Would a win over Canelo put Golovkin's resume above Kovalev's?

[285Kid]

Maybe, GGG need to just do what his two jefe did



Get all the belt

[bojangles1987]

Whoever the 11 people are that voted for Golovkin already having a better resume are just wrong. It's not even opinion, Kovalev clearly has a better resume.

[Chrismart]

Yes, for sure IMO.

[j0zef]

Whoever the 11 people are that voted for Golovkin already having a better resume are just wrong. It's not even opinion, Kovalev clearly has a better resume.

I was not one of the 11 (picked first option), but to say it's clearly better is incorrect IMO.

Hopkins is a legend, but he was 50. Outside of Bhop, their resumes are similar, both have beaten good, highly ranked fighters who were not stars. I'd say Golovkin has beaten better opposition if we take out Hopkins, so the argument is how do you value a 50 year old Hopkins.

[Sweet Pea 50]

I don't know.

It's not like Kova doesn't have some huge opportunities in '16 himself with potential fights with Stevenson and Ward on the horizon.

He beats both, and a GGG win over Canelo is kinda "meh".

[BrometheusBob.]

Yes it would, unless Kov beats Ward of course.

[kafkod]

I was not one of the 11 (picked first option), but to say it's clearly better is incorrect IMO.

Hopkins is a legend, but he was 50. Outside of Bhop, their resumes are similar, both have beaten good, highly ranked fighters who were not stars. I'd say Golovkin has beaten better opposition if we take out Hopkins, so the argument is how do you value a 50 year old Hopkins.

It wasn't just Kovalev beating BHop that impressed me, but the way he did it.

He went in with a game plan that was different from any he'd used before, and he executed it perfectly.

I feel the same way about Golovkin's win over Lemieux. Like Kovalev with BHop, he fought aggressively, but used the jab and footwork to keep distance between himself and a potentially dangerous opponent.

Kovalev had the tougher job with BHop though. Even at nearly 50 yo, Hopkins was still harder to keep under control and harder to catch clean than Lemieux.

[jypehob]

Kovalev and GGG to me are top 10, Canelo is in the top 5. A win over Canelo would put GGG in the top 5, therefore he would be above Kovalev.

[bojangles1987]

I was not one of the 11 (picked first option), but to say it's clearly better is incorrect IMO.

Hopkins is a legend, but he was 50. Outside of Bhop, their resumes are similar, both have beaten good, highly ranked fighters who were not stars. I'd say Golovkin has beaten better opposition if we take out Hopkins, so the argument is how do you value a 50 year old Hopkins.

Hopkins and Pascal are both far more accomplished and far better than anyone Golovkin has been in the ring with. And even other than those two, Kovalev has Campillo, who should have been a unified titlist when Kovalev slaughtered him and is also a better, more accomplished fighter than anyone Golovkin has beaten.

Kovalev's resume is clearly better. There is no serious debate here, just Golovkin fans who don't want to admit the truth. It's not his fault, but he doesn't get imaginary credit for those who wouldn't fight him.

[emre belozoglu]

GGG is at the cusp of having a great resume if he can get the right fights made this year, canelo would put him over kovalev