Comments Thread For: Source: Canelo, Golovkin Clash Not in Play For May

[Bardock]

you are actually correct. I forgot about the sturm thing. bottom line though is he still WON a wba title, and only got moved up because of WBA nonsense. You cant blame him for wba politcs of not enforcing mandos and elevating people to sell more belts.

Bottom line is he isn't anywhere near Hopkins' title defense record with that weak ass WBA belt he has, even though you gennady groupies preach it like its fact

[The Big Dunn]

I did not see the Nunez fight. I had known of GGG since the olympics, but really didnt get to see his live fights until Proska. When I was in Moscow 5 or 6 years ago Yury Federov gave me a VHS tape with 3 or 4 GGG fights from Germany, but the tape quality was somewhat poor. Even so I could still see that this kid was the real deal.

But to my overall point. GGG did win the WBA interim title. We can debate the process until the cows come home, but you are dismissing it because Sturm wouldnt fight him and the WBA gave Sturm an escape route.

I concede the point that I forgot about the Nunez fight. I thought the Tapia fight was his first WBA title fight. I dont look at boxrec every 15 seconds to back up my posts. But if you want to dismiss ggg's wba title because Sturm was still champ above him, then you must dismiss jacobs title, because ggg is champ above him.

I'm not dismissing anything. I simply posted a fact-you know like you said about Floyd MD over Canelo. You just have this perpetual hard-on for GGG so you want to ignore facts when they do not put him in the best light. You need to cut that BS out.

The fact is GGG got his title because of the same politics you just killed when it got Jacobs his title. Please can you cut the hypocrisy out for one ****ing day when it comes to GGG.

No matter what the fact will never change GGG DIDN'T WIN HIS TITLE IN THE RING!!!!!

[icha]

Canelo actually showed some integrity with that decision. He wouldnt do it because it was for a regular title and Floyd was still super champion. I agreed 100% with his decision.

at least you are aware of the real reasons, not many posters here seemed to understand that... wba just wanted to make money out of canelo from a title canelo lost to floyd and was handed to lara ...

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Bottom line is he isn't anywhere near Hopkins' title defense record with that weak ass WBA belt he has, even though you gennady groupies preach it like its fact

Lmao... Hopkins streak was built off nobodies... he held the IBf belt for years before securing big fights.. Hopkins was 36 when he finally got big fights in the mw tourney

[Bardock]

Lmao... Hopkins streak was built off nobodies... he held the IBf belt for years before securing big fights.. Hopkins was 36 when he finally got big fights in the mw tourney

Doesn't change the fact his title defenses were legit. There wasn't an IBF "super" "regular" "interim" "interim-interim" champion

[OnePunch]

I'm not dismissing anything. I simply posted a fact-you know like you said about Floyd MD over Canelo. You just have this perpetual hard-on for GGG so you want to ignore facts when they do not put him in the best light. You need to cut that BS out.

The fact is GGG got his title because of the same politics you just killed when it got Jacobs his title. Please can you cut the hypocrisy out for one ****ing day when it comes to GGG.

No matter what the fact will never change GGG DIDN'T WIN HIS TITLE IN THE RING!!!!!

History shows Floyd MD over Canelo. Sure, we can argue that it was an absurd decision, but the record stands as Mayweather MD12 Alvarez.

But the WBA thing is totally different. GGG and Jacobs situations were virtually identical, except for the particular name of the WBA belt in question.

Both GGG and Jacobs won WBA titles, each at a time where there was another WBA champion above them. For GGG it was Sturm, and for Jacobs its GGG. But same scenario.

But if you want to cling to the fact that I forgot about the Nunez fight and attributed the title to the Tapia fight, then so be it. If not that, you'll find another reason, so what difference does it make.......

[OnePunch]

Doesn't change the fact his title defenses were legit. There wasn't an IBF "super" "regular" "interim" "interim-interim" champion

hmmm, the same IBF that most Fury fans are now calling "garbage"?

[The Big Dunn]

History shows Floyd MD over Canelo. Sure, we can argue that it was an absurd decision, but the record stands as Mayweather MD12 Alvarez.

But the WBA thing is totally different. GGG and Jacobs situations were virtually identical, except for the particular name of the WBA belt in question.

Both GGG and Jacobs won WBA titles, each at a time where there was another WBA champion above them. For GGG it was Sturm, and for Jacobs its GGG. But same scenario.

But if you want to cling to the fact that I forgot about the Nunez fight and attributed the title to the Tapia fight, then so be it. If not that, you'll find another reason, so what difference does it make.......

Jacobs won the WBA MW title, GGG was elevated to WBA MW champ. Huge difference.

Only thing I'm clinging to is the truth. You should grab hold of it once you let go of GGG's, well you know.

[Larry the boss]

Canelo is such a coward, a fake. Disgusting clown son of a *****!

lol............

[Bardock]

hmmm, the same IBF that most Fury fans are now calling "garbage"?

WOW you are reaching! What does this have to do with Fury?!

The same IBF belt you said had the most integrity of all the belts? LMAO