FACT: If Golovkin was from USA he would be hailed as the second coming of Mike Tyson!

[Pac=Duran]

They were stopped on their feet before they were knocked unconscious.

Tell me what you think happens to Geale, Monroe, Rosado and Ouma if they were allowed to continue?

The only reason they ended on their feet is because they either called time themselves (Monroe/Geale) or the referee was merciful.

When you're done you're done. I don't really want to see KO's like Canelo vs Kirkland, Marquez vs Pacquiao or Pacquiao vs Hatton everyday.

[Elroy1]

Golovkin, Lomachenko, Kovalev, both Klitschko's, Povetkin, and many other East Euros are all possibly better than anything that's ever come before.

There are only 2 important reasons why they are not hailed as the best of the best of the best...

a) They ain't American...

b) They ain't black!!

And everybody knows it!

The Slavs have the hardest fists and the hardest chins in boxing these days.. And probably forever now, so we might as well just ****ing get used to it!

[Weebler I]

When you're done you're done. I don't really want to see KO's like Canelo vs Kirkland, Marquez vs Pacquiao or Pacquiao vs Hatton everyday.

Scipio is trying to say he's not a knockout artist but if a boxer with a 90% KO ratio isn't a KO artist, I'd like to know who is.

[Scipio2009]

Lol what is your obsession with stopping people "on their feet?" Willie just simply decided to quit huh? Didnt touch the canvas a few times and badly hurt? Golovkin sure is weak, pillow puncher really.

Tyson was laying guys flat; even if the competition was ****, Tyson was putting guys out.

Golovkin is not putting guys out, even while facing similarly soft competition.

ergo, the attempt by some to try and draw a parrallel between the two, to try and add some cache to Golovkin's name, is a foolish effort, and an obvious one at that.

If you're going to compare a guy to Tyson, be certain that his actual fight results look like what Tyson was actually doing to his opponents.

[Weebler I]

Tyson was laying guys flat; even if the competition was ****, Tyson was putting guys out.

Golovkin is not putting guys out, even while facing similarly soft competition.

ergo, the attempt by some to try and draw a parrallel between the two, to try and add some cache to Golovkin's name, is a foolish effort, and an obvious one at that.

If you're going to compare a guy to Tyson, be certain that his actual fight results look like what Tyson was actually doing to his opponents.

Then why are there so many TKOs on his record and not more KOs?

[Godsfly]

Holmes was shot to pieces by then. Spinks showed up for the paycheck, never fought again.

Point is Tyson wasn't exactly knocking out amazing competition during his rise either. He did what he needed to do though, took on top ranked fighters and unified the belts. Same thing GGG is trying to do.

now you've golovkin turds have ****ted out an egg.............

first thing. holmes was better then anything golovkin has fought even tho he was older. old, so called shot holmes a year later gave a young prime mercer his first loss. that version of holmes literally ****s all over golovkins trash resume. lets be honest...........also spinks is better then anything golovkin has foughten.

bruno
tucker (who was a 6'5 beast)
larry
spinks

are all better then anything golovkin has fought (and this was a tyson in his 20's way younger then golovkin) tysons era is considered weak but he fought tougher comp in his 20's vs golovkin could dream of doing into his 30's




hummmmmmmmm

[Scipio2009]

He obviously had the goods before his first ever US date, insiders knew. TR matchmaker Goodman had him #1 at MW even before Pavlik lost to Sergio. But he had no push behind him, till HBO kicked out Schaefer/Haymon and opened up to minor promoters, and GGG did the rest, destroying 6 Ring top tenners in under 3 years and having the rest cowering

I don't know TR matchmaker Goodman, never seen his face, or heard a word from him, but I'd be willing to guess that not having any top middleweights under their banner at that point had more to do with the assessment than anything; doubt that Top Rank would **** on another one of their own fighters.

And that "till HBO kicked out Schaefer/Haymon" quip was unneccesary; even without Golden Boy there, HBO was basically only home to Top Rank and maybe 3 other fighters, let alone minor promoters. Again, re-writing history is far more difficult when so much of the actual source information is available in a few searches of the world-wide-web.

Lastly, knocking of 4 guys that were ranked 9/10 by Ring magazine when he fought them isn't as impressive as the picture you tried to create, but at least it's honest.

[El-blanco]

Tyson was laying guys flat; even if the competition was ****, Tyson was putting guys out.

Golovkin is not putting guys out, even while facing similarly soft competition.

ergo, the attempt by some to try and draw a parrallel between the two, to try and add some cache to Golovkin's name, is a foolish effort, and an obvious one at that.

If you're going to compare a guy to Tyson, be certain that his actual fight results look like what Tyson was actually doing to his opponents.

I love tyson but the guys he was killing were inferior in quality to the guys ggg is smashing. You rarely see top ten guys get completely smoked like how PAC ended up against Marquez. Most of them are too good to be hit by something that clean which is why you see fighters stopped on their feet at higher levels. McClellan looked fine other than some rapid blinking versus benn, are you going to tell me benn didn't **** him up?

[Weebler I]

first thing. holmes was better then anything golovkin has fought even tho he was older.

Holmes told a story about that, he'd been out for 2 years and took the fight on short notice.

"What I remember," offered Holmes, "is that Don King came knocking at my door about 9 o'clock at night. I'd been retired about two years. So I said, 'What's up?' And he said, 'I want you to fight.' And I said, 'Man, I've been retired for two years. You know that.'

"And he said, 'Yeah, I know, man. But I've got this fight for you and I know you can beat this guy.' I said, 'Don, I'm not going to fight, but who are you talking about?' And he said, 'Mike Tyson.' And I said, 'Oh, (bleep).'

"I said, 'Don, I can't beat Mike Tyson. It's been almost two years. I'm retired.' And he said, 'But you can whup Mike Tyson.' And I said, 'No, I can't whup Mike Tyson.' And he said, 'Yeah, but I can get you $3.5 million.' So I said, 'OK, where's Mike at?'"

Tyson's take:

"I mean, look at the situation," instructed Tyson. "Larry came off 2½ years of inactivity. He was pretty much robbed of his title. He pretty much gave up boxing. He didn't have time to prepare properly. He didn't have time to get ready. But if I had mercy on him, he would have kicked my (bleep). That was a real show of courage. It was amazing that he got up."

[HeroBando]

I don't know TR matchmaker Goodman, never seen his face, or heard a word from him, but I'd be willing to guess that not having any top middleweights under their banner at that point had more to do with the assessment than anything; doubt that Top Rank would **** on another one of their own fighters.

And that "till HBO kicked out Schaefer/Haymon" quip was unneccesary; even without Golden Boy there, HBO was basically only home to Top Rank and maybe 3 other fighters, let alone minor promoters. Again, re-writing history is far more difficult when so much of the actual source information is available in a few searches of the world-wide-web.

Lastly, knocking of 4 guys that were ranked 9/10 by Ring magazine when he fought them isn't as impressive as the picture you tried to create, but at least it's honest.

Brad Abdul Goodman, look him up. Pavlik was lineal and with Top Rank, so wrong again.

Not sure what you're talking about, there were lots of no TR shows. Neither GGG nor Kovalev TR, they wouldn't have gotten a chance with Greenburg

Prior to getting his chance on HBO, he had 0 top 10 scalps. 6 is much better than 0, and really a good output in 3 years in any division.