The fact that Trout was undefeated and coming off the win over Cotto is important when looking at their records for me. I take Canelo. I'll admit I think Golovkin is better and will go higher places yet. But I'll take Canelo's resume. Lopez was also coming off the Ortiz upset where he brutalized Ortiz.
I am a big Canelo fan but Mayweather beat Canelo easily. GGG would knock Mayweather out in my opinion so I voted that GGG has the better record. GGG has never lost a fight and he rarely loses a round. The reason GGG has not fought better opposition is that better opposition will not fight him. Put them in the ring with GGG and out they go. GGG has great boxing skills, stamina, speed, power, accurate combinations and he has never been knocked down in any pro fight and 350 amateur fights.
Trout is the best win between the two of them.
Ryan Rhodes has a win over Jamie Moore who knocked out Macklin.
Cintron was a joke when Canelo fought him. Lets not talk about that.
I give the edge to Canelo. And I'd honestly favor Angulo over anyone Golovkin has beaten if Canelo gets that win
Based on what?
If we're going by who fought the better opponents, then it's obviously Canelo because of his fights against Trout and Mayweather.
But if we're going by performance it's a different story. Canelo looked awful against Trout, he won the fight I'm not disputing that, but he looked terrible in the process and then he got embarrassed so badly by Mayweather (a guy who was 20 lbs lighter than him), and gave no indication in that fight that he could ever be a future P4P star.
When GGG fights Sergio Martinez, I think we need to revisit this.
I think GGG is the much better fighter, has performed a lot better with what he's given, but Canelo has faced the better opposition.
While this is true, the thread was who has a better resume not who has potential to be better, at 23 Canelos resumes is better than GGGs already, so while GGG might have potential it's hard to guage where it goes til they're both at the end of their careers.
That said Canelo has the better resume hands down.
Both have fought limited competition,,,,
Ggg has looked a lot more impressive,, he would have smoked guys like trout, old Shane, Hutton, Rhodes, etc
Canelo is hype, and showed it in the Floyd fight... Ggg is much better, if he gets to fight serg or ward he ain't gonna go out like a bytch like canelo did vs Floyd
resume does not = how you won.... it= who you beat
Resume= a summary, and an accurate summary will include performance.
Using your employer analogy. Yeah Triple G performed better, for McDonald's. Canelo underperformed for Goldman Sachs.
Yes, tell me more about his narrow victory over Austin Trout, his victory over Alfonso Gomez and his dominant victory over Ryan Rhodes. It is the stuff of legends.
GGG resume is better. When you apply for a job, your potential employer will not just say ''Oh you worked for so and so, you are hired'', they will contact your previous employers to see how well you performed. Even though their opponents are similar in class, GGG has been outright brutal in the way that he dispatched his foes; for that reason I cannot say that Canelo's resume is equal to GGG.
Using your employer analogy. Yeah Triple G performed better, for McDonald's. Canelo underperformed for Goldman Sachs.
KOing Macklin in 3 > edging Trout in a decision
Plus, Trout's win over Cotto was more about what Cotto didn't do in that fight, rather than what Trout did
Considering all the notable wins?
Canelo:
Trout
Angulo* - Pending
Rhodes
Lopez
M. Hatton
Vazquez
N'Dou
Gomez
Mosley
Cintron
Tyner
Golovkin:
Macklin
Stevens
Rosado
Proksa
Ouma
Gardner
Ishida
Canelo has the better resume.
Who's fighting the better fighter next? Canelo.
Who has fought the overall tougher opposition? With Trout, Mayweather and Angulo, back to back to back, Canelo.
Canelo takes it for me, better resume, better career, only 23 years old vs Golovkin's 31 years old. Not even close really, Canelo is ahead of where he's actually supposed to be in terms of competition faced. Golovkin is far behind at his age, and he is no Hopkins, he won't last long with that sh-tty defense I saw against Stevens.
Proska and Stevens are terrible though.
Both have poor resumes.
I'd say they're similar to Rhodes in skill, which is about how I rate those wins for both guys. Golovkin has more wins against ranked MW's than Canelo does against ranked JMW's or WW's for that matter when he was younger.
It's not a huge difference, but GGG by a hair for me.
Based on what?
If we're going by who fought the better opponents, then it's obviously Canelo because of his fights against Trout and Mayweather.
But if we're going by performance it's a different story. Canelo looked awful against Trout, he won the fight I'm not disputing that, but he looked terrible in the process and then he got embarrassed so badly by Mayweather (a guy who was 20 lbs lighter than him), and gave no indication in that fight that he could ever be a future P4P star.
When GGG fights Sergio Martinez, I think we need to revisit this.
I think GGG is the much better fighter, has performed a lot better with what he's given, but Canelo has faced the better opposition.
:lol1: Bullshit! He's fought 3 154 pounders out of his last 10, before that it was middleweights, and super middleweights. Now, tell me who are all these 154 pounders that are on Canelo's resume? Don't say Trout because like you said a million times losses don't count.
Trout,Cintron,Rhodes would be his top 3 wins
This is just a desperate thread to try and big up Canelo while ****ting on GGG.
Why would i try to big up Canelo or down GGG..i am making a point to those who are hyping up GGG and sh1tting on Canelo..