Comments Thread For: Golovkin on Canelo: He is Businessman, Not Idol of Boxing

[ShoulderRoll]

Golovkin is acting like a businessman right now, with Loeffler saying that a Charlo fight doesn't make sense.

Will his fans call him out for his hypocrisy? I doubt it.

[Chollo Vista]

Golovkin is acting like a businessman right now, with Loeffler saying that a Charlo fight doesn't make sense.

Will his fans call him out for his hypocrisy? I doubt it.

Great bump!

This is one of the threads I've been looking for

[icha]

oh lord!! there we go...

[Thuglife Nelo]

ShoulderRoll is right about the hypocrisy. GGG talks more shet than Canelo ever did, and Gennadiy is literally a guy you can’t trust. Look at these statements that are all over the place with contradictions.

Ellie Sechback, the video is online, asked GGG “would you be interested in fighting the winner of Floyd vs Manny?!” GGG responda, “absolutely!” while smiling. Even Abel Sanchez was telling industry, after Monroe Jr.’s press conference that Gennadiy was ready for 154 with Floyd and that Canelo “hadn’t made 154 in years.” It’s obvious Abel was trying to steer attention away that industry KNEW Canelo had asked GGG about 155 even before Cotto. This is how Abel was trying to stir attention away from that and build a narrative for GGG vs the winner of Floyd vs PAC. What does PAC or Floyd have to do with Canelo telling GGG about a catchweight? Oh wait.... wait for a it.... BUSINESS MEN innit? It makes business sense to fight PAC or Floyd right but not Canelo? As if GGG would ask PAC or Floyd to come to 160.

Here is GGG talking about Khan yet fights Brook thereafter... Gennadiy is an utter clown.

"Fighting Amir Khan, then maybe [welterweight Manny] Pacquiao … hey, listen, Canelo, I have double the championship belts [at middleweight],” Golovkin said. “Make the fight with me. It’s a good fight for us. Not an easy fight. Everyone understands that. But then next … you can bring on Manny or Floyd [Mayweather]. For me, it’s about who’s the best? Who’s No. 1 in the division? That’s what’s No. 1 to me. Second is money.”

“Canelo says he’s the middleweight champion. Middleweight is my best weight,” Golovkin said. “Everybody says Canelo’s this great champion. I saw his last fight. Cotto’s not a real middleweight. Great champion, not a middleweight. I’m a middleweight. So let’s settle who’s the best middleweight. Canelo? He’s a big idol … is he really a junior-middleweight? Come on, guys. Let’s fight. You don’t want the fight, I understand, you’re 100% a businessman. So go fight Manny Pacquiao. But I wait, I’ve been waiting … let’s go fight.”

[Citizen Koba]

ShoulderRoll is right about the hypocrisy. GGG talks more shet than Canelo ever did, and Gennadiy is literally a guy you can’t trust. Look at these statements that are all over the place with contradictions.

Ellie Sechback, the video is online, asked GGG “would you be interested in fighting the winner of Floyd vs Manny?!” GGG responda, “absolutely!” while smiling. Even Abel Sanchez was telling industry, after Monroe Jr.’s press conference that Gennadiy was ready for 154 with Floyd and that Canelo “hadn’t made 154 in years.” It’s obvious Abel was trying to steer attention away that industry KNEW Canelo had asked GGG about 155 even before Cotto. This is how Abel was trying to stir attention away from that and build a narrative for GGG vs the winner of Floyd vs PAC. What does PAC or Floyd have to do with Canelo telling GGG about a catchweight? Oh wait.... wait for a it.... BUSINESS MEN innit? It makes business sense to fight PAC or Floyd right but not Canelo? As if GGG would ask PAC or Floyd to come to 160.

Here is GGG talking about Khan yet fights Brook thereafter... Gennadiy is an utter clown.

"Fighting Amir Khan, then maybe [welterweight Manny] Pacquiao … hey, listen, Canelo, I have double the championship belts [at middleweight],” Golovkin said. “Make the fight with me. It’s a good fight for us. Not an easy fight. Everyone understands that. But then next … you can bring on Manny or Floyd [Mayweather]. For me, it’s about who’s the best? Who’s No. 1 in the division? That’s what’s No. 1 to me. Second is money.”

“Canelo says he’s the middleweight champion. Middleweight is my best weight,” Golovkin said. “Everybody says Canelo’s this great champion. I saw his last fight. Cotto’s not a real middleweight. Great champion, not a middleweight. I’m a middleweight. So let’s settle who’s the best middleweight. Canelo? He’s a big idol … is he really a junior-middleweight? Come on, guys. Let’s fight. You don’t want the fight, I understand, you’re 100% a businessman. So go fight Manny Pacquiao. But I wait, I’ve been waiting … let’s go fight.”

No doubt Golovkin was a 'businessman' in the end. Like I said to 'Roll he found out the world looks a very different place when you're the dude with the target on your back. It's the old story of the up and comer railing at the unfairness of it all (think Froch trying to get Calzaghe or a dozen other stories) whilst the big names got on with their buisiness then ending up doing the same to the guys underneath when he got to the top.

But as to 154 / 155 I don't recall GGG ever claiming he would fight a Middleweight fight at 155 for his titles, he said he would go down to 154 or up to 168 for the 'right' fights (whatever the hell that meant)... he didn't say 'I will put my titles on the line at any weight in between and accept any offer I am sent between those weights irrespective of what else is available'.

End of the day Golovkin's run his career pretty much the same as any other fighter given the circumstances he was in. K2 ain't power players and HBO were on diminishing budgets which meant his range of options weren't as great as the biggest stars until fairly recently.

Golovkin ain't a hero, he ain't a heel he's just a boxer trying to make the best of his circumstances in a cutthroat business... same as every other fighter out there.

[ShoulderRoll]

No doubt Golovkin was a 'businessman' in the end. Like I said to 'Roll he found out the world looks a very different place when you're the dude with the target on your back. It's the old story of the up and comer railing at the unfairness of it all (think Froch trying to get Calzaghe or a dozen other stories) whilst the big names got on with their buisiness then ending up doing the same to the guys underneath when he got to the top.

But as to 154 / 155 I don't recall GGG ever claiming he would fight a Middleweight fight at 155 for his titles, he said he would go down to 154 or up to 168 for the 'right' fights (whatever the hell that meant)... he didn't say 'I will put my titles on the line at any weight in between and accept any offer I am sent between those weights irrespective of what else is available'.

End of the day Golovkin's run his career pretty much the same as any other fighter given the circumstances he was in. K2 ain't power players and HBO were on diminishing budgets which meant his range of options weren't as great as the biggest stars until fairly recently.

Golovkin ain't a hero, he ain't a heel he's just a boxer trying to make the best of his circumstances in a cutthroat business... same as every other fighter out there.

But he is a hypocrite.

And all his fans who criticized other fighters for their business moves, while never once criticizing GGG for his, are hypocrites too.

Is that fair to say?

[Citizen Koba]

But he is a hypocrite.

And all his fans who criticized other fighters for their business moves, while never once criticizing GGG for his, are hypocrites too.

Is that fair to say?

Yeah, I've said as much myself, and not just in the last two posts on the the matter. Is he unusual or exceptional in that regard? I don't think so. You probably discovered by now that life makes hypocrites of us all, or put another way, its easy to talk chit when you ain't the one with an offer for $$$ mils in front of you. Maybe you could just say Golovkin wised up.

I'd suggest fighters perspectives do change over time and circumstances - same as for the rest of us - so it ain't as black as white as that. If I was so inclined I could also mention many other fighters who didn't follow through on their words, or who have acted differently when they got a bit of success, but that ain't really my style.

When fighters are on the way up the decisions are relatively simple and the goals clear, they just gotta climb the rungs of the ladder. . They get to the top and they get older the waters get muddier. How much do you prioritise income, how much do you prioritse glory or legacy?... and that **** shifts over time... when the clock starts ticking it ain't a surprise that thinking about your retirement package shifts to the front of the queue and justifiably so. Glory might be enough to take a kid to the top but at some point he'll realise he's got the rest of his life to live.


Far as I'm concerned the fault lies with the sport and it's absurd lack of oversight and organisation which allows fighters - outside of mandatories - to fight pretty much who they want, and doesn't have a clear or fixed system of rewards. Develop a universal ranking, standardise purses and take away the A side B side nonsense and we'd see a very different sport. With things are they are; fractured, corrupt and peicemeal all talk of ducking, businessmen and so forth is simply absurd, subjective nonsense. No one is ever obliged to fight anyone except for mandatories and no fighter can ever be criticised for seeking to maximise his own income any more than he could be in any other job.

[Thuglife Nelo]

Yeah, I've said as much myself, and not just in the last two posts on the the matter. Is he unusual or exceptional in that regard? I don't think so. You probably discovered by now that life makes hypocrites of us all, or put another way, its easy talk chit when you ain't the one with an offer for $$$ mils in front of you. Maybe you could just say Golovkin wised up.

I'd suggest fighters perspectives do change over time and circumstances - same as for the rest of us - so it ain't as black as white as that. If I was so inclined I could also mention many other fighters who didn't followed through on their words, or who have acted differently when they got a bit of success, but that ain't really my style.

When fighters are on the way up the decisions are relatively simple and the goals clear, climbing the rungs of the ladder. They get to the top and they get older the waters get muddier. How much do you prioritise income, how much do you prioritse glory or legacy?... and that **** shifts over time... when the clock starts ticking it ain't a surprise that thinking about your retirement package shifts to the front of the queue and justifiably so. Glory might be enough to take a kid to the top but at some point he'll realise he's got the rest of his life to live.


Far as I'm concerned the fault lies with the sport and it's absurd lack of oversight and organisation which allows fighters - outside of mandatories - to fight pretty much who they want, and doesn't have a clear or fixed system of rewards. Develop a universal ranking, standardise purses and take away the A side B side nonsense and we'd see a very different sport. With things are they are; fractured, corrupt and peicemeal all talk of ducking, businessmen and so forth is simply absurd, subjective nonsense. No one is ever obliged to fight anyone except for mandatories and no fighter can ever be criticised for seeking to maximise his own income any more than he could be in any other job.

I like how in all your subtext you still give GGG a pass even though you try to write objectively. ShoulderRoll knows. It’s like whenever I give benefit of doubt for meat contamination you’re on your race horse to disprove it wrong...

It’s fine you prefer GGG’s legacy over Canelo. Forget all the theory aside for hundreds of narratives, Canelo will and has always been the better fighter. It’s nothing to brag about, but that context is important bro. Let’s be real, the reason we follow the sport is to satisfy role playing to something we strive to be in professional combat. It’s not always about acting formal. There’s a difference between being professional and acting civilized. For as much as Floyd talked smack he backed it up. GGG’s verbatim throughout the years, meaning what he literally said, is distasteful.

Even by trying to figure the past or benefit of doubt, the current situation has fans still blaming Canelo for everything revolving GGG. As I made that thread the “quintessential problem...”

There are historical fighters, legends, HOF’s still fighting past GGG’s age that weren’t even Heavyweights and yet they received more damage from previous fights. I bet there’s an excuse for GGG by any scenario explained.

[Citizen Koba]

I like how in all your subtext you still give GGG a pass even though you try to write objectively. ShoulderRoll knows. It’s like whenever I give benefit of doubt for meat contamination you’re on your race horse to disprove it wrong...

It’s fine you prefer GGG’s legacy over Canelo. Forget all the theory aside for hundreds of narratives, Canelo will and has always been the better fighter. It’s nothing to brag about, but that context is important bro. Let’s be real, the reason we follow the sport is to satisfy role playing to something we strive to be in professional combat. It’s not always about acting formal. There’s a difference between being professional and acting civilized. For as much as Floyd talked smack he backed it up. GGG’s verbatim throughout the years, meaning what he literally said, is distasteful.

Even by trying to figure the past or benefit of doubt, the current situation has fans still blaming Canelo for everything revolving GGG. As I made that thread the “quintessential problem...”

There are historical fighters, legends, HOF’s still fighting past GGG’s age that weren’t even Heavyweights and yet they received more damage from previous fights. I bet there’s an excuse for GGG by any scenario explained.

No man, you don't understand at all. I'm arguing that fighters don't or shouldn't need 'excuses', that in fact the term is meaningless with regards to professional boxing except for those mired in ****** fanbase arguments. I ain't saying Golovkins a greater or more accomplished fighter than Canelo at all, because he isn't, hell I'm not even saying Golovkins H2H better prime even though I think there's a case because I'm not sure we've seen the best of Canelo yet. I'm saying precisely that all the rationalisations and justifications we use to try to argue why our preferred fighters are more worthy of our support than some other fighter should be seen for what they are. Rationalisation. We all got our biases and preferences and that's OK but trying to prove ours are more justified or better than someone else's is a fools errand cos folk will always find a plausible narrative to justify their preference . It's what humans do. All of these fighters just trying to make the best of the lot they're served, man. They all deserve our respect unless they actually are proven to have deliberately cheated.

And the Clenbuterol thing you're either misunderstanding or being disingenuous. I do give Canelo the benefit of the doubt, and I've said so over and over. There's no proof of deliberate use and it's time to move on.

I only challenge you when you claim or insinuate that there's proof of innocence, and you know full this is something you do on the regular. You stop claiming there's proof of innocence - which there isn't - and you'll find I don't bring it up at all, man. It's you that ain't moving on.

[ShoulderRoll]

No man, you don't understand at all. I'm arguing that fighters don't or shouldn't need 'excuses', that in fact the term is meaningless with regards to professional boxing except for those mired in ****** fanbase arguments. I ain't saying Golovkins a greater or more accomplished fighter than Canelo at all, because he isn't, hell I'm not even saying Golovkins H2H better prime even though I think there's a case because I'm not sure we've seen the best of Canelo yet.

And the Clenbuterol thing you're either misunderstanding or being disingenuous. I do give Canelo the benefit of the doubt, and I've said so over and over. There's no proof of deliberate use and it's time to move on.

I only challenge you when you claim or insinuate that there's proof of innocence, and you know full this is something you do on the regular. You stop claiming there's proof of innocence - which there isn't - and you'll find I don't bring it up at all, man.

You seem like an even-handed guy, Koba.

A lot of the blowback against the Golovkin fans comes as a result of their double standards and bias. I don't think you need to get dragged into these wars or get lumped in with them.

Unless you want to take their side.