Comments Thread For: Why Atlas Leaving Golovkin Off His P4P List is Deeply Flawed

[Robbie Barrett]

Shhhhhhh Kigali... i mean Isaac, you're letting everyone know how little you understand about boxing.

Go back and watch monroe fight rd 1 golovkin defense (doesn't get hit) and his head movement.
Then watch when monroe tees off on him. He drops his hands and stands there, takes his punches, nods in approval at monroes lack of power, then gestures to keep them coming. Why did Monroe stop throwing? Golovkin was asking him to continue.

In the wade fight all i can remember is that wade was overmatched so much it was almost a joke. Not happy about that fight because the huge gap in talent and skill.
Once again, Golovkin had good high gaurd and head movement, then he stops, lowers his hands as wade comes into attack. Even blind freddy can see this but you can't?

I'm not looking for a back and forth with you. If you honestly can't see what i'm talking about after re-watching the vids, i know how little you know.

How little i understand? You sound like a guy that's never been in a fight in his life.

No fighter lets someone hit them you ******ed ****. Even featherfist punchers hurt.

Gololvkin always does the nodding head when he gets caught clean. You haven't seen many of his fights if you think that was some kind of sign.

[komandante]

Teddy and his bias opinion, I'm sure he'll put Bradley in there if not w/o Pac's spanking.

[Progrssive_Jedi]

The writer decides to write an article deriding Atlas's list. Then questions Pacquiao's place in the top 10? Pacquiao's wins over Bradley and Vargas last year were better than most fighters opposition on the list. Certainly better than Wade and Brook at 160.

He questioned Manny place because of his criteria. Manny has faded, and that was a criteria.

But he also did it to show the contradiction Atlas used.

But more importantly, Brook whoops both Vargas and Bradley.

How little i understand? You sound like a guy that's never been in a fight in his life.

No fighter lets someone hit them you ******ed ****. Even featherfist punchers hurt.

No one does! That statement alone is easily debunked. Ali often did. I've seen quit a few fighters do it in and out of the ring.

Kimbo Slice did it all the time. And to huge mother ****ers who no doubt packed a punch. Why, because when you lay into a guy that can hurt you and he smiles or nods, you know you're in ****ing trouble.

GGG doesn't do it to everyone. But I know he's invited punches, and I know Wade, Monroe, and Brook were on their back feet after they realized they couldn't hurt ggg and the fight was just gonna be them getting hurt.

But cool, hate on. It's all very easily to debunk.

[BillyBoxing]

Golovkin lets fighters hit him on purpose don't you know?

You certainly didn't understand half of the post you replied to.

[Robbie Barrett]

You certainly didn't understand half of the post you replied to.

So i didn't understand that he was being sarcastic and he really thinks Golovkin has good defence, but he doesn't get credit for it because it's not as obvious?

I understood perfectly fine.

I disagree. Golovkin is there to be hit and has been, but ******s make up dumb excuses like he gets hit on purpose.

[asgarth]

Shhhhhhh Kigali... i mean Isaac, you're letting everyone know how little you understand about boxing.

Go back and watch monroe fight rd 1 golovkin defense (doesn't get hit) and his head movement.
Then watch when monroe tees off on him. He drops his hands and stands there, takes his punches, nods in approval at monroes lack of power, then gestures to keep them coming. Why did Monroe stop throwing? Golovkin was asking him to continue.

In the wade fight all i can remember is that wade was overmatched so much it was almost a joke. Not happy about that fight because the huge gap in talent and skill.
Once again, Golovkin had good high gaurd and head movement, then he stops, lowers his hands as wade comes into attack. Even blind freddy can see this but you can't?

I'm not looking for a back and forth with you. If you honestly can't see what i'm talking about after re-watching the vids, i know how little you know.

Dont bother with Kigali, nothing coherent will reach his ears. He is one of the most biased person I have ever encountered on a forum.

[Edward90]

I completely agree with the fact that Spence should not be there and I'm buying stock in Spence. I think he's the real deal, but he hasn't done anything to warrant being in the top 10. Also, Thurman is wayyyyyyy too high. The only win that I find worth really mentioning is Porter. Guerrero and Collazo were fine, but they don't catapult you like that...

The thing is how recent are we talking in terms of level of opposition. Pacman wins over Bradley and Vargas are more impressive than Wade and Brook for GGG, so I'm not sure what his problem is with Pacman. He has a point to a degree with Canelo. However, if you go back a couple years, Canelo's level of opposition and resume surpasses that of GGG's fairly easily. Also, if Atlas thinks that the Brook fight showed significant slippage, that's his right (aalthough I thought it was a meaningless fight). GGG didn't really use the skills he has in that fight because he didn't really need to. Also, throughout his career, GGG has been there to be hit, despite his ability to avoid punishment. He has a solid chin though.

I agree that GGG should be top 10 P4P, but he could have refuted Atlas better.

[koolkc107]

I already explained why Atlas is right in another thread. I didn't get there the same way Teddy did but I agree that he is correct to leave Lil g off the top 10.

P4P means "if the fighters were the same size, who would win". And none of the guys on Teddy's list lose to Lil g if that is the case, except maybe Canelo. Yet, Kid Cinnamon is much more proven albeit maybe not recently.

I understand this writers opinion and he makes good arguments in turning Atlas's own criteria against him.

But, he is still wrong. Lil g is not top 10 P4P til his resume makes a significant upgrade.

[cork]

Andreas Hale, once again, spits nothing but truth.

All you have to do is look at Teddy's own criteria. If you apply it to the other fighters on the list, you'll be scratching your head trying to figure out how some of those guys were ranked above Golovkin. It seems like he made up the criteria just for Golovkin and he's not even able to apply it properly.

Also with regards to 'slippage'. How a fighter whose never been knocked down or lost a professional fight is slipping is laughable. When Golovkin loses a fight or gets knocked down, then we can discuss slippage.

This one's easy. Slippage for a fighter who barely loses round in his career lost one or two round against brook = getting old. But yeah that double standard is puzzling.

I have no idea how he rank Thurman 4th when his best win is porter who I don't think is a good boxer at all. The 147 division is so overrated right now but at least the writer did point out p4p is all opinion so take it with a grain of salt. It amuses me how lot of these guys are so passionate about this though.

[Robbie Barrett]

He questioned Manny place because of his criteria. Manny has faded, and that was a criteria.

But he also did it to show the contradiction Atlas used.

But more importantly, Brook whoops both Vargas and Bradley.

He was comparing them was he? Lets do that with Atlas's rules.

1. Talent: Pure ability - Pacquiao
2. Technique: How does he apply his talent? - Pacquiao
3. Time and consistency: How long has he performed at this level? - Pacquiao
4. Competition: How good is it? - Pacquiao
5. Slippage: There's always someone breathing over your shoulder - Golovkin

Even if Brook beats them at WW it doesn't make Golovkins win better, he was fighting a WW at MW.