don't think that people should express opinions until those opinions are 'proven'.

i haven't even contended that Geale doesn't deserve to be rated higher. my point is that it doesn't count for much at this stage, when neither guy has fought a truly excellent fighter.

it's hard to have a worthwhile discussion with belligerent people who just misapprehend others' points/remarks and go off on rants.

[BafanaBafana]

Originally Posted by Russian Crushin

Yet he hasnt, so you cant call him better. At this point we have to see who beat the better fighters, unless they fight to prove who better between them

This is how legitimate rankings are made. The opposite would be ranking Gary Russell Jr. as the top featherweight contender because he has a flashy style. lol.

Geale is a good fighter, he is not flashy but he's effective and pretty difficult to catch clean and he is also very patient; definitely a guy who knows how to get the wins. Probably has the second best resume in the division after Martinez. He seems to get pretty underrated around here because he doesn't have crazy speed and or one-punch knockout power.


Here's my top 5 middleweights, I typically base my rankings on resume (not H2H):
1. • Sergio Martinez* (Pavlik, P. Will, Chavez Jr, Macklin)
2. • Daniel Geale (Sturm, Sylvester, Adama)
3. • Julio Cesar Chavez Jr (Lee, Rubio, Zbik)
4. • Gennedy Golovkin (Proksa, Ouma)
5. • Peter Quillin (N'Dam, McEwan)

[DoktorSleepless]

Probably Golovkin, but by decision, not knock out. Geale has decent enough movement and defense to not get hit as much and not broken down as early as previous Golovkin opponents. Plus Geale is much bigger than Golovkin's best 3 wins, who were basically jr middleweights.

[S. Saddler 1310]

just to clarify, i think the contention arose over my statement (opinion) that Geale is "average". another fellow pointed to the ratings to dispute my statement. while i do not dispute that Geale deserves to be rated above most at MW, and while i agree that his CV is possibly the best CV at MW after Martinez', it's also the best of an underwhelming bunch only by virtue of one win agaisnt a jaded and faded fighter whom i never thought much of at his best - as such, Geale's body of work still does not convince me that he is above average ("average" being relative to world-class contender status). in Golovkin, i perceive above-average ability. this is why i think he is better and would beat Geale down. different classes of fighter, in my opinion.

i apologize for any offence caused to Daniel's fans.

[Russian Crushin]

Originally Posted by S. Saddler 1310

urm, what? yes, i can. Kermit Cintron had faced better comp than Saul Alvarez, for instance, had more wins over top 154 contenders than Saul did, but who thought Cintron was the better fighter before he got beaten down? nobody.

it's called perceiving attributes and degrees and nuances of ability, and it is done all the time, sometimes correctly and sometimes not. i may be wrong about N'Dam, which could be proven in time - but if he does get some more opportunities and ends up with a better CV than Geale, does that mean i will be 'correct' then while being 'incorrect' now? i guess you don't think that people should express opinions until those opinions are 'proven'.

i haven't even contended that Geale doesn't deserve to be rated higher. my point is that it doesn't count for much at this stage, when neither guy has fought a truly excellent fighter.

it's hard to have a worthwhile discussion with belligerent people who just misapprehend others' points/remarks and go off on rants.

For your cintron example, there's context involved, spinks didn't beat Ali because he was better all time

Yes potential and perceived go a long way into ranking a fighter, but that mostly with other unranked fighters who haven't done anything or much. This is why Gary russel jr isn't ranked #1 at at 126, or anywhere near actually.

There's no way you can rank prospects or contenders over proven fighter, even if you do think they'd beat them head to head, or how good their "perceived skill is". You can think they're Better, that's your opinion, but geale is proven better so far

[Reloaded]

Geale reminds me of Calzaghe without the slapping , award and busy , I think GG power will make all the difference but I wouldnt be surprised if Geale stole it .

[gingerbreadman]

I wouldn't pick against Golovkin if he were matched against any come-forward fighter south of 168, so went for GGG. Geale has good defences for a front-foot guy, but conversely I don't think he's fought a real gravedigger in his career. Just feel that Golovkin works best against guys who press the action and that can be timed coming in, and Geale seems like an ideal matchup. GGG by stoppage.

[Simurgh]

Geale is not fast enough to run from GGG all night nor technically brilliant. He would be found and hit a lot.
I see it as brutal TKO/KO in mid/late rounds. It is very bad match-up for Geale.

[S. Saddler 1310]

Originally Posted by Russian Crushin

For your cintron example, there's context involved, spinks didn't beat Ali because he was better all time

so Alvarez was picked over Cintron because Cintron was so much less than he ever was before? i don't think so, tbh. Alvarez was simply perceived to be a better fighter, and he proved as much.

Originally Posted by Russian Crushin

Yes potential and perceived go a long way into ranking a fighter, but that mostly with other unranked fighters who haven't done anything or much. This is why Gary russel jr isn't ranked #1 at at 126, or anywhere near actually.

just for the record,

i haven't even contended that Geale doesn't deserve to be rated higher. my point is that it doesn't count for much at this stage, when neither guy has fought a truly excellent fighter.

i think the contention arose over my statement (opinion) that Geale is "average". another fellow pointed to the ratings to dispute my statement. while i do not dispute that Geale deserves to be rated above most at MW, Geale's body of work still does not convince me that he is above average ("average" being relative to world-class contender status).

i'm not trying to rate guys in an empirical manner, totting up the outward merit in their win columns and considering no other factors, the way i would if i were in the position of whomever puts together ratings for The Ring. i'm rating them subjectively, based on what i perceive in their performances, what i think they can or will do when given the chances to prove themselves. that's where certain nuances come in. for instance (seeing as you mentioned context), N'Dam lost to Quillin, but it can easily be argued that he distinguished himself more in that valiant defeat than Geale has in any of his wins, being that Geale has never faced an opponent as dangerous as Quillin, whom N'Dam outboxed quite clearly for long spells of their fight.

Originally Posted by Russian Crushin

There's no way you can rank prospects or contenders over proven fighter, even if you do think they'd beat them head to head, or how good their "perceived skill is". You can think they're Better, that's your opinion, but geale is proven better so far

Golovkin and N'Dam are not really prospects, and Geale is only a contender himself. they're all contenders until they beat 'the man', so to speak.

but, as i said, i agree that Geale's CV is possibly the best CV at MW after Martinez'. but i add that it's the best of an underwhelming bunch only by virtue of one win against a jaded and faded fighter whom had no outstanding wins over his long title reign.

[The_Demon]

I think Golovkin breaks him down and stops him late,though it wouldn't shock me if he had to settle for a decision

Nice sig by the way Phantom