Roach recently on Golovkin: "He has the best footwork in boxing"

[Szef]

People (in the U.S.) usually don't actually understand the difference between the "Cuban School" and the "Soviet school"... As these schools are both "minimalist" in expression... The Cuban school is "aesthetically purist", while the Soviet school is basically offensive oriented...

(I'm an "Art Dealer", as main trade...)

I agree.

Two absolutely the best amateur schools out there.

Watching these two philosophies collide is a thing of beauty.

That's why I love WSB.

[Weebler I]

Yep, this so much.

Loma spends about 50% of his movements doing rather pointless, amatuer bouncy movements for nothing but looking good. Golovkin wastes no movements, no energy and didn't lose his 2nd fight like Loma did.

People are confusing fast footwork with effective footwork. It doesn't have to be blindingly fast to do the same job.

Actually it's presenting a moving target concurrently making him harder to hit in defence while creating the angles to opening up his opponent to land the punches he wants to land in attack.

As to Loma losing his second fight, Golovkin fought an opponent called Siarhei Navarka in his second pro fight whereas Lomachenko fought for a world title in his 2nd fight and became world champion in his 3rd fight. It's really not even comparable.

[MDPopescu]

Actually it's presenting a moving target concurrently making him harder to hit in defence while creating the angles to opening up his opponent to land the punches he wants to land in attack.

As to Loma losing his second fight, Golovkin fought a no-mark called Siarhei Navarka in his second pro fight whereas Lomachenko fought for a world title in his 2nd fight and became world champion in his 3rd fight. It's really not even comparable.

... Golovkin would have become world champ at his first pro fight -- in case they would have had provided him with the opportunity.
... But nevermind...

[Weebler I]

... Golovkin would have become world champ at his first pro fight -- in case they would have had provided him with the opportunity.
... But nevermind...

In 2006 against a Hopkins (not even sure he beats him now), prime Taylor or Pavlik? Perhaps he would, but I'm sceptical. Nevertheless, he didn't, whereas Lomachenko did.

[BoxingIsGreat]

Why is discussing white fighters so boring? Not being a racist, but it feels so heavy to even read.

[Szef]

Why is discussing white fighters so boring? Not being a racist, but it feels so heavy to even read.

That's why Floyd can't read.

[Unseen]

People forget that foorwork, and speed are different things.

If someone is fast on their legs which saves them, it doesn't mean they have good foot work.

Some fighters have their legs too fast for their body and they are off balance like Khan.

Some are too slow and end up missing like Canelo.

Golvokin is slow but he sets his feet to generate power and isn't off balance a lot considering the power shots he throws.

[MDPopescu]

Why is discussing white fighters so boring? Not being a racist, but it feels so heavy to even read.

I don't discuss fighters (by color). I discuss "boxing schools"... It's boring for you -- because you don't share certain knowledge on the matter.

Your problem with fighters' "race" doesn't concern me at all.

[Unseen]

When I think of it, GGG has great offensive footwork to stalk and chase down a fighter.

Defensively I am not sure if it is Rigo or Mayweather. Setting distance that someone is scared to punch is good. Mayweather VS Hatton was a masterclass of footwork.

[MDPopescu]

... To date, nobody performs the "switch" as well as Golovkin does. The "switch" isn't only in the footwork, it involves the entire body...
(Floyd or Rigo don't switch...)