Comments Thread For: Mayweather: Golovkin Should Take a Risk Like Other Champions Do!

[Larry the boss]

manny fought prime hatton, after hatton got knocked out by floyd and the turnbuckle in the same night.

Somehow.

read his post..lol he said hatton had gotten ko'd by manny before floyd fought him.....and that canelo even now would be to green for floyd...then said he should have fought oscar in 2007...when they did fight in 2007..wtf

[b00g13man]

you do know he fought Hatton BEFORE Manny right??? sooooo??

and you said Oscar was a 2007 fight?? Floyd did fight him in 2007...

and in you words Floyd SHOULD HAVE NEVER FOUGHT CANELO PERIOD RIGHT??

These clowns only just started watching the sport. They're embarrassing themselves.

[Catrin]

you do know he fought Hatton BEFORE Manny right??? sooooo??

and you said Oscar was a 2007 fight?? Floyd did fight him in 2007...

and in you words Floyd SHOULD HAVE NEVER FOUGHT CANELO PERIOD RIGHT??

you are Right! hatton fought pacman after Floyd! but the manner in which pacman put hatton to sleep was by far more brutal than floyds whooping!

do you really think Floyd deserve the W vs ODLH I thought it was a Draw!

and yes Canelo had no business fighting Floyd and jr knew it that's why he took the fight! easy money!

and as far 147 fighters better than old washed up pakiao! let's see:
Thurman, Spence, swift, brook!
than again he fights Berto who is not even Ranked!!! talk about RISK!

[!! Shawn]

Hopkins was a nobody at 34. He had nowhere near the hype Golovkin is getting. B Hops hype came afterwards by beating the likes of De La Hoya, Trinidad and being the longest reigning middleweight champion after ten years... Then he jumped up two weight classes and became light heavyweight champion.

Hopkins started fighting professionally a lot later and had barely any amateur career. GGG has already been a pro ten years and had an extensive amateur record so I don't see him being as well preserved as B Hop and being able to fight well into his 40s. If GGG is going to make moves, the time is now not later.

Bhop had been pro for 12 years before he fought Trinidad and was 36 years old. Golvkin has been pro for 10 years, and is 34.

Is it Golvkins fault that he has produced results that have captivated the boxing world, and generated the hype surrounding him?

Why does Hopkins get a pass for staying at middleweight for longer than GGG has, and fighting mandatories while trying to unify the middleweight division, but GGG does not?

Nevermind that it took Hopkins until he was 39 and 15 years in the pro's before he finally unified all of the belts.

GGG is getting criticized for going after the same goal, doing it faster, and doing in a more exciting way.

It took Hopkins 9 years to collect all 4 belts, Golvkin is on pace to do it in 6-7 depending on when he managed to get Saunders in the ring wit him.

So why again does Hopkins get praised as an ATG Middleweight, but GGG is a bum that fought nobody?

Why do all of the haters scream for GGG to move up like Hopkins did, even though if Golovkins career were running parallel to Hopkin's it would be another 3 years before Golovkin made a jump up in weight?

If you add up the elo rating of their opponents, before Hopkins first big fight with Trinidad which covers his first 6 years as middleweight champion, his title reign consisted of a total opponent elo of 2454. Golvkins title defenses over the same career span total to a rating of 4217 elo points.

What does that mean? Broken down on average each of Golovkins defenses have come against an opponent with an elo rating of 248 vs Hopkins average of 171... So on average, Golvkin has defended his title against opponents rated 44% higher than the opponents Hopkins was defending against.

Hopkins entire middleweight reign consisted of a total opponent elo of 5,522.

A single victory of Alvarez will put Golvkin's combined opponent elo at 5,610.
If he beats Jacobs and Saunders as well, that would put him at 6,441.

Thats 16% better than Hopkins entire middleweight run, of 10 years as champion, in what by that time will have been only 7 years for GGG.

But GGG is the one that is over hyped, and Hopkins is the legend.

Oh, and wins over Alvarez, Jacobs, and Saunder will tie GGG for most title defenses in middleweight history with Hopkins. But... GGG is the bum who hasn't fought anyone right?

[Johnwoo8686]

Bhop had been pro for 12 years before he fought Trinidad and was 36 years old. Golvkin has been pro for 10 years, and is 34.

Is it Golvkins fault that he has produced results that have captivated the boxing world, and generated the hype surrounding him?

Why does Hopkins get a pass for staying at middleweight for longer than GGG has, and fighting mandatories while trying to unify the middleweight division, but GGG does not?

Nevermind that it took Hopkins until he was 39 and 15 years in the pro's before he finally unified all of the belts.

GGG is getting criticized for going after the same goal, doing it faster, and doing in a more exciting way.

It took Hopkins 9 years to collect all 4 belts, Golvkin is on pace to do it in 6-7 depending on when he managed to get Saunders in the ring wit him.

So why again does Hopkins get praised as an ATG Middleweight, but GGG is a bum that fought nobody?

Why do all of the haters scream for GGG to move up like Hopkins did, even though if Golovkins career were running parallel to Hopkin's it would be another 3 years before Golovkin made a jump up in weight?

If you add up the elo rating of their opponents, before Hopkins first big fight with Trinidad which covers his first 6 years as middleweight champion, his title reign consisted of a total opponent elo of 2454. Golvkins title defenses over the same career span total to a rating of 4217 elo points.

What does that mean? Broken down on average each of Golovkins defenses have come against an opponent with an elo rating of 248 vs Hopkins average of 171... So on average, Golvkin has defended his title against opponents rated 44% higher than the opponents Hopkins was defending against.

Hopkins entire middleweight reign consisted of a total opponent elo of 5,522.

A single victory of Alvarez will put Golvkin's combined opponent elo at 5,610.
If he beats Jacobs and Saunders as well, that would put him at 6,441.

Thats 16% better than Hopkins entire middleweight run, of 10 years as champion, in what by that time will have been only 7 years for GGG.

But GGG is the one that is over hyped, and Hopkins is the legend.

Oh, and wins over Alvarez, Jacobs, and Saunder will tie GGG for most title defenses in middleweight history with Hopkins. But... GGG is the bum who hasn't fought anyone right?

Dude I don't know what is so hard to understand. Hopkins is considered a legend for what he did in the second half of his career, post 2001 and for his light heavyweight success. Hopkins career was largely overhshadowed in the 90s by the likes of Roy Jones and Oscar De La Hoya. Had B hop had retired at 35 no one would be talking about him right now. Let's see GGG fight the competition Hopkins fought and then move up to light heavyweight to become a champion.
Hopkins had fought prime Roy Jones at middleweight, no one on GGG's resume can match that. When Hopkins was GGG's age he had nowhere near the kind of hype that Golovkin is getting despite arguably fighting the stiffer competition.
Golovkin is a good fighter but he's being overrated by the media.

[hugh grant]

Nelo can show GGG is overrated at any point. Gggs critics shoiukd stop being so butthurt how highly GGG is rated in the mean time.

[Combat Talk Radio]

LOL, The Punisher protected?? Pass it, you had enough already, clearly.

Who compares a middleweight power to a welterweight power?? The biggest cab driver was Baldomir, I don't even think I should waste my time typing to someone who called Paul Williams protected. That takes some kind of hallucinogen to contrive.

I get it, you're a fan. Your avi speaks volumes. Let me break this down.

If you look at Williams' resume his best win was Margacheato. Marga has never looked good against anyone with at least decent speed. But fine, that's one.

Sergio Martinez - first fight he got a gift. Second fight, Maravilla put him to bed.

Erisland Lara - straight up exposed Williams, got robbed for his trouble. Don't even bother dis*****g this was a robbery.

Beyond those three, Williams fought bums to get to 42. Not one big name to be seen. He never would have stood a chance against Floyd, his defense was terrible and he was eating shots clean from both Lara and Martinez across 3 fights.

[!! Shawn]

Dude I don't know what is so hard to understand. Hopkins is considered a legend for what he did in the second half of his career, post 2001 and for his light heavyweight success. Hopkins career was largely overhshadowed in the 90s by the likes of Roy Jones and Oscar De La Hoya. Had B hop had retired at 35 no one would be talking about him right now. Let's see GGG fight the competition Hopkins fought and then move up to light heavyweight to become a champion.
Hopkins had fought prime Roy Jones at middleweight, no one on GGG's resume can match that. When Hopkins was GGG's age he had nowhere near the kind of hype that Golovkin is getting despite arguably fighting the stiffer competition.
Golovkin is a good fighter but he's being overrated by the media.

Bhop was already a legend before the comeback at 174.

My point was not to discredit Bernard Hopkins, it was to show that Golvkin is doing what Hopkins did but against better opposition.

The second half of hopkins career was just icing on the cake.

But lets not also forget the context.

Jumps to 174, beats Tarver.

Moves Winky Wright up from 160

Moves Calzaghe up from 168, loses.

Moves Kelly Pavlik up from 160

Roy Jones Jr

Jean Pascal

Jean Pascal

Loses to Dawson decisively to Dawson.

etc.

The only real win he had against a legitimate top fighter in the division was against Tarver who didn't view Hopkins as a threat and spent most of his camp losing weight after putting on 40lb to star in Rocky Balboa.

His later run is impressive for the fact that at his age he was still able to be competitive, and that is a testament to his fundamentals, and ATG understanding of the craft.

He made his legacy at middleweight though. That's where Hopkins was great. His dismantling of Trinidad was a work of art. His record number of title defenses, a testament to his dedication to the craft.

As to his fighting Roy Jones Jr, yes that fight was great. But at that point nobody knew how great Roy Jones Jr was going to be, and nobody knew how great Hopkins was going to be either.

They were simply the #1 and #2 rated contenders for James Toney's now vacant belt.

Both of them get credit in hindsight but lets not forget it took Hopkins another 2 years and 6 fights to win his first title. So even at the time, if you would have looked at their respective career contextually.

Roy Jones had already Decisively beaten James Toney at 168lb before Hopkins even won his first title.

So if you were looking at Roy's record in the build up to the Toney fight, Hopkins wouldn't have been a stand out name.

Conversely, Hopkins beat a young Glen Johnson in 1997. Glen Johnsons wouldn't find success until 7 years later beating Roy Jones and Antonio Tarver back to back. So even looking back at Hopkins resume in 2001 after he beat Trinidad, Johnson would have looked like another bum.

The point is, none of these things really become clear until everyones careers have finished. Some of Golovkins opponents may go on to make great names for themselves in years to come, just as some of Hopkins did.

And it also goes to show the value of defending belts against mandatories, because every once in a while a Glen Johnson will show up, and get completely dismantled, and years later you understand how good a win that really was.

[Johnwoo8686]

Bhop was already a legend before the comeback at 174.

My point was not to discredit Bernard Hopkins, it was to show that Golvkin is doing what Hopkins did but against better opposition.

The second half of hopkins career was just icing on the cake.

But lets not also forget the context.

Jumps to 174, beats Tarver.

Moves Winky Wright up from 160

Moves Calzaghe up from 168, loses.

Moves Kelly Pavlik up from 160

Roy Jones Jr

Jean Pascal

Jean Pascal

Loses to Dawson decisively to Dawson.

etc.

The only real win he had against a legitimate top fighter in the division was against Tarver who didn't view Hopkins as a threat and spent most of his camp losing weight after putting on 40lb to star in Rocky Balboa.

His later run is impressive for the fact that at his age he was still able to be competitive, and that is a testament to his fundamentals, and ATG understanding of the craft.

He made his legacy at middleweight though. That's where Hopkins was great. His dismantling of Trinidad was a work of art. His record number of title defenses, a testament to his dedication to the craft.

As to his fighting Roy Jones Jr, yes that fight was great. But at that point nobody knew how great Roy Jones Jr was going to be, and nobody knew how great Hopkins was going to be either.

They were simply the #1 and #2 rated contenders for James Toney's now vacant belt.

Both of them get credit in hindsight but lets not forget it took Hopkins another 2 years and 6 fights to win his first title. So even at the time, if you would have looked at their respective career contextually.

Roy Jones had already Decisively beaten James Toney at 168lb before Hopkins even won his first title.

So if you were looking at Roy's record in the build up to the Toney fight, Hopkins wouldn't have been a stand out name.

Conversely, Hopkins beat a young Glen Johnson in 1997. Glen Johnsons wouldn't find success until 7 years later beating Roy Jones and Antonio Tarver back to back. So even looking back at Hopkins resume in 2001 after he beat Trinidad, Johnson would have looked like another bum.

The point is, none of these things really become clear until everyones careers have finished. Some of Golovkins opponents may go on to make great names for themselves in years to come, just as some of Hopkins did.

And it also goes to show the value of defending belts against mandatories, because every once in a while a Glen Johnson will show up, and get completely dismantled, and years later you understand how good a win that really was.

Golovkin is doing what Hopkins did but against BETTER opposition? You must be kidding me. If Golovkin had faced some of the names Hopkins faced in the 90s he would not be undefeated. Prime Roy Jones is head and shoulders ahead of anyone on GGG's resume. And no one was calling Hopkins a legend in 1999 when he was 34 like Golovkin is now. Hopkins run after beating Trinidad is what caused him to be called a legend.

There are good names Golovkin can face at higher weight classes but he clearly wants no parts of them. I can understand why he wants the Canelo fight and wanted the Cotto fight. Those were big money fights and each guy had held the middleweight strap. But if the small guys won't fight you, you should do as Roy Jones said and "move up!"

[.:: JSFD26 ::.]

Pretty ironic coming from Mayweather. But I'm not gonna get into details cause I'm sure it's all over this thread already. Lol