Should Gennady Golovkin be in the top 10 P4P?

[D-MiZe]

Golovkin's best win is... Daniel Geale?!

If you rank 'em by who'd win if they were the same weight, that's just too many assumptions. You have to have something concrete. Who they've beaten is a good indicator of how good they are not how good they might be.

Middleweight isn't a deep division either so he's going to need to travel if he wants to become a Top 10 P4P fighter. If he moved up to 168 and beat Ward, that to me is the very definition of being a P4P fighter.

[SplitSecond]

Golovkin's best win is... Daniel Geale?!

If you rank 'em by who'd win if they were the same weight, that's just too many assumptions. You have to have something concrete. Who they've beaten is a good indicator of how good they are not how good they might be.

Middleweight isn't a deep division either so he's going to need to travel if he wants to become a Top 10 P4P fighter. If he moved up to 168 and beat Ward, that to me is the very definition of being a P4P fighter.

if haymon wasn't such a btch we could get golovkin-quillin then the winner faces the winner of canelo-cotto(i imagine will be at 156 or more)

[Daddy T]

Golovkin's best win is... Daniel Geale?!

If you rank 'em by who'd win if they were the same weight, that's just too many assumptions. You have to have something concrete. Who they've beaten is a good indicator of how good they are not how good they might be.

Middleweight isn't a deep division either so he's going to need to travel if he wants to become a Top 10 P4P fighter. If he moved up to 168 and beat Ward, that to me is the very definition of being a P4P fighter.

as is HOW they win. For instance compare GGG to let's say, Canelo ... demolition jobs of geale, macklin, rubio, stevens imo is better than ... a dodgy win over lara ... a clear loss to floyd and a dodgy win over trout. Boxrec and paper resume in some people's minds however could well argue canelo as better p4p when he clearly isn't.

But whatever it's all subjective so you head back to boxrec to check resumes and wins v losses ... I'll go watch a few fights

[IMDAZED]

No and it's a shame because if he gets a big name (not Ward) I think he wins and becomes top 10. But he doesn't have that name and it's unfair to place him there just because. His resume is decent at best. I do like what his management is doing to him and I'm guessing he'll have that big fight next year.

[D-MiZe]

as is HOW they win. For instance compare GGG to let's say, Canelo ... demolition jobs of geale, macklin, rubio, stevens imo is better than ... a dodgy win over lara ... a clear loss to floyd and a dodgy win over trout. Boxrec and paper resume in some people's minds however could well argue canelo as better p4p when he clearly isn't.

But whatever it's all subjective so you head back to boxrec to check resumes and wins v losses ... I'll go watch a few fights

Obviously how they win plays a big part in ranking a fighter.

Geale is the only champion Golovkin has beaten, albeit a former champion. Make a list of Golovkin's 5 best wins. Sure, we can mentally ********** about what he could do or how he could look against other fighters. But I prefer to watch the fight, see how he handles the opponent, who the opponent is and where that opponent is in their career. Look at how everyone griped about Ouma-Golovkin.

[T18Z]

P4P is supposed to be about who you think RIGHT now would win if everybody was the same weight.

People seemed to have lost track of that these days and think it is just a compare boxrec resume competition.

No way are there ten guys out there that would be backed to beat GGG if you shrunk or increased them to 160.

(This is why Rigo even more so than GGG should be way, way, way up the p4p lists btw)

Exactly this, tired of people using resume as the sole indicator of P4P.

[New England]

Golovkin's best win is... Daniel Geale?!

If you rank 'em by who'd win if they were the same weight, that's just too many assumptions. You have to have something concrete. Who they've beaten is a good indicator of how good they are not how good they might be.

Middleweight isn't a deep division either so he's going to need to travel if he wants to become a Top 10 P4P fighter. If he moved up to 168 and beat Ward, that to me is the very definition of being a P4P fighter.

a p4p list and an evaluation of resume are different things. accomplishments are not equal to ability. they're an indicator, but they're not to be correlated directly.


i give a lot of weight to a fighters ability in a contemporary p4p list. i want to know who is the best fighter, not who has the best resume. you can have a great resume, and perform poorly in a fight. a great recent example is floyd mayweather vs maidana 1. floyd looked old, and i dropped him below rigondeaux on my list. floyd's resume didn't take a hit, but his ability did. in the second maidana fight, floyd gassed up under ariza, and looked freaking spectacular. his resume didn't change much with a second victory over maidana, but his ability was clearly demonstrated.


people need to recognize just how subjective a p4p list is. the further down you go, as you have to when raking golovkin [i have him around 10, give or take,] it gets all the more subjective.



in short, accomplishments over the course of the career, and ability in one's next fight, are not the same thing.

[New England]

as is HOW they win. For instance compare GGG to let's say, Canelo ... demolition jobs of geale, macklin, rubio, stevens imo is better than ... a dodgy win over lara ... a clear loss to floyd and a dodgy win over trout. Boxrec and paper resume in some people's minds however could well argue canelo as better p4p when he clearly isn't.

But whatever it's all subjective so you head back to boxrec to check resumes and wins v losses ... I'll go watch a few fights

good post. we are in agreement.


canelo and golovkin are very similar in size. alvarez' last two fights were at middleweight. 155 lbs is middleweight. golovkin would be a massive favorite to beat golovkin. alvarez' people woulnd't touch that fight with a ten foot pole.


accomplishments and ability are not the same thing.


canelo may be 5 lbs lower than golovkin naturally. he got his ass kicked by floyd mayweather, who is at least a natural weight class lower [floyd is a natural WW.]

[New England]

P4P is supposed to be about who you think RIGHT now would win if everybody was the same weight.

People seemed to have lost track of that these days and think it is just a compare boxrec resume competition.

No way are there ten guys out there that would be backed to beat GGG if you shrunk or increased them to 160.

(This is why Rigo even more so than GGG should be way, way, way up the p4p lists btw)

another good post, and one with which i'm in full agreement.



there are not 10 fighters on the planet who would beat golovkin if all fighters were the same size. he and canelo are the same size, and canelo won't even fight him.

that's a subjective opinion, the way any other p4p list is purely opinion.

[PAC-BOY]

I'm a fan of GGG. But I have to say no. IMO he has to beat some top guys to be in the top p4p bracket.
That's for any and all fighters. It has nothing to do with KOs. Undefeated record money or ppv numbers if any.
It has to do with being the best you need to beat the best. Start fighting and beating top 10 guys. Then yes by all means get in the top p4p