Comments Thread For: Stevens Views Golovkin As An Overrated 'Hype Job'

[{Pito}]

Dray435 wont be showing up for a while.

[dray435]

Dray435 wont be showing up for a while.

Wont be showing up? I'm right here, I am even less impressed with golovkin now he had curtis out early in the fight and still couldn't finish him, he had a man in front of him who did not come to fight or win, it's like stevens was ready to quit around the six rd, golovkin couldn't even ko a fighter who was putting up very little offense and who he had out cold early in the fight, it is obvious stevens needs some more experience and was to green, when he couldn't land his big left hook because golovkin kept his right glove plastered to his face stevens was ready to quit it appeared.

He didn't work the body he even had golovkin in full retreat in a few of those rds and still couldn't put enough punches together to the head and body to to break golovkin down, it is obvious that stevens is a green fighter with nothing but a left hook and nothing else, a fighter that golovkin had out cold early from a temple punch I might add but he still couldn't get rid of the kid. Golovkin is hype I'm more convinced of it now than ever, and he will be exposed as soon as they pair him against the right fighter, unfortunately there are very few decent fighters in the MW division, so he may be reigning for a while I'd like to see how he does against quillin though, and I don't think he beats martinez I think he gets outboxed over 12 rds.

[dray435]

I guess you missed the part when I said that Hagler was one of the last of the old school fighters. And how do I know if all those fights did or didn't erode the skills of those fighters? I don't honestly know. But as they say the proof is in the pudding. With that said they all were pretty dominant champions. So that tells me that they were not past their respective primes and far from washed up, to include the Marvelous One.

There is also no doubt that the Hagler that fought Antuofermo was not the same one that fought Leonard. After all there was seventeen fights and eights years that separate the two fights. However, the real reason he may have looked much better earlier in his career was more likely due to the level of his competition at the time then anything else.

As for what Sugar Ray said about Hagler this is what I witnessed. I watched Hagler dominate the number one contender and knock him out. I believe Mugabi had only won two rounds when he was stopped. And the fight before that Hagler destroyed Thomas Hearns. So once again Hagler didn't seem to be to past his prime or washed up when he was still able to pull those amazing feats off.

As far as the announcers talking up the house fighters I agree it happens. But Gil Clancy didn't say anything out of line during the Mugabi fight and he was right on with what he said during the Leonard fight. Gil kept repeating over and over again that he did not understand why Hagler was fighting orthodox for the first half of the fight. And I agree with Gil that it cost Hagler the fight. With that said, the lose had more to do with Marvin fighting the wrong fight then anything about him being a shell of his former self. I also believe that Ray surprised many with what he had left in the tank. But again that is only my opinion and I still don't believe Ray did enough to win. I also have to admit that I am pretty biased when comes to Hagler.

As far as the health thing is concerned I am not sure what to say about that. But didn't you say I was presumptuous earlier? I believe it is slightly presumptuous of you to make such a bold statement. Simply because of all the advancements with vitamins and medications to practicing medicine,to include plastic and cosmetic surgery, I believe we are way better off health wise then people were back in 1940's. Regardless of how many steroids our cows may be eating.

That is why we have Bhop doing what he is doing at 48 years of age and Vitali at 42 or any other of the numerous fighters that are fighting at an elite level way past the expiration dates of the careers of their counterparts from the past. But than again maybe you were right all along. And it is simply because they don't suffer the wear and tear of a long career like that of the fighters from the past.

In closing I still think you are blowing the Hagler thing way out of proportion and I also believe you are being overly dramatic in the process. By the way you were totally off the mark with how GGG would do tonight. So what now? Are you going to go off on us and explain how great Carlos Monzon was at middleweight and how GGG would have never beaten him?

I thought you and others would wait on the outcome of the stevens vs golovkin fight to start voicing your opinions, but what was I off the mark about? I said if stevens could take his punch and land his own he had a chance of winning, stevens did neither he was hurt early and couldn't land his left hook because golovkin kept his right plastered to the side of his face and stevens appeared to want to quit when he couldn't get golovkin out of there early, but it was far from an impressive performance by golovkin having a wounded, green, clueless fighter in front of him but still was unable to get him out of there is proof positive that he doesn't know how to exploit golden opportunities when giving to him on a platter. Golovkin is skill deficient and just a very limited fighter himself he does not have an impressive or exceptional offense or defense which means he is just a decent fighter even his power is obviously overrated. The fact that other fighters perform well now does not mean that they didn't perform better in their earlier years in terms of speed, mobility, timing, etc, it is a proven scientific fact that the more a fighter ages and takes punishment the more there skills and abilities begin to decline, not even the medical and scientific community disagrees with that point.

And haglers mobility and quickness was obvious in his earlier years and I doubt the fact that his competition was not quite as good then dictates whether he was faster or slower, if your fast you're fast, if you're slow you're slow, it doesn't matter who you have in front of you and being a fan of marvins I know based on years of observation that the problem in the leonard fight was not just the fact that he was fighting in the orthodox stance which I believe hagler did only because he second guessed ray thinking that ray would be prepared for the southpaw stance so he did it to throw leonard off of his game but I agree it was the wrong strategy, but an obvious erosion of skill was the primary problem, I know the prime hagler and that fighter that fought leonard was not him, I don't know who that hagler was really but he certainly wasn't the fighter who beat sibson, or even hearns for that matter, leonard on the other hand was well rested and rejuvinated and actually engaged in mock fights for over a year in preparation for hagler.

And are you serious suggesting we are better off now then we were 60-70 years ago in terms of health? We may have made scientific and medical advances in this age but the environment is more polluted now than it has ever been the seas and oceans are full of toxic waste as well as the land, and the air is polluted and we breathe it in every day, drink it every day, and eat toxins and harmful substances in our food every day, most of those toxins are consumed by us through a polluted water supply and food chain, cattle are full of hormones, fish are full of mercury, etc, and that has a terrible impact on our overall health as a society, yes we have made advances in science and medicine but we are steadily declining in terms of environmental health and safety, something that has much more of a negative impact on the human population than almost anything else, a few advances in medicine here and there wont change that destructive fact and truth. Bernard Hopkins is the exception to the rule although I believe his longevity has more to do with his defensive style in that he knows how to fight with out taking to much punishment and he knows how to pick the right fighters to look good against most of his competition are b level fighters who are one dimensional and bernard simply knows how to exploit those flaws and lack of skill to make himself look better than he really is, although I still believe he is a great fighter because of what he has accomplished. Of course monzon would beat golovkin are you kidding me? please stop compairing this guy to all time greats he is exhibiting none of the intangibles of a great fighter being so limited in so many respects, he shouldn't be spoken of in the same sentence and based on what I am seeing he never will be, but he is an okay fighter.

[HeroBando]

Wont be showing up? I'm right here, I am even less impressed with golovkin now he had curtis out early in the fight and still couldn't finish him, he had a man in front of him who did not come to fight or win, it's like stevens was ready to quit around the six rd, golovkin couldn't even ko a fighter who was putting up very little offense and who he had out cold early in the fight, it is obvious stevens needs some more experience and was to green, when he couldn't land his big left hook because golovkin kept his right glove plastered to his face stevens was ready to quit it appeared.

He didn't work the body he even had golovkin in full retreat in a few of those rds and still couldn't put enough punches together to the head and body to to break golovkin down, it is obvious that stevens is a green fighter with nothing but a left hook and nothing else, a fighter that golovkin had out cold early from a temple punch I might add but he still couldn't get rid of the kid. Golovkin is hype I'm more convinced of it now than ever, and he will be exposed as soon as they pair him against the right fighter, unfortunately there are very few decent fighters in the MW division, so he may be reigning for a while I'd like to see how he does against quillin though, and I don't think he beats martinez I think he gets outboxed over 12 rds.

How can you be less impressed? You had Stevens stopping him, and he got demolished. Those guys you think would beat him will not even stepping the ring with him

[LeG00N]

I am even less impressed with golovkin now

[thuggery]

That dray435 kid is on suicide watch

[KaL-EL]

I thought you and others would wait on the outcome of the stevens vs golovkin fight to start voicing your opinions, but what was I off the mark about? I said if stevens could take his punch and land his own he had a chance of winning, stevens did neither he was hurt early and couldn't land his left hook because golovkin kept his right plastered to the side of his face and stevens appeared to want to quit when he couldn't get golovkin out of there early, but it was far from an impressive performance by golovkin having a wounded, green, clueless fighter in front of him but still was unable to get him out of there is proof positive that he doesn't know how to exploit golden opportunities when giving to him on a platter. Golovkin is skill deficient and just a very limited fighter himself he does not have an impressive or exceptional offense or defense which means he is just a decent fighter even his power is obviously overrated. The fact that other fighters perform well now does not mean that they didn't perform better in their earlier years in terms of speed, mobility, timing, etc, it is a proven scientific fact that the more a fighter ages and takes punishment the more there skills and abilities begin to decline, not even the medical and scientific community disagrees with that point.

And haglers mobility and quickness was obvious in his earlier years and I doubt the fact that his competition was not quite as good then dictates whether he was faster or slower, if your fast you're fast, if you're slow you're slow, it doesn't matter who you have in front of you and being a fan of marvins I know based on years of observation that the problem in the leonard fight was not just the fact that he was fighting in the orthodox stance which I believe hagler did only because he second guessed ray thinking that ray would be prepared for the southpaw stance so he did it to throw leonard off of his game but I agree it was the wrong strategy, but an obvious erosion of skill was the primary problem, I know the prime hagler and that fighter that fought leonard was not him, I don't know who that hagler was really but he certainly wasn't the fighter who beat sibson, or even hearns for that matter, leonard on the other hand was well rested and rejuvinated and actually engaged in mock fights for over a year in preparation for hagler.

And are you serious suggesting we are better off now then we were 60-70 years ago in terms of health? We may have made scientific and medical advances in this age but the environment is more polluted now than it has ever been the seas and oceans are full of toxic waste as well as the land, and the air is polluted and we breathe it in every day, drink it every day, and eat toxins and harmful substances in our food every day, most of those toxins are consumed by us through a polluted water supply and food chain, cattle are full of hormones, fish are full of mercury, etc, and that has a terrible impact on our overall health as a society, yes we have made advances in science and medicine but we are steadily declining in terms of environmental health and safety, something that has much more of a negative impact on the human population than almost anything else, a few advances in medicine here and there wont change that destructive fact and truth. Bernard Hopkins is the exception to the rule although I believe his longevity has more to do with his defensive style in that he knows how to fight with out taking to much punishment and he knows how to pick the right fighters to look good against most of his competition are b level fighters who are one dimensional and bernard simply knows how to exploit those flaws and lack of skill to make himself look better than he really is, although I still believe he is a great fighter because of what he has accomplished. Of course monzon would beat golovkin are you kidding me? please stop compairing this guy to all time greats he is exhibiting none of the intangibles of a great fighter being so limited in so many respects, he shouldn't be spoken of in the same sentence and based on what I am seeing he never will be, but he is an okay fighter.

[IMG]http://content.hollywire.com/sites/default/files/*****-mad-meme-election.jpg[/IMG]

[joesaiditstrue]

Curtis Stevens is green?

You're one of those same guys who ****s on Golovkins resume too right? lol

[dray435]

How can you be less impressed? You had Stevens stopping him, and he got demolished. Those guys you think would beat him will not even stepping the ring with him

I'm sorry you can't make see what is not there I don't see greatness in golovkin. And I thought you and others would wait on the outcome of the stevens vs golovkin fight to start voicing your opinions, but what was I off the mark about? I said if stevens could take his punch and land his own he had a chance of winning, stevens did neither he was hurt early and couldn't land his left hook because golovkin kept his right plastered to the side of his face throughout most of the fight and stevens appeared to want to quit when he couldn't get golovkin out of there early, but it was far from an impressive performance by golovkin having a wounded, green, clueless fighter in front of him but still was unable to get him out of there is proof positive that he doesn't know how to exploit golden opportunities when giving to him on a platter. Golovkin is skill deficient and just a very limited fighter himself he does not have an impressive or exceptional offense or defense which means he is just a decent fighter even his power is obviously overrated, Im sorry I don't see greatness at all and If stevens was the bum that most of you claim he is and most of you had golovkin destroying him easy in 4rds or just by brutal ko but none of that happened, golovkin wasn't even able to get the bum as you all claim he is out of there when he was virtually out cold, what does that say about your great fighter golovkin if he couldn't decisively beat a bum?

[thuggery]

what does that say about your great fighter golovkin if he couldn't decisively beat a bum?

You're finished kidd