Let's get something straight about a fighter's physical prime

Hmmm I see, I think Canelo wins a razor close one because of the timing of the fight maximises his chances, he's getting better whereas Golovkin has peaked. A year ago I would have picked Golovkin by late stoppage or decision. If you thought Golovkin lost a step against Wade then I can't argue with your position as it's genuine but a lotta other posters have only recently taken that position alongside you leading to Canelo backers and other neutral posters dismissing you all in one group. Well your reasoning for picking canelo kind of reinforces my point. I still pick ggg in this fight, but it should be a good competitive fight.

Judge whatever. There was no clear physical decline. You're full of **** saying you can see it. What i saw was a guy fighting his most skilled opponents and struggling compared to what he usually does because of that. If it was clear you'd have no problem presenting some evidence. I can't make you see something you lack the knowledge to see. What exact evidence can i produce? Either you can see it or you can't. I acknowledge that his level of opposition plays a part, but i thought he looked flat against dominic wade...so we can't say it's just about opposition. All I'm saying is there's other factors outside opposition alone...could be that he was on peds before...who knows.

No, I don't feel he's at his absolute peak as a fighter. Does that mean i think he's washed up?...no. People are taking this the wrong way, it's just something that should be brought into the discussion about the fight...nothing more. There seems to be a faction of haters that want to be able to say "told you so" when ggg takes a loss and are getting all wound up by the simple mention of ggg being 35. I personally thought he looked flat against dominic wade too...i made a thread about him being in decline after that fight....ggg fans accused me of being a hater. Hmmm I see, I think Canelo wins a razor close one because of the timing of the fight maximises his chances, he's getting better whereas Golovkin has peaked. A year ago I would have picked Golovkin by late stoppage or decision. If you thought Golovkin lost a step against Wade then I can't argue with your position as it's genuine but a lotta other posters have only recently taken that position alongside you leading to Canelo backers and other neutral posters dismissing you all in one group.

I don't know how you can see that considering Golovkin was never quick or athletic to begin with. You probably will look like you lost a step when you fight your best opponents..... if he had fought Dominic Wade in a rematch instead of Jacobs I doubt you'd be making this thread. Golovkin is past his physical prime most likely but his prime as a fighter? ..... we don't know and it doesn't help that he's fighting his 3 most accomplished and skilled opponents back to back to back. Golovkin being 35 is not the same as Roy Jones being 35.... Pacquaio being 37 or 38 is not the same as Marquez being 37 or 38. No, I don't feel he's at his absolute peak as a fighter. Does that mean i think he's washed up?...no. People are taking this the wrong way, it's just something that should be brought into the discussion about the fight...nothing more. There seems to be a faction of haters that want to be able to say "told you so" when ggg takes a loss and are getting all wound up by the simple mention of ggg being 35. I personally thought he looked flat against dominic wade too...i made a thread about him being in decline after that fight....ggg fans accused me of being a hater.

You can absolutely see with the naked eye. Go back and watch his fights vs proksa-stevens and then watch his last 3. If you tell me hasn't lost a step, then you're full of sh*t. You can't tell when a fighter isn't as sharp? Wtf do you look at when you watch fights? I don't know how you can see that considering Golovkin was never quick or athletic to begin with. You probably will look like you lost a step when you fight your best opponents..... if he had fought Dominic Wade in a rematch instead of Jacobs I doubt you'd be making this thread. Golovkin is past his physical prime most likely but his prime as a fighter? ..... we don't know and it doesn't help that he's fighting his 3 most accomplished and skilled opponents back to back to back. Golovkin being 35 is not the same as Roy Jones being 35.... Pacquaio being 37 or 38 is not the same as Marquez being 37 or 38.

You're full of ****, there was no clear decline in physical ability in the Brook and Jacobs fight. If there is it's thousandths of a second which no ****er would be able to see with the naked eye. It's usually noticeable with other fighters because you see it in the fights against the level of opponents, you can't see that with Golovkin because he didn't fight his best opponents until the last two fights. There's no measuring stick with in ring performance for Golovkin. Go ****ing measure and come back with the evidence. :dunce: Like i said...go look at the fights. Forget about the word measure, i can see you're hung up on it. I should have used judged or something like that. Anyway, I'm starting to see you don't know much about the sport. Why do you keep changing your name anyway?

No, just no. What you're suggesting, that he's still in prime, is completely arbitrary and is based off nothing but 'your eyes'. There is an insurmountable amount of physical and biological evidence that show the peak of human conditioning is in their 20s, and for some sports even younger. You can look at a million different things. Look at the average age of athletes in any physical sport. Look at the age of athletes who compete in the olympics. Look at virtually any boxer ever in the history of the sport. There are many athletes who claim fine victories in their mid 30s, for example Floyd beat Canelo, Kareem Abdul Jabbar had several excellent seasons in his late 30s, and many more. But nobody will ever claim that they were at their peak physical condition. They were more experienced, maybe they were smarter. But they were past their physical period. You can't argue biology. You can't argue biology, but you can certainly fight it. Proper diet and excercise can keep a man at or near their physical peak well in to the 40's. As far as why we rarely see athletes in their late 30's or early 40's has to do with the damage they take over the course of a career and little to do with what our bodies are actually capable of later in life. Flexibility, strength, stamina, reflexes, testosterone levels and on and on and on can all be maintained well past 30, if you live that life, like a GGG does. The only variables are how hard the older guy has to work for it, how much damage he has taken, and the older guys ability to keep up his desire deep into his career. Saying a 35 year old man is incapable of being in his physical prime is just flat out wrong. Sure if you hit 30 and don't put in the work, you slowly slide down an ever increasing decline. I keep beating the drum here, but again, with proper diet and excercise it does'nt have to be the case. With all that said. The only real measure we can give on a fighter is their performance. And like I said, I've seen nothing from GGG that would suggest he has lost a step.

You just said they can be measured, go fucking measure them then. Don't tell me you can see his decline in speed etc with your naked eye, you're full of shit if you do. You can absolutely see with the naked eye. Go back and watch his fights vs proksa-stevens and then watch his last 3. If you tell me hasn't lost a step, then you're full of sh*t. You can't tell when a fighter isn't as sharp? Wtf do you look at when you watch fights?

Go measure them and come back with the evidence. Go come back with evidence he's still in his prime...that's just as stupid. We're talking about things we observe, aren't we? Evidence...smh

He started better testing and fought higher caliber fighters:poke:... but it was the age only doe Just like i said in op...anyone who isn't on peds, and that doesn't exclude ggg.

We don't know if he's declining. We have nothing to compare the Brook and Jacobs fights with. They were the most skilled fighters he's ever fought. FIGHTERS DON'T USUALLY LOOK AS GOOD FIGHTING THE MOST SKILLED FIGHTERS THEY'VE EVER FOUGHT. You can't tell if a fighter is slower...has less snap on their punches...doesn't move as well...doesn't react as well...isn't quite as sharp? There are things that can be measured regardless of opposition...and there are things that come down to his opposition being better. I'm not completely dismissing his better opposition as a reason he looked flat, just like you shouldn't dismiss his age as another reason.

The human body completely recreates itself every 6 months! Bones, muscles and organs all have one goal in common? To be the absolute best they can be! they are always striving for a perfect Homeostasis! by breaking themselves down, and recreating themselves! (They this naturally, but when you train? you give your cells a stimulus to adapt to! Strive to become better etc)........But yes! the brain has the slowest cell turnover! hahaha! So technically you cannot compared Golovkin, to a Average Joe! The man is always in a constant state of training! if you look in other sports where tactics, and intricate skills don't play a big part in their performance! Athletes and more so Men have reached their absolute primes in the 30's! World records get broken all of the time in swimming, and cycling by athletes in their 30's! Track and field athletes like Linford Christie and Carl Lewis produced their prime performances over 100m in their 30's! Boxers more so than any other athletes in all sports, have bad habits! Very few boxers live like Olympic Athletes, far too many have the attitude of Sunday league football players for most of the year accept? when they are in training camp leading up to a fight! (Look at the state of fighters like Tyson Fury and billy Joe Saunders for example!)... Golovkin from what i have seen is always training, and more importantly? his body and bones seem to be made out of adamantium! (Golovkin does not really get injured! this is a big factor which can cut short many primes! At 35 if he can get through a immense training camp with no injuries, he still has the potential to be the best version of himself! Carl Froch stated that when he was 35/36 he was breaking all of his personal training records! Since the start of his boxing career he would document all of his training performance etc )...

Negative. As much as you post here, you haven't seen veteran posters say, "Canelo is waiting until he ages"? I think it's a 50/50 but we as fans need to stop d8cking around the obvious. Why else would they wait this long to fight GGG? I said it myself, but this "waiting til he gets old talk" has just been in the past year. Most in the last 6 months. It's not like this has been 5 years in the making. How is everyone cool with this a year ago, then he's too old a year later? When he's looking great, GG fans want to say he'll transcended age. He fights 1 good fighter and now there's a preemptive strike against Canelo getting any credit. Again, people are upset that it's now 50/50. They liked backing Golovkin when they we certain he'd win. For true boxing fans, 50/50 is as good as it gets.

Man, GG fans are freaking the fk out. Everyone was saying that GG would crush Nelo. Then Golovkin fights Jacobs and suddenly, "Remember, he's OLD!" Show some support for your guy. This is really a 50/50 fight. No need for excuses from either side. One is 35, the other is fighting a bigger guy for only the 2nd time. I remember posts saying how gg may be able to fight til he's 50 like Bernard since he's so fresh. Jacobs did a lot mental damage to these guys The same people who said Canelo was too scared and would never fight GGG, are the same ones who are now saying that their man is getting too old. :lol1: Can't say I didn't see this coming.

Golovkin is still going to batter Canelo. The fact is he's no longer in his prime. it's a fact of nature.

Man, GG fans are freaking the fk out. Everyone was saying that GG would crush Nelo. Then Golovkin fights Jacobs and suddenly, "Remember, he's OLD!" Show some support for your guy. This is really a 50/50 fight. No need for excuses from either side. One is 35, the other is fighting a bigger guy for only the 2nd time. Negative. As much as you post here, you haven't seen veteran posters say, "Canelo is waiting until he ages"? I think it's a 50/50 but we as fans need to stop d8cking around the obvious. Why else would they wait this long to fight GGG?

I don't really agree with this or anyone that is claiming GGG is'nt in his physical prime. Men hit their peak around 30 and at that point strength, and testosterone levels among other things all start to decline. So at face value you can make the argument that he is past prime. But that ignores the fact that with proper diet and training a man is capable of keeping at or near his physical prime well into the 40s. Now obviously you have to factor in the wear and tear that an athlete takes over their career and that will rob them of some of their prime years. Now GGG has a ton of amateur fights, but as a pro, for his age, he does'nt have a lot of fights. He also has'nt had any wars and relatively speaking has'nt taken a ton of damage. I've seen nothing to suggest that GGG has lost a step. Saying he is past it solely based on his age is rather arbitrary. No, just no. What you're suggesting, that he's still in prime, is completely arbitrary and is based off nothing but 'your eyes'. There is an insurmountable amount of physical and biological evidence that show the peak of human conditioning is in their 20s, and for some sports even younger. You can look at a million different things. Look at the average age of athletes in any physical sport. Look at the age of athletes who compete in the olympics. Look at virtually any boxer ever in the history of the sport. There are many athletes who claim fine victories in their mid 30s, for example Floyd beat Canelo, Kareem Abdul Jabbar had several excellent seasons in his late 30s, and many more. But nobody will ever claim that they were at their peak physical condition. They were more experienced, maybe they were smarter. But they were past their physical period. You can't argue biology.

I started to feel age hitting me around 33 or 34. Pianos started getting heavier, flights of stairs started getting 'longer', 14 or 15 hour moves started becoming harder, falls on wet ramps started to hurt, knees ached a little more a little longer. Running back and forth to the truck for hours started getting me more out of breath. I still could run circles around some of those young boys that weren't built for that kind of work, they just became slower circles around them, lol

No fighter that is 35 years old is in his prime. There's absolutely no way you can argue that. It's not about fanbases, agendas, haters, fanboys, or whatever. No matter who you are, a 35 year old is not in his prime. Not Floyd, not Foreman, not RJJ and not even BHop who continued fighting for 15 years more. Some styles/sizes age better than others - that is true. The more you rely on speed and reflexes the more vulnerable you are to age. George Foreman's style translated well into twilight of his career, while someone like David Haye is nowhere near the same fighter he was in his 20s. Lomachenko is going to be a shadow of his former self in 5 years, while Hopkins' crafty style survived well over the years. If this is about Canelo (which it looks like), then yeah, this fight will forever be tainted because Golden Boy waited for Golovkin to age - no matter who wins. The same arguments are made all the time about Floyd, Calzaghe and Marciano with different degrees of truth in each case. I don't really agree with this or anyone that is claiming GGG is'nt in his physical prime. Men hit their peak around 30 and at that point strength, and testosterone levels among other things all start to decline. So at face value you can make the argument that he is past prime. But that ignores the fact that with proper diet and training a man is capable of keeping at or near his physical prime well into the 40s. Now obviously you have to factor in the wear and tear that an athlete takes over their career and that will rob them of some of their prime years. Now GGG has a ton of amateur fights, but as a pro, for his age, he does'nt have a lot of fights. He also has'nt had any wars and relatively speaking has'nt taken a ton of damage. I've seen nothing to suggest that GGG has lost a step. Saying he is past it solely based on his age is rather arbitrary.

No fighter that is 35 years old is in his prime. There's absolutely no way you can argue that. It's not about fanbases, agendas, haters, fanboys, or whatever. No matter who you are, a 35 year old is not in his prime. Not Floyd, not Foreman, not RJJ and not even BHop who continued fighting for 15 years more. Some styles/sizes age better than others - that is true. The more you rely on speed and reflexes the more vulnerable you are to age. George Foreman's style translated well into twilight of his career, while someone like David Haye is nowhere near the same fighter he was in his 20s. Lomachenko is going to be a shadow of his former self in 5 years, while Hopkins' crafty style survived well over the years. If this is about Canelo (which it looks like), then yeah, this fight will forever be tainted because Golden Boy waited for Golovkin to age - no matter who wins. The same arguments are made all the time about Floyd, Calzaghe and Marciano with different degrees of truth in each case.What you're saying doesn't make much sense. If speed and reflexes go first with age, then Golovkin should be fine because he's always been slow. But then, When we look at Mayweather, he was arguably the most spectacular when he was around the 35 age mark. For example, he beat Canelo when he was 36. And everyone who says Canelo waited for Golovkin to age is a biased Golovkin fan. Are people not realizing that Canelo himself has yet to even hit his own prime? Fighters tend to peak at 30, because at that age your physical ability is still there with the culmination of your skill and experience all coming together in harmony. Canelo is 26!! The age difference between GGG and Canelo was always going to be a problem and let's not forget who needs who. The fact that this fight is going to happen at all only speaks to Canelo's heart as a fighter. GGG should be lucky he's only 35.