Better fighter: Matthysse or Golovkin?

Yes, and he lost to them......... The two best fighters Matthysse faced, Judah and Alexander; he lost against. (although they were close fights) Now had he WON those two fights, this is a completely different discussion....then, you could justify all these responses about Lucas being a superior fighter due to the fighters he's beaten. IMO. Sure, he could have took away a lot from those fights, experience wise, gaining more experience making him a better fighter, etc etc......and when comparing him to another fighter, you can use that as judging criteria, absolutely... But let's not forget GGG had over 300 amateur fights, and had wins against fighters just as good as those two (yes its amateurs, but in the pros we've already seen he can brawl. if anything can display your boxing skills, its amateur boxing)... so those losses, and what kind of experience and anything else Lucas took away from them are completely irrelevant. Because GGG has just as much experience, if not more. As I've said, had Lucas won those fights this would be a totally different discussion/comparison and some of the posts about Matthysse's would of been justified........So why ISN'T Matthysse a better fighter due to the competition he's faced? Let's take a look.... With that being said, in my opinion; it comes down to the fighter's they've BEATEN........and are we going to act like a 15 loss Damarcus "Chop Chop" Corley, Angel Martinez (who?), a 7 loss Humberto Soto, and a fighter in Ajose Olosegun (a guy who's recorded is padded just like Manuel Charr, his opposition has been terrible and Matthysse was his first step up in competition) are really THAT MUCH BETTER competition then a 7 loss Kassim Ouma, Lajuan Simon, and top 10 middleweight Gregorsz Proksa? I start with Chop Chop, because all of Matthysse's previous opponents have been domestic level.... Come on, really? Now, I'm not necessarily saying Golovkin is better, nor am I saying Matthysse is the better fighter.....BUT to say that Lucas Matthysse is a better fighter then Gennady Golovkin, based on "the fighters he fought" is completely ridiculous, IMO. And a really, really weak way to come to the conclusion that Lucas is better, in this particular comparison. If you're going to proclaim Lucas as a better fighter, no problems. Lucas Matthysse is a fine fighter. I like him.......but your reasoning, IN THIS PARTICULAR COMPARISON, is very weak.....very weak indeed. Cheers. You bringing the losses in their record dont help your argument. Soto is known as a better fighter than Ouma and Corley have fought at the highest level for longer than Simon. In addition, Lucas was robbed against Judan and Alexander. Seen the fight several times and have the same conclusion. Lucas has prove himself more than GGG. So far, he is better.

simple answer, golovkin

I desperately need to see some more Golovkin fights. Aside from the Proksa fight would should I be looking at? Mathysse is an incredible fighter though. You could put him in with a world-class fighter or a tomato-salesman and both fights would make for compelling viewing for different reasons.

If I match them up skill set to to skill set and power for power I pick Golovkin. But that's minus the resumes. Include what Lucas has down he's the obvious winner. But if they where the same size I would pick Golovkin over Lucas.

golovkin. i think tiple og runs though the best at 160. dont think lucas can handl the very best at 140 (bradley,jmm)

both are f*ckin badassesss

Matthysse clearly. Unlike Genady Lucas has actually fought fighters with pulses. Yes, and he lost to them......... The two best fighters Matthysse faced, Judah and Alexander; he lost against. (although they were close fights) Now had he WON those two fights, this is a completely different discussion....then, you could justify all these responses about Lucas being a superior fighter due to the fighters he's beaten. IMO. Sure, he could have took away a lot from those fights, experience wise, gaining more experience making him a better fighter, etc etc......and when comparing him to another fighter, you can use that as judging criteria, absolutely... But let's not forget GGG had over 300 amateur fights, and had wins against fighters just as good as those two (yes its amateurs, but in the pros we've already seen he can brawl. if anything can display your boxing skills, its amateur boxing)... so those losses, and what kind of experience and anything else Lucas took away from them are completely irrelevant. Because GGG has just as much experience, if not more. As I've said, had Lucas won those fights this would be a totally different discussion/comparison and some of the posts about Matthysse's would of been justified........So why ISN'T Matthysse a better fighter due to the competition he's faced? Let's take a look.... With that being said, in my opinion; it comes down to the fighter's they've BEATEN........and are we going to act like a 15 loss Damarcus "Chop Chop" Corley, Angel Martinez (who?), a 7 loss Humberto Soto, and a fighter in Ajose Olosegun (a guy who's recorded is padded just like Manuel Charr, his opposition has been terrible and Matthysse was his first step up in competition) are really THAT MUCH BETTER competition then a 7 loss Kassim Ouma, Lajuan Simon, and top 10 middleweight Gregorsz Proksa? I start with Chop Chop, because all of Matthysse's previous opponents have been domestic level.... Come on, really? Now, I'm not necessarily saying Golovkin is better, nor am I saying Matthysse is the better fighter.....BUT to say that Lucas Matthysse is a better fighter then Gennady Golovkin, based on "the fighters he fought" is completely ridiculous, IMO. And a really, really weak way to come to the conclusion that Lucas is better, in this particular comparison. If you're going to proclaim Lucas as a better fighter, no problems. Lucas Matthysse is a fine fighter. I like him.......but your reasoning, IN THIS PARTICULAR COMPARISON, is very weak.....very weak indeed. Cheers.

Matthysse for me. He's shown he can beat the top rated guys in his division while Golovkin has smashed his way through guys he was supposed to smash through. I also think Matthysse has more upside ability wise, I don't think Golovkin is a great boxer as such; he's good with just decent speed, what will carry him is the fact that both hands hit like sledge hammers.

Matthysse clearly. Unlike Genady Lucas has actually fought fighters with pulses.

GGGGGGGGolovkin! (with the G-unit voice)

Make a call!!! Was looking forward to your take, given that u are a huge fan of both Alright alright! lol, hmm....I have to say that Matt has impressed me with the way he handles southpaws, and the fact that he doesn't get hit nearly as much as his style would lead you to believe. Both guys are proficient when they go to the body, and both have game-changing power. Very similar mentality and they go about their business in a similar way too, but I think Golovkin is a bit more patient on offense and I think he might have better counter-punching ability too. I'll pick Matt for now, cuz I've seen more of his ability due to his tougher opposition. However, GGG probably has the higher ceiling.

Matthysee.

This is hard. Other than the obvious "Matt has fought better competition", I think they are are the biggest threats in their respective divisions. Need to see Golovkin fight a couple more legit opponents before I can decide Make a call!!! Was looking forward to your take, given that u are a huge fan of both

This is hard. Other than the obvious "Matt has fought better competition", I think they are are the biggest threats in their respective divisions. Need to see Golovkin fight a couple more legit opponents before I can decide. I do think that Golovkin has the potential to do bigger things, to achieve more than Lucas. Time ain't really on his side though.

Yeah fair enough, thats indisputable i guess. Experience aside though, does Lucas still rate higher? Or a better question who has the greater potential? Because really we dont know how well GGG will fair at the higher levels but that doesn't stop us as fans from speculating...

As of right now, I'd say Mattysse has proven more against better fighters professionally. So I'd go with him until proven otherwise. This. Matthysse had proven what he's got against a few top level guys, Triple G hasn't yet.

As of right now, I'd say Mattysse has proven more against better fighters professionally. So I'd go with him until proven otherwise.