Did GGG Have 1 of the Greatest Careers a Fighter Can Wish For?

[Elheath]

Gold in Worlds and a Silver medal in the Olympics as an amateur, then 42-2-1 as a professional. Was a unified middleweight champion and made great money that will feed his family tree for generations to come.

He certainly had a great career overall, and 99.9% of professional boxers will be extremely happy to have anything similar to it. But not even remotely close to greatest even if within just middleweight, let alone historically all time. A greatest career a fighter can wish for is one that has people talking about in comparison to historical ATG.

[Kannabis Kid]

For a guy who spends so little time on this site, you sure spend a lot of time digging up meaningless comments I don't even notice. Who is Zanzibar? Teaming up with other guys, eh? Isn't that what you accused of? Sweet irony.

So when is your next trip across the border for oranges? I might need you to pick some up for me.

I don't have to dig up anything it's all there to be seen and clearly you do notice haha otherwise you wouldn't even mention it. If you understood English or passed 3rd grade you would understand very easily.

[BlackRobb]

I don't have to dig up anything it's all there to be seen and clearly you do notice haha otherwise you wouldn't even mention it. If you understood English or passed 3rd grade you would understand very easily.

Gone for 3 weeks again. How was drug rehab?

[Lance98]

Greatest career one can wish for? Like what? Lying to casual fans and ducking fighters that are legit threats? He never had a big career defining win and lost when he stepped up to face canelo. His other so-called wins are fights that he arguably lost (jacobs, derevyanchenko) or looked bad (kell brook). He is not an ATG middleweight like marvin hagler. He is just a mediocre hype job that failed to deliver. I don't even think he that is a hall of fame material.

[Kannabis Kid]

Gone for 3 weeks again. How was drug rehab?

3 weeks? You mean like when you went silent in the DM and didn't respond until 3 weeks later lmao after I called you out on it. Nothing will top that, you literally ran away just like you did the last time we both were online and I made you log off. All on record to be seen, I know you've missed your step father but sorry it's the holidays little guy and you are alone once again.

[BlackRobb]

3 weeks? You mean like when you went silent in the DM and didn't respond until 3 weeks later lmao after I called you out on it. Nothing will top that, you literally ran away just like you did the last time we both were online and I made you log off. All on record to be seen, I know you've missed your step father but sorry it's the holidays little guy and you are alone once again.

It takes you 3 weeks to respond on the thread, but you're whining when it takes me a week to respond to your feeble and g@y DMs.

[GrandpaBernard]

How can a career be great if it only contains 1 legit name ?!?!?!

How can a career be great without the fighter being all time great

[BodyBagz]

How can a career be great without the fighter being all time great

There are levels to greatness.
GGGeezer is, or should be, low on the list.

[daggum]

Greatest career one can wish for? Like what? Lying to casual fans and ducking fighters that are legit threats? He never had a big career defining win and lost when he stepped up to face canelo. His other so-called wins are fights that he arguably lost (jacobs, derevyanchenko) or looked bad (kell brook). He is not an ATG middleweight like marvin hagler. He is just a mediocre hype job that failed to deliver. I don't even think he that is a hall of fame material.

in another thread you just said how wilder was greater than ggg. so on one hand you think wilder was legit but on the other ggg was a fraud. these 2 very conflicting things shouldnt have been possible because your brain should have been able to fire and say "wait, the things im saying about ggg actually apply 100 percent to wilder." or "if ggg is a fraud wilder must be a fraud as well" but something in there blocked that and i wonder what it was. do you have anymore insight into your thought process? do you block out all negative truthful information that is about wilder and use cognitive dissonance? if so is it conscious or sub conscious? do you realize the truth and ignore it or do you avoid the truth entirely/spin it? and do you hyper focus on anything negative when it comes to ggg even if its just rampant speculation/not true? do you want things to be true that arent and when you accept untruths does that make you feel better and does this then establish a base on which to make fallacious arguments in the future? from the outside someone saying ggg is overrated and wilder was legit doesnt make a whole lot of sense given all the evidence so im just curious. theres a difference between someone saying he wasnt that good and having their own personal set of rules they apply to judge fighters but then 5 minutes later if that same person says wilder was way better than ggg it doesnt make a whole lot of logical sense and seems very arbitrary.

[Lance98]

in another thread you just said how wilder was greater than ggg. so on one hand you think wilder was legit but on the other ggg was a fraud. these 2 very conflicting things shouldnt have been possible because your brain should have been able to fire and say "wait, the things im saying about ggg actually apply 100 percent to wilder." or "if ggg is a fraud wilder must be a fraud as well" but something in there blocked that and i wonder what it was. do you have anymore insight into your thought process? do you block out all negative truthful information that is about wilder and use cognitive dissonance? if so is it conscious or sub conscious? do you realize the truth and ignore it or do you avoid the truth entirely/spin it? and do you hyper focus on anything negative when it comes to ggg even if its just rampant speculation/not true? do you want things to be true that arent and when you accept untruths does that make you feel better and does this then establish a base on which to make fallacious arguments in the future? from the outside someone saying ggg is overrated and wilder was legit doesnt make a whole lot of sense given all the evidence so im just curious. theres a difference between someone saying he wasnt that good and having their own personal set of rules they apply to judge fighters but then 5 minutes later if that same person says wilder was way better than ggg it doesnt make a whole lot of logical sense and seems very arbitrary.

ggg is a fraud, an actual one. Accept it and move on. He has no heart to challenge himself.