Has anyone thought about it this way concerning GGG

[techliam]

No, even with most thinking Kovalev is the man, Adonis is STILL the lineal.

And lately, I hear a few who even like Stevenson in the fight.

Me? I think if Ward is truly adapted to the division after his next fight, he beats them both.

Lineal can reflect less than an ABC title, which it does in Canelo's case. In Stevenson's case, it means just as much as a paper WBC belt. So contender status. We shouldn't look at titles on face value alone, that's a pretty poor excuse not to think. The fighter defines the title.

Its a common mistake of perception when it comes to lineal titles. Yes, Stevenson is 'the man' when looking through a lineal lense, but it doesn't make him 'the man' in general. Theres very few people who look at boxing through a lineal lense because of the inherent and fatal flaws in the system.

[techliam]

WBA and WBC elevated status... non tangible title fights.

casual boxing fans still don't get it. yet they enjoy criticizing other p4p kings that went up the ladder to win belts.

it's not about "it's not his fault GGG was elevated to the status" it's called being very unlucky in making a legacy.

it's really called Tom Loeffler and Abel Sanchez. Had Lil'G been with a different promoter and trainer, assuming he's as good as he turns out to be, then it's safe to say he would currently have a better career.

love it.

So titles ('tangible' in your view) make a career, huh? I take it you arent one of those calling for a Lara fight then, as he has never won a world title in the ring. He doesn't have any legacy at all, surely?

[techliam]

Interesting perspective. Definitely not the way I see it but this makes sense.

The only reason I would disagree with you is the fact that being an undisputed champion was still out there when the Chavez and Froch fights were being pursued.

If you are willing to give up the "goal" of holding all the belts for the payday and/or are willing to go up and come down in weight for the money, to then say unification is your dream rings hollow.

I don't understand your reasoning at all. Going up for 1 payday fight is not incompatible with pursuing an ultimate goal of unification.

Golovkin would not lose his titles unless he vacates the division, which he would not be doing. You're pretending everything Golovkin has done at middleweight suddenly disappears when he takes one payday fight outside. There has never been an ounce of indication that he'd stay at 168 after a big fight, not dissimilar to Floyd and his experiments at 154

[The Big Dunn]

I don't understand your reasoning at all. Going up for 1 payday fight is not incompatible with pursuing an ultimate goal of unification.

Golovkin would not lose his titles unless he vacates the division, which he would not be doing. You're pretending everything Golovkin has done at middleweight suddenly disappears when he takes one payday fight outside. There has never been an ounce of indication that he'd stay at 168 after a big fight, not dissimilar to Floyd and his experiments at 154

It may not be, yet GGG , his team, and fans suggest going up and coming back down would be unfair or problematic, yet never said this when the fights were winnable for the money. I do not think you can have it both ways.

No I am not and its not right to suggest or act like I am doing this. I am responding to what I've seen and heard from GGG and his camp. I am not suggesting he'd have to stay at 168.

I am saying specifically that if going up and coming down is a detriment to GGG, then it has to be in all cases of going up and coming down. You just can't use that excuse when the fight isn't one he is likely to win.

[Lester Tutor]

love it.

So titles ('tangible' in your view) make a career, huh? I take it you arent one of those calling for a Lara fight then, as he has never won a world title in the ring. He doesn't have any legacy at all, surely?

If it's casual for you to compare one elevated status sanctioning body's belt to TWO sanctioning bodies then we're not on the same page.

Do you really think people are requesting a Lara bout vs Golovkin because of Lara's 154 prestige? If it wasn't for the skill alone, nobody would even mention it. The reason people are requesting the bout is because styles make fights.

Also your point is contradictory or flawed because you're criticizing one fighter that has less of the impact of the same situation and therefore they shouldn't fight? Or we comparing elevated Champ status? Moreso, who has the better resume between Lara and Golovkin?

In fact, the criticism towards Golovkin has nothing to do with Lara since particularly they are in different divisions. My criticism is that elevated WBA and WBC isn't good for boxing. You have your opinions.

[techliam]

If it's casual for you to compare one elevated status sanctioning body's belt to TWO sanctioning bodies then we're not on the same page.

Do you really think people are requesting a Lara bout vs Golovkin because of Lara's 154 prestige? If it wasn't for the skill alone, nobody would even mention it. The reason people are requesting the bout is because styles make fights.

Also your point is contradictory or flawed because you're criticizing one fighter that has less of the impact of the same situation and therefore they shouldn't fight? Or we comparing elevated Champ status? Moreso, who has the better resume between Lara and Golovkin?

In fact, the criticism towards Golovkin has nothing to do with Lara since particularly they are in different divisions. My criticism is that elevated WBA and WBC isn't good for boxing. You have your opinions.

My point was simply that your logic of having two elevated titles makes for a bad career was, and still is faulty. Its such a poor attempt to try twist the scenario into one where you blame Golovkin.

Elevated titles are bad for the sport. So all blame to the people who allowed this to happen, namely Geale and Canelo. Geale eventually manned up, so I can give him some credit at least.

Despite your attempt to alter the frame of the narrative, you have to include the context, which means apportioning blame. You can't not do this just because Golovkin wouldn't be at the end of the criticism. Your critique of Golovkin's team is a separate point entirely, as theres no evidence that any other promoter would have done as well or any better. We forget, Golovkin has only enjoyed having a 'name' for two years or so, and thats down to HBO showcasing and investing in him. Had he been picked up a lot earlier, it may be different, but it'd be silly to expect him to have been as an unknown Kazakh with no wider links

[Lester Tutor]

Elevated titles are bad for the sport.

my point. it's not unusual to see one sanctioning body do this, but two, clearly it would put some fighters in depression. However, I guess for Kazakh standards, it might not even be an issue.

[techliam]

It may not be, yet GGG , his team, and fans suggest going up and coming back down would be unfair or problematic, yet never said this when the fights were winnable for the money. I do not think you can have it both ways.

No I am not and its not right to suggest or act like I am doing this. I am responding to what I've seen and heard from GGG and his camp. I am not suggesting he'd have to stay at 168.

I am saying specifically that if going up and coming down is a detriment to GGG, then it has to be in all cases of going up and coming down. You just can't use that excuse when the fight isn't one he is likely to win.

Where has team Golovkin said it was problematic? For a while they've said a 168 fight is possible for a payday. That 1 fight doesn't stop the goal of unifying his natural division, its just a one off payday. If they said weight was problematic so we shouldn't fight Ward, then they messed up. They should have been honest and said a Ward fight isn't the payday we want to move up. Which is fine, in my view any fighter should be compensated for the disavantages like that. Golovkin's 168 choices have been entirely consistent - Froch in the UK, Chavez Jr, and in the pipeline now, Ramirez when he cracks stardom. They're all huge money fights for him. He hasnt called anyone else out by name. I use Floyd as a similar example, as his 154 project is a carbon copy - Floyd being undersized, but he took the money fights - Oscar, Cotto and Canelo at 152.

The Canelo scenario is interesting because team Golovkin knew they had at least some leverage (WBC and public demand), and could fit the Canelo fight into his main goal of unifying as they both held belts. I expected some half way agreement eventually (60/40 at 157, maybe) but Canelo made his intentions clear when he vacated the title. I dont think anyone is sure how much dropping weight will affect a 34 year old Golovkin, but I don't think its entirely the same as moving up. I wish Canelo would just go back down to 154 where the fight becomes irrelevant. My apologies if my language was too accusational, as per the bolded

[The Big Dunn]

Where has team Golovkin said it was problematic? For a while they've said a 168 fight is possible for a payday. That 1 fight doesn't stop the goal of unifying his natural division, its just a one off payday. If they said weight was problematic so we shouldn't fight Ward, then they messed up. They should have been honest and said a Ward fight isn't the payday we want to move up. Which is fine, in my view any fighter should be compensated for the disavantages like that. Golovkin's 168 choices have been entirely consistent - Froch in the UK, Chavez Jr, and in the pipeline now, Ramirez when he cracks stardom. They're all huge money fights for him. He hasnt called anyone else out by name. I use Floyd as a similar example, as his 154 project is a carbon copy - Floyd being undersized, but he took the money fights - Oscar, Cotto and Canelo at 152.

The Canelo scenario is interesting because team Golovkin knew they had at least some leverage (WBC and public demand), and could fit the Canelo fight into his main goal of unifying as they both held belts. I expected some half way agreement eventually (60/40 at 157, maybe) but Canelo made his intentions clear when he vacated the title. I dont think anyone is sure how much dropping weight will affect a 34 year old Golovkin, but I don't think its entirely the same as moving up. I wish Canelo would just go back down to 154 where the fight becomes irrelevant. My apologies if my language was too accusational, as per the bolded

Its cool. you and I always have fierce but fair debates.

I am not one that thinks GGG deserves any criticism because he diets correctly and sstays in shape. He doesn't have to go up to prove anything to me. He also gets no blame from me for the Canelo situation.

My only criticism is what i posted. He can fight whoever he wants next. I just hope this time he chooses the best possible opponent.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Damn right. The way this sport was, and how it should be. Unfortunately in todays world it is not, so in my opinion if a fighter comes a long and makes it a firm statement that they want to achieve this, it blows my mind how some people don't support it.

There should be one champ per division, but today that is extremely difficult, so the next best thing is plotting to complete a clean sweep of the main titles and therefore become that 'one champ'. How can you not like a guy that wants that? It is the way the sport should be.

For sure. If I had my way, believe me- 8/9 divisions and one world champion per division. Right not we have Golovkin, WBC/IBF/WBA Champion at middleweight, Kovalev, WBA/WBO/IBF Champion at light heavyweight, Tyson Fury, WBA/WBO Champion at heavyweight and Dennis Lebedev, WBA/IBF Champion at cruiserweight. So, it isn't all bad, but it could be better. I know the WBA is trying to unify their cruiserweight belts which is ridiculous but at least a step in the right direction. My guess is the money has dried up on those add-on titles. Either way, a few good things are happening.