Why aren't people keeping the same energy for Charlo-Cota as they were for GGG-Vanes?

there were some fans who tried to justify it by saying vanes knocked down Andrade, they were saying how tough he was... a lot were condemning it as well... I'm not that into the back n forth to go find the post but they exist... you may have had some extreme geeGG haters who kept complaining about it but what can him and charlo do but fight the replacement? only so much complaining we can do... I get the fanbase back n forths, they are fun but after a while it gets to be annoying. I hear ya man, completely agree for the most part. We are all going to have our favorites as far as who we root for, but I wish most on here kept it a little more real with the analysis of fights/fighters. I think it would be a much better community on here if that were the case. That goes for basically every group not just one. Would love to just get on here and purely talk boxing but unfortunately that doesn't always happen. Good post man.

Can you find a post where any GGG fan was saying Vanes-GGG was a great fight? Seemed at best they were saying it was a good replacement on short notice. I can definitely point out posts though where fans were giving GGG grief for this fight, while none seem to be having the same energy for Charlo. No one seems to be saying that Charlo should postpone the original date to fight Hurd, Lara etc... there were some fans who tried to justify it by saying vanes knocked down Andrade, they were saying how tough he was... a lot were condemning it as well... I'm not that into the back n forth to go find the post but they exist... you may have had some extreme geeGG haters who kept complaining about it but what can him and charlo do but fight the replacement? only so much complaining we can do... I get the fanbase back n forths, they are fun but after a while it gets to be annoying.

thisssssssss!!!!!!!! Can you find a post where any GGG fan was saying Vanes-GGG was a great fight? Seemed at best they were saying it was a good replacement on short notice. I can definitely point out posts though where fans were giving GGG grief for this fight, while none seem to be having the same energy for Charlo. No one seems to be saying that Charlo should postpone the original date to fight Hurd, Lara etc...

No dude the hate was because Vanes was a sh-t opponent at 160 for GGG. Your unwillingness to admit that is 95% of the problem. The other 5% is the attempted justification of him as a viable opponent. It was a bad choice regardless of the context and circumstances. We understand why the choice was made-to ensure a win so the Canelo rematch wasn't hurt-but that mitigates the choice only a bit. In the end a guy who was a top 2 MW in the world chose an opponent coming off a 2 year layoff whose last fight was a loss at 154. Unacceptable. Notice how Cota is also coming off a loss and no one is trying to make him seem anything but a bum. Again I think you're going way overboard on the dismissing of Vanes. He was always levels above Cota. No one ever embarrassed him in the ring, and he was in there with multiple guys of a similar level to GGG. With all due respect, I have said many times that it was not an ideal fight for GGG, but on short notice it wasn't that bad. I have admitted the areas where Vanes was not an ideal opponent (weight, 2 year inactivity) and you seem intent on refusing to point out his good attributes (always fought well at the top level, no one ever KOd or completely outclassed him in the ring). I just try to call it like I see it man - Vanes was never a bad fighter and was always a top guy at 154. Moving up in weight on short notice after 2 years inactive was not ideal at all, but he looked fine in the ring to me, and many people gave him round 1 vs GGG, indicating he looked fine. GGG stopped him impressively in round 2. Good win for GGG considering the style in which he won - compare to say how Charlo looked against a similar fighter in Korobov for example. My overall point is/was that anyone coming in on short notice will be seen as 'unacceptable' to some people. For me, when a guy has to take on a short notice replacement I don't really blame the guy whose opponent pissed dirty or got injured. Take the stay busy fight and then fight again quickly against a big name. GGG did that and I assume Charlo will as well.

I just disagree about Vanes - again any time he stepped up against top competition he basically fought to a draw, and he did so many times - Andrade, Charlo, Lara (2) etc. If he was stopped badly his last few fights I would agree it was a really bad pick. In the moment I don't think it was that bad at all. Certainly better than Spike O'Sullivan etc. I think a lot of the hate on Vanes now is driven from the fact that many do not like GGG and are looking for any reason possible to give him some sh.it. People do the same thing to Wilder on here sometimes - saying Ortiz is now 50 years old etc, when going in many thought Wilder would lose. From a neutral perspective those are my 2 cents there. Again worth pointing out Vanes did win the first round against GGG on many cards, and as someone who remembers watching him in his first fight vs Lara, he looked the same as he has always looked to me. If he came in fat and gassed late, or looked shot I would give my opinion that he looked bad, but I didn't see that. As I said before, a guy coming up from 154 and 2 years inactive was certainly not an ideal opponent for GGG so in that way it wasn't a great matchup. And you say coming off a loss - I say he fought he really close fight with Lara (who I love) and most people on here would have loved to see Lara fight GGG. If Vanes was completely destroyed by Lara in that fight it would have been a completely sh.it fight with GGG, but overall going in it wasn't that bad, not on short notice. I do agree that anyone willing to take the fight on a month's notice will in general be a guy who is a lighter touch - most guys who really feel they can win will probably want a full camp and/or to negotiate a good split money wise. For Vanes' case he was inactive so he jumped at the opportunity to get a shot like that, even if it was above his pay-grade. I don't think he was shot though and I think people have always rated him as a top fighter. The moving up in weight and style matchup with GGG was not in his favor imo, but otherwise he looked fine. He just fights too aggressive against someone like GGG who will KO you if you can't back him up, or if you aren't trying to move a lot around the ring. Thanks for your thoughts though man, good post. No dude the hate was because Vanes was a sh-t opponent at 160 for GGG. Your unwillingness to admit that is 95% of the problem. The other 5% is the attempted justification of him as a viable opponent. It was a bad choice regardless of the context and circumstances. We understand why the choice was made-to ensure a win so the Canelo rematch wasn't hurt-but that mitigates the choice only a bit. In the end a guy who was a top 2 MW in the world chose an opponent coming off a 2 year layoff whose last fight was a loss at 154. Unacceptable. Notice how Cota is also coming off a loss and no one is trying to make him seem anything but a bum.

The fight was just announced a few hours ago. Can you point me to the post where people are calling Charlo-Cota a good fight like GGG Stan’s were saying about GGG-Vanes? thisssssssss!!!!!!!!

Dude Vanes wasn't a legit opponent. He was coming off a loss at 154. Opinions like that from GGG fans are insane and drove all the backlash. If you admitted Vanes was a trash opponent picked to ensure a win so the the Canelo rematch wouldn't get derailed, then other posters wouldn't be so irate and respond the way they did. As for #3, my point is People just saw a huge upset and are prisoners of the moment. Rather than crap on Cota continuously many are hoping he can pull off a similar upset. In the case of GGG/Vanes there was no recent upset and no one believed such a weak opponent coming up from 154 had any chance. I just disagree about Vanes - again any time he stepped up against top competition he basically fought to a draw, and he did so many times - Andrade, Charlo, Lara (2) etc. If he was stopped badly his last few fights I would agree it was a really bad pick. In the moment I don't think it was that bad at all. Certainly better than Spike O'Sullivan etc. I think a lot of the hate on Vanes now is driven from the fact that many do not like GGG and are looking for any reason possible to give him some sh.it. People do the same thing to Wilder on here sometimes - saying Ortiz is now 50 years old etc, when going in many thought Wilder would lose. From a neutral perspective those are my 2 cents there. Again worth pointing out Vanes did win the first round against GGG on many cards, and as someone who remembers watching him in his first fight vs Lara, he looked the same as he has always looked to me. If he came in fat and gassed late, or looked shot I would give my opinion that he looked bad, but I didn't see that. As I said before, a guy coming up from 154 and 2 years inactive was certainly not an ideal opponent for GGG so in that way it wasn't a great matchup. And you say coming off a loss - I say he fought he really close fight with Lara (who I love) and most people on here would have loved to see Lara fight GGG. If Vanes was completely destroyed by Lara in that fight it would have been a completely sh.it fight with GGG, but overall going in it wasn't that bad, not on short notice. I do agree that anyone willing to take the fight on a month's notice will in general be a guy who is a lighter touch - most guys who really feel they can win will probably want a full camp and/or to negotiate a good split money wise. For Vanes' case he was inactive so he jumped at the opportunity to get a shot like that, even if it was above his pay-grade. I don't think he was shot though and I think people have always rated him as a top fighter. The moving up in weight and style matchup with GGG was not in his favor imo, but otherwise he looked fine. He just fights too aggressive against someone like GGG who will KO you if you can't back him up, or if you aren't trying to move a lot around the ring. Thanks for your thoughts though man, good post.

Why lie though? He never turned him down. Dervy couldn't fight on that original date, everyone knows that. As I mentioned previously, to postpone that fight through no fault of GGG's own and also further push back the Canelo rematch would just be a bad decision all around and one that GGG shouldn't make as he wasn't in the wrong here. And again - Vanes is miles better than Cota. Vanes competed solidly against anyone he was ever in with, and many gave him the first round against GGG (though many people who hate GGG try and give his opponent every possible round lol), so hard to say he looked shot in there. He just got ran over by a truck. That's one of GGG's best qualities - if you aren't able to compete physically with him, he gets you out of there. Yeah sadly I think you're right. Many of them actually seem to think they are being intellectually honest though; it's strange. He was actually vacated when he decided to fight Canelo, instead of Dervy, after Vanes. Question - how would you feel if the WBO or whatever belt Harrison has, says Charlo needs to fight Hurd before Harrison again? Is Charlo ducking if he decides to go through with Cota on the original fight date, instead of postponing his original date/training to set up a later fight with Hurd? Better yet - how did you feel when the IBF told Canelo he had to face Dervy next? Seemed like many Canelo fans were very much against that. Many similarities. They were pointed out by me and others as well. Not very hard to understand my friend. Lol probably the best argument here, can't argue with you. You seem like an unbiased guy, I like it. Thanks for the post man. I do think Vanes was a legit opponent. He looked fine in there in the ring to me as well, and many people gave him the first round. He is certainly miles better than Cota as Vanes proved many times he could compete at the top level. I agree that 2 years inactive and moving up a weight class is not an ideal opponent there though. But yeah I do think he was solid enough on short notice. Good point about number 2 as well - especially as another guy pointed out, Charlo isn't as big of a name as GGG right now anyway, so easier for him to get overshadowed. I don't completely follow number 3 or where you were going with that - but everyone is always hoping the new hope(s) can beat their least favorite fighters. I personally don't have an issue with a Cota as Charlo's replacement on short notice - it wasn't his fault. And as you alluded to, putting in a different, tough opponent on short notice is always dangerous. Also true that Ruiz was a huge dog as you mentioned - but when he stepped up against Parker he didn't do much worse than AJ did against him, so in hindsight maybe it was a tougher fight than we all realized. Cota has shown every time he stepped up to even B level fighters, he gets stopped. But again I don't have an issue with the fight at all, wasn't Charlo's fault. Just feel like if people kept it real they would keep very similar energy about the two fights since they are very similar circumstances - my 2 cents. Dude Vanes wasn't a legit opponent. He was coming off a loss at 154. Opinions like that from GGG fans are insane and drove all the backlash. If you admitted Vanes was a trash opponent picked to ensure a win so the the Canelo rematch wouldn't get derailed, then other posters wouldn't be so irate and respond the way they did. As for #3, my point is People just saw a huge upset and are prisoners of the moment. Rather than crap on Cota continuously many are hoping he can pull off a similar upset. In the case of GGG/Vanes there was no recent upset and no one believed such a weak opponent coming up from 154 had any chance.

what a stupid thread,GGG turned down his mando and chose Vanes who hadnt fought in 2 years Why lie though? He never turned him down. Dervy couldn't fight on that original date, everyone knows that. As I mentioned previously, to postpone that fight through no fault of GGG's own and also further push back the Canelo rematch would just be a bad decision all around and one that GGG shouldn't make as he wasn't in the wrong here. And again - Vanes is miles better than Cota. Vanes competed solidly against anyone he was ever in with, and many gave him the first round against GGG (though many people who hate GGG try and give his opponent every possible round lol), so hard to say he looked shot in there. He just got ran over by a truck. That's one of GGG's best qualities - if you aren't able to compete physically with him, he gets you out of there. Because haters here are racist against Golovkin. Yeah sadly I think you're right. Many of them actually seem to think they are being intellectually honest though; it's strange. GGG vacated the IBF for Vanes. Charlo vacated a belt for Harrison or Cota? Not even the same circumstances to begin with. He was actually vacated when he decided to fight Canelo, instead of Dervy, after Vanes. Question - how would you feel if the WBO or whatever belt Harrison has, says Charlo needs to fight Hurd before Harrison again? Is Charlo ducking if he decides to go through with Cota on the original fight date, instead of postponing his original date/training to set up a later fight with Hurd? Better yet - how did you feel when the IBF told Canelo he had to face Dervy next? Seemed like many Canelo fans were very much against that. This fanboy thread is pretty disgusting. Not the same by any backward twisting of the mind. Many similarities. They were pointed out by me and others as well. Not very hard to understand my friend. people cared about gggg, only 4 people care about Charlo Lol probably the best argument here, can't argue with you. You seem like an unbiased guy, I like it. 3 reasons: 1. everyone agrees Charlo/Cota is garbage while GGG fans tried to pretend Vanes was a legit opponent. 2. The news of Tony's ankle and Cota being named as replacement was overshadowed by Ruiz beating AJ this weekend. 3. Ruiz, a huge underdog, just pulled off a massive upset. the people that hate PBC fighters have been posting about hoping for the same thing while acknowledging what I posted in post #1. Thanks for the post man. I do think Vanes was a legit opponent. He looked fine in there in the ring to me as well, and many people gave him the first round. He is certainly miles better than Cota as Vanes proved many times he could compete at the top level. I agree that 2 years inactive and moving up a weight class is not an ideal opponent there though. But yeah I do think he was solid enough on short notice. Good point about number 2 as well - especially as another guy pointed out, Charlo isn't as big of a name as GGG right now anyway, so easier for him to get overshadowed. I don't completely follow number 3 or where you were going with that - but everyone is always hoping the new hope(s) can beat their least favorite fighters. I personally don't have an issue with a Cota as Charlo's replacement on short notice - it wasn't his fault. And as you alluded to, putting in a different, tough opponent on short notice is always dangerous. Also true that Ruiz was a huge dog as you mentioned - but when he stepped up against Parker he didn't do much worse than AJ did against him, so in hindsight maybe it was a tougher fight than we all realized. Cota has shown every time he stepped up to even B level fighters, he gets stopped. But again I don't have an issue with the fight at all, wasn't Charlo's fault. Just feel like if people kept it real they would keep very similar energy about the two fights since they are very similar circumstances - my 2 cents.

That was an obvious typo. But I never graduated from high school. I'm not common sense & street smarts than book smarts. And that has led me to lead a pretty comfortable life. Especially considering where I came from. Yes, I am smarter than most people hear. What I know can't be taught by memorizing words in a book. That's what sheep do. Hey man good for you, sincerely. I think you'd do a lot better on here if you were less tribal and more of a real boxing fan, but to each his own.

Because Charlo isnt fighting ANYBODY good, let alone a grudge rematch for all the belts, after he destroys Cota.

GGG-Vanes GGG's opponent has to back out of the fight a month before the fight. GGG takes a late replacement to keep the fight date. Charlo-Harrison Charlo's opponent has to back out of the fight 3 weeks before the fight. Charlo takes on Cota as Harrison's replacement. Not to mention that Vanes is a couple levels above Cota. Everyone seems to be in agreement that Cota-Charlo is a bad fight. But no one is getting on Charlo for this fight, like some people on here were getting on GGG for the Vanes fight. Can someone break it down for me why that is? Seems a little hypocritical, like some people almost have a clear bias for or against some fighters and don't treat them equally. Strange. 3 reasons: 1. everyone agrees Charlo/Cota is garbage while GGG fans tried to pretend Vanes was a legit opponent. 2. The news of Tony's ankle and Cota being named as replacement was overshadowed by Ruiz beating AJ this weekend. 3. Ruiz, a huge underdog, just pulled off a massive upset. the people that hate PBC fighters have been posting about hoping for the same thing while acknowledging what I posted in post #1.

This fanboy thread is pretty disgusting. Not the same by any backward twisting of the mind.

Because haters here are racist against Golovkin.

what a stupid thread,GGG turned down his mando and chose Vanes who hadnt fought in 2 years

I didn't know your was the guy trying to convince us GGG/Rolls is a good fight. If I had known that I never would've posted in this thread Btw - if I had known you were a guy who doesn't know it should be 'you were' instead of 'you was', I would never take your opinion about boxing, or anything else, seriously at all. And I did know that, so I never have taken you seriously lol. I mean how can you try and claim to be smarter than someone and you can't even get that right? My 8 year old is learning you're and your right now and still knows how to get 'you were' right every time lol. Internet allows for a lot of bragging without the shame that you should feel for comments like that lol.

I didn't even know Harrison was out... damn, that sucks. I've never heard of the guy he's fighting but who's he gonna fight on 3 weeks notice? Makes no difference to me.... I agree...and as long as you had a similar opinion on GGG Vanes then you get my 'real fan' badge...which is basically one green K lol

I didn't even know Harrison was out... damn, that sucks. I've never heard of the guy he's fighting but who's he gonna fight on 3 weeks notice? Makes no difference to me....

I didn't know your was the guy trying to convince us GGG/Rolls is a good fight. If I had known that I never would've posted in this thread Btw - again - let's see your answer here; giving you a chance to prove you are a real boxing fan and not a troll: 'Also - so if a guy drops a belt rather than face a mandatory, and actually claims it is for money reasons as that fight won't sell, would you rake that guy over the coals worse than you do with GGG?'

I didn't know your was the guy trying to convince us GGG/Rolls is a good fight. If I had known that I never would've posted in this thread Lol - Find the post where I said that was a good fight. Not trying to be rude man but this is why most people on this site don't like you or take you seriously. You can't win arguments on the merits a lot of the time so you twist words around and shift goal posts. Actually trying to help you out. I can tell posting on this forum is a big part of your life and I think you would get a lot more satisfaction from it if you became more of a boxing fan and had less of your self-worth tied up in certain fighters winning or losing.