Why is Broner criticized yet GGG praised?

[PivotandRoll]

dont be lazy and watch the fights lol, yeah going to cancel work tomorrow so i can sit through all of benns fights. Alright bum was an exaggeration but he wasnt some world beater was he, as i said a lot of these fighters from the past get made out to be amazing when they werent, laughable that im being made out to be the crazy one by you two clowns for thinking golovkin (unanimously considered either 1st,2nd ,3rd in world p4p) is better than benn and eubank, two solid but limited fighters who were nowhere near any P4P lists

You admit to not have seeing the fights and then make statements and expect to be taken seriously....

[Madison Boxing]

You admit to not have seeing the fights and then make statements and expect to be taken seriously....

ive seen a couple of his fights and ive seen his record. ive seen that hes not ko'd 22 in a row, and never been down in 400 fights, ive seen he was never on top of anyones P4P list, ive seen he was never a dominant champion. I dont have to have watched everyone of John ruiz's fights to know hes not as good as someone like mike tyson. Its common sense ffs, if you went around in public telling people nigel benn and chris eubank were better than gennady golovkin you would get pointed at and laughed at, its only on forums where these crazy opinions get found.

[PAC-BOY]

Broner is 26 and is 5-2 against current or former world champions and has won titles in 4 different divisions....GGG is 34 and only 3-0 against current or former world champions and thats in 1 division....Please explain

ok...Ill explain. Broner is a piece of shlt. Thats why!

[PivotandRoll]

i agree with this, but there's quite a caveat when you consider that those guys beat broner clearly, and golovkin is the most dominant fighter in boxing right now. broner looked spectacular / dominant at 130 and 135. also had a massive advantage in natural size. looked ordinary when he got to 140 and 147. i wonder why?


do we credit broner for wins he didn't get because they're better than anytbody golovkin fought?


when you look at a resume, rank a fighter, etc, you don't credit him for his losses . you ask "who did he beat and when?"

in broner's case his best win may very well be antonio freaking demarco, a much smaller but decent fighter, and the best fighter he's actually beaten was probably an aging paulie malignaggi at welterweight.


when you consider wins, which is what really matters on a resume, golovkin's the better fighter. no losses, nevermind getting a beating from marcos maidana. nevermind a clear loss to shawn porter at a catchweight. wins that fit right in with the antonio demarcos and aging paulie's of the world. and they're back to back for several years, all via knockout. his resume is better than broners. at the very least, they're comparable.


but you have moneyteamers / team broners hyping broner, and crapping on golokvin. i wonder why ?

So Ali gets no credit in his lose to Frasier and so on and so on through history?? No, Doesn't work like that.

Broner was with Maidana the whole time, though he lost clearly it was competitive with Broner even taking over at times in the middle rounds and hurting Maidana late.

Against Porter....Well he deserves to be **** on. He didn't show up at all and I'll take all my deserved flak for saying I don't think that was anywhere near Broner's best.

Honestly Demarco has more to his game than Murray. If you put a guy the same size comparably in front of Murray he'd do the same thing Broner did to Demarco if not worse. Proof is easy to see, Imagine Groves had of been faster, hit harder and much better defense.

There are levels and for some reason you idiots lose comprehension of it as the weights go up. Murray best win is Martinez who lost every round to Darren Barker the fight before until his late rally. He lost 6-7 rounds to Macklin before that. That's who Murray beat. And That is who GGG beat.

I 've already said I would pick GGG to KO all MW's not named BJS. I'm not hating, just telling the truth(or perhaps my distorted view of it for all I know).

I'm a Floyd and Broner fan, but I'd rather puke on myself than be a part of those soundbite quoting *******s.

[PivotandRoll]

ok...Ill explain. Broner is a piece of shlt. Thats why!

That's such a honest answer. Fair play.

Like do GGG fans not understand that if these WW's like Floyd, Manny, Maidana, Cotto were the same size as him they'd be far better fighters?

[PivotandRoll]

ive seen a couple of his fights and ive seen his record. ive seen that hes not ko'd 22 in a row, and never been down in 400 fights, ive seen he was never on top of anyones P4P list, ive seen he was never a dominant champion. I dont have to have watched everyone of John ruiz's fights to know hes not as good as someone like mike tyson. Its common sense ffs, if you went around in public telling people nigel benn and chris eubank were better than gennady golovkin you would get pointed at and laughed at, its only on forums where these crazy opinions get found.

Eubank would easily knock out the people GGG has knocked out...That is not some record btw.... Wilder was like what 28 KO's in a row? Shavers KO'd 27 in a row. Mugabi got 24. How many did Valero have? Should I keep going?

Audley Harrison won a gold medal.....GGG didn't . Your arguments suck.

You simply don't know boxing.

[kafkod]

He has 3 belts right..won 1 in the ring against Lemuiex and the other 2 were handed to him right? you slam Broner saying he cherry picked right but who exactly is GGG fighting? hell he is fighting a ww next

Golovkin won all 3 of his titles in the ring. Don't blame him because the WBA and WBC bullshit rules allowed both Sturm and Canelo to avoid him and carry on fighting as paper champs for a while after Golovkin became THE MW champion of both those organisations.

It was Kell Brook who asked for a fight with Golovkin, btw, not the other way round. So by definition, that can't be called a cherry pick by GGG.

[PivotandRoll]

and thats my point, all these great fighters and eubank and benn didnt fight them. Cause they formed there own domestic circuit with watson and collins, all fighting each other and avoiding the true world class fighters

As opposed to what? fighting Welterweights.. They had world class opponents on there shores and made more money in them fights. Eubank openly ducked them yes, he didn't think he could win. At least he was honest about it and didn't hide behind unifying a dead division.

[New England]

So Ali gets no credit in his lose to Frasier and so on and so on through history?? No, Doesn't work like that.

Broner was with Maidana the whole time, though he lost clearly it was competitive with Broner even taking over at times in the middle rounds and hurting Maidana late.

Against Porter....Well he deserves to be **** on. He didn't show up at all and I'll take all my deserved flak for saying I don't think that was anywhere near Broner's best.

Honestly Demarco has more to his game than Murray. If you put a guy the same size comparably in front of Murray he'd do the same thing Broner did to Demarco if not worse. Proof is easy to see, Imagine Groves had of been faster, hit harder and much better defense.

There are levels and for some reason you idiots lose comprehension of it as the weights go up. Murray best win is Martinez who lost every round to Darren Barker the fight before until his late rally. He lost 6-7 rounds to Macklin before that. That's who Murray beat. And That is who GGG beat.

I 've already said I would pick GGG to KO all MW's not named BJS. I'm not hating, just telling the truth(or perhaps my distorted view of it for all I know).

I'm a Floyd and Broner fan, but I'd rather puke on myself than be a part of those soundbite quoting *******s.

broner was not teh same size as demarco. that is a part of my point. wins over MWs when you're a MW > wins over 130 lbers when you're murdering yourself to make weight and fighting a guy naturally 1-2 weight classes below you. broner was 8 lbs heavier than de leon. looked like eloy perez' older brother. etc.



and murray did very well against martinez. arguably won that fight in argentina. do you really want to go that rout ?


who does broner have other than demarco?
tought fight with paulie? on paulie's deathbed?
the other carlos molina?
emanuel taylor?
gavin reese?
alakhverdiev?
theophane?

am i missing another run of the mill nobody?


to say that these guys distance themselves from lemieux, geale, murray, macklin, proksa, stevens, etc, is wrong. then you consider that broner fights smaller guys more often, relied on a catchweight against porter and still lost, got his ass kicked by marcos maidana, and that he wins much less convincingly than golovkin, who is on an 8 year, 20 fight knockout streak. yeah

[PivotandRoll]

Golovkin won all 3 of his titles in the ring. Don't blame him because the WBA and WBC bullshit rules allowed both Sturm and Canelo to avoid him and carry on fighting as paper champs for a while after Golovkin became THE MW champion of both those organisations.

It was Kell Brook who asked for a fight with Golovkin, btw, not the other way round. So by definition, that can't be called a cherry pick by GGG.

That's a lie, Hearn while on the phone said to Kell "you should take the fight"

I'm wondering why hes said it to Kell instead of Degale though and that's not a dig, I wonder if it's about the loyalty thing Hearn always spouts about.

GGG shouldn't be blamed for cowards ducking him, but he should be blamed for contradicting himself over Kell and being so focused on unifying a division that has two interesting fights(BJS, Jacobs) that aren't about to happen anytime soon.