It's not a resume that befits his talent, and all his fans know that. Why does anyone have to even defend it? I love the guy but his resume is mediocre.
But the agenda of the thread was to lay bare his weak resume, let's not pretend it was anything different. So if you're having that argument, why can you not bring up the several blatant ducks that he has had? Can people not bring some context to it? A resume is only as good as the guy willing to fight you.
Or will this a portion of this site continue to pretend that Golovkin was not flagrantly ducked by Sturm, Martinez, Quillin, Jacobs, Canelo, Cotto, Eubank, Saunders?
But the agenda of the thread was to lay bare his weak resume, let's not pretend it was anything different. So if you're having that argument, why can you not bring up the several blatant ducks that he has had? Can people not bring some context to it? A resume is only as good as the guy willing to fight you.
Or will this a portion of this site continue to pretend that Golovkin was not flagrantly ducked by Sturm, Martinez, Quillin, Jacobs, Canelo, Cotto, Eubank, Saunders?
Comment