is Golovkin a top all time 15 great at middleweight?

[ShoulderRoll]

I think this speaks to the differences people use in regards to criteria in evaluating.

You look at it in the way implied above, judging GGG by the fighters he has beat and citing who else could have beaten them. I would look at the MWs i have ranked 15th, 14th, 13th, etc all time, and think would i pick them to beat GGG?

Its the difference between evaluating the fighter and evaluating the resume. I am certain that many more people do it your way, and i will be derided for citing mine. But how i do it is the way i prefer.

Your way is fine too. But you are judging how good Golovkin is based on how he has looked against the opponents on his resume.

Could past middleweights look similarly as good against that lineup? I think so.

[DeeMoney]

Your way is fine too. But you are judging how good Golovkin is based on how he has looked against the opponents on his resume.

Could past middleweights look similarly as good against that lineup? I think so.

Agree wholeheartedly

[QueensburyRules]

I did warn you queenie now get back in your cage

- -Yesssss!

No doubt that this grade school caged criteria being used has majority dainties populating this forum all giggling like a gaggle of school girls.

As alluded by shoulder, there are a variety of criteria for ratings always in use that leads to so many disparate results that is beyond the capacity of the usual lowbrows to understand.

[Dr. Z]

Andre Ward raised his hand to fight him but Golovkin scuttled that by asking for a 164 lb catchweight.

That should also be noted by historians.

Why not 164 catchweight? It's not like Ward is going to be that weight on fight night.

IMO. Ward was a little lucky win the first fight vs Kovalev.

Most great middles, such as Hagler and Moon had there chances to move up to light heavy, they wisely chose to say at 160.

[Madison Boxing]

of course he is. one of the most dominant middleweights of all time and arguably never lost, he is an all time great whether people like it or not

[Marchegiano]

Never really focused on MW Not sure I can rattle off 10-15 names.

Not ranking, just trying to fill out a list:

McCoy
Ryan
Greb
Norfolk
Barbados Walcott
SRR
SRL
LaMotta
Emile
**** Tiger
Hopkins
Toney
Fitzs
NP Dempsey
Hagler
Flowers
Ketchel
Darcy


That said, sure, I could find a spot for 3G or Canelo probably. I can only think of 18 great MWs anyway.

[GhostofDempsey]

The arguments for or against GGG as a top 10, 15 or 20 all-time MW are often overlooked when ranking other modern day fighters. If we are going to hold it against GGG for requesting a catchweight against Ward then we have to hold that against other greats like Mayweather and Manny for their catchweight fights. Ward also offered to go to 160 for Mayweather but wouldn't go to 160 for GGG. Several fighters also avoided GGG.

I like watching GGG fight, but I think he is limited in terms of skill and making adjustments. He's fairly two-dimensional and isn't fighting in an era of other great middleweights. I agree he was robbed twice versus Canelo, but his next best win is Jacobs, a very narrow decision victory. There is a huge gap in "greatness" between Jacobs and MW's of prior eras. I can't see Jacobs defeating the best MW's of prior eras. At 160 I would pick RJJ, Toney, Nunn, Benn, McClellan, for the win, and that's just one decade of fighter's where speaking of, and it looks pretty much the same as we go back further to Hagler, Hearns, Leonard, and decades prior. I can't convince myself that GGG would do any better against the ATG's of prior eras.

[kafkod]

Golovkin's defenses of the WBA "regular" title shouldn't count towards any record.

Similar to how Canelo couldn't be considered a world champion at 168 for winning Rocky Fielding's "regular" title. It wasn't until this past weekend that Alvarez became a legit 4 division champion.

Boxing historians should, and will, look at that.

The WBA super title awarded to Felix Sturm - who didn't fulfill the requirements to be a super champ until the WBA were bribed to alter them especially for him - was a sham, paper title created only to allow Sturm to avoid a mandatory defence vs Golovkin.

Golovkin was the WBA MW champion right from the start of his reign. Sturm was a paper champion.

[DeeMoney]

Never really focused on MW Not sure I can rattle off 10-15 names.

Not ranking, just trying to fill out a list:

McCoy
Ryan
Greb
Norfolk
Barbados Walcott
SRR
SRL
LaMotta
Emile
**** Tiger
Hopkins
Toney
Fitzs
NP Dempsey
Hagler
Flowers
Ketchel
Darcy


That said, sure, I could find a spot for 3G or Canelo probably. I can only think of 18 great MWs anyway.

Heres the thing I have with ranking SRL as a MW; he only really fought 2 fights as a 160 lb MW (Hagler and Camacho). I am sure he could have been an ATG MW, but how much work do we need from a fighter at a class before we rate them there.

Also Barbados Walcott was a Welter and Norfolk was a LHW/HW. I think they fit in the same description. COULDVE been great at MW, but werent really MWs

[Marchegiano]

Heres the thing I have with ranking SRL as a MW; he only really fought 2 fights as a 160 lb MW (Hagler and Camacho). I am sure he could have been an ATG MW, but how much work do we need from a fighter at a class before we rate them there.

Also Barbados Walcott was a Welter and Norfolk was a LHW/HW. I think they fit in the same description. COULDVE been great at MW, but werent really MWs

I'd figured I'd be off in spots. I really need to brush up on sub-heavy fighters. If they didn't do much in HW I probably don't know them as well as I should.

Hagler, Hearns, and Leonard I've been "getting around to" for like a decade.