Gennady Golovkin vs. Curtis Stevens Predictions & Info

[Light_Speed]

Thanks for the vid.

[RubenSonny]

what did the other guys do, homie?

have you taken a look at the top 20 at MW in the last couple of months?

Seems like you are avoiding the question, other fighters have beat people that are atleast remotely relevant, Stevens hasn't. Either way this kind of defeats the point because you used the fact that he is top 10 to credit Golovkin but in this post you highlight the weakness of such a status. We both know it's all relative.

[Weebler I]

I can't think of a pressure fighter who looks good when retreating/on the back foot.

I actually think Ward fits the bill. He's not just a pressure fighter though, he can box on the backfoot too (which is for me what makes him the most complete boxer in the sport today).

It's just an inherent flaw of his style, he's coming to smash his opponent and isn't planning to take a step back because he has power that will make most fold. What should be done against a pressure fighter? freeze them with combinations and hard counters, make them take a step back and stop them from building momentum. Stevens was able to do it in spots, the challenge for future opponents will be to pull off the strategy throughout 12 rounds.

Imo boxing them on the backfoot with movement and defensive counter-punching is usually the best course of action against a pressure fighter but as I see it Golovkin is just too good at cutting off the ring meaning you have to fight fire with fire. As you say, Stevens managed it in parts.

[New England]

Please tell me where I implied any of what you said~

Looking bad and have flaws shown are two different things, someone better than Stevens could cause him real issues does that automatically make him lose no but Stevens is a fringe guy at best. Now could just anybody do it no but beating Stevens is nothing it was expected, I didn't expect him to have any issues in this fight at all because Steven's isn't on a world class level, I thought Golovkin would show more and he showed less, so there is some room to be critical here~

Or is saying he can't fuck with Andre Ward a big slight now

"There are guys much better than Stevens out there and it doesn't take that much to go from winning a fight like that to getting crushed."


who are these guys? middleweights that will crush golovkin?

[IronDanHamza]

you said yourself dan that you aren't very familiar with the top 10 of the division.

marco antonio rubio, andy lee, david lemieux are probably three of the hardest punchers not named golovkin or quillin. stevens is at the very least in the mix with those three. he hits harder than andy lee and rubio IMO by a long shot. rubio can **** a bit

lemieux might hit harder, but he's got a chin like a schoolboy.


stevens can punch, especially when compared to his peers. it's not like this is some division of great fighters. after golovkin, quillin, and "a healthy" martinez [whatever that means, the guy looked old against murray,] it drops the hell off.

I didn't say that I said I wasn't too sure on who I'd place in there instead fo Stevens. I'm sure with a little research there would be a handful with ahalf decent win on their record that would justify a Top 10 slot over Stevens.

Andy Lee's not a hard puncher.

A fighter should need to atleast hurt someone in the top 20 before being considered the 3rd hardest puncher in the division.

He can punch. Definitely not shown he can punch harder than all but two fighters at 160. We don't even know how his power would faze someone with a good chin other than we know it didn't faze Golovkin.

[kiaba360]

set traps in the middle of the ring. if you have a good jab, legs, and power, use them to stay in the middle of the ring. if you find yourself on the ropes you get low if you're short, or pull an ali if you're tall and grab them. then you move / pivot to the side or hold.



you do everything from the center of the ring.

clinching/smothering could also come in handy. Talking about strategy makes me realize exactly why I have no interest in GGG/Ward. Ward has the talent and the toolbox to neutralize him, hopefully HBO stays away from that match-up and continues to build him up as the new MW kingpin.

[The Gambler1981]

Precisely.

You can look bad against a poor opponent, it doesn't make the opponent good.

You can win every round and still look bad.

Take Pacquaio-Mosley as an example.

Pacquaio won every round. He looked bad though. And that didn't make Mosley good.

Golovkin didn't look bad though, overall he didn't look bad. Just showed some glaring flaws against a fighter who had no business being in the ring competing for a world title.

Exactly it is not like Stevens really did much in terms or winning the fight he was clearly losing most of the fight but the thing about boxing is you can be losing the fight even badly but still do some things right or the other guy do some things wrong.

Against a mediocre opponent that stuff only matters little to a quality guy, but those issues tend to pop up again and again then against someone either good enough or with just the right set of abilities they really get taken advantage of.

To me that is the real critical eye in boxing can you look through a win and see where there could be later issues, or through a lose an realize why another guy might not be able to take advantage even if the opponent appears similar.

I always try to learn something from a fight, so in this fight I expected Golovkin to dominate so I was looking at him closely. Now I considered this an easy test so I am perhaps grading very harshly but in my following of the sport that tends to be the more correct than being forgiving, given the harsh nature of the sport.

[New England]

Seems like you are avoiding the question, other fighters have beat people that are atleast remotely relevant, Stevens hasn't. Either way this kind of defeats the point because you used the fact that he is top 10 to credit Golovkin but in this post you highlight the weakness of such a status. We both know it's all relative.

my line of inquiry is not avoiding the question. we are ranking stevens. you've got to look at the top 20 to rank stevens among his peers. he was a top 9-15 fighter before tonight. it's an awful division. i don't care if you want to put gabe truax in front or behind him. it's meaningless.

[The Gambler1981]

"There are guys much better than Stevens out there and it doesn't take that much to go from winning a fight like that to getting crushed."


who are these guys? middleweights that will crush golovkin?

It doesn't take much to go from dominating a fighter the caliber of Stevens to loosing against a better guy.

I think Golovkin does just fine at 160 and would favor him over all the guys there but if he lost to a top guy the flaws that appeared tonight will play a large role in that.

[RubenSonny]

my line of inquiry is not avoiding the question. we are ranking stevens. you've got to look at the top 20 to rank stevens among his peers. he was a top 9-15 fighter before tonight. it's an awful division. i don't care if you want to put gabe truax in front or behind him. it's meaningless.

Okay then why would you use the fact that he is ranked in 'the top 10' to defend Golovkin?