You guys put ggg on a pedestal don't you...

[Madison Boxing]

I have always been reserved about him because I wanted to see him go through the levels before I made a true judgement. I'll tell you what though, the little opinions I did put forward before last night were pretty accurate. I thought we were watching a B level fighter with A+ power, and I can confirm now that is exactly what he is.

The problem with his career before last night was that he had racked up so many title defences without having fought anyone particularly good. So he divided opinion massively thus creating fierce debate/argument on here.

Me I'm a little bit old fashioned I guess, I want to see evidence before I label a guy - I want to see him in with top competition. Its the same with Errol Spence now, I have never jumped on that bandwagon because we have to see what he can do with someone good under the lights, not in the gym in sparring. We'll surely find out against Brook what he has.

With GGG fans hopefully the comparisons with Hagler, Monzon, Hopkins, etc. will stop now. I don't hold my breath though.

did hagler, monzon and hopkins never have any close fights in there careers?

[Madison Boxing]

Well I think we all just brought into the hype in the end. If you had doubts about him then you get labelled a "Hater"... So in the end we all thought he had no competition in 160, but now I could see why they wanted to keep him there.

you make it sound like he lost lol. he just beat the second best guy at middleweight who hadnt lost in 7 years.

[GGG Gloveking]

yeah... We gotta see bbc...

.....ok.....

[GGG Gloveking]

did hagler, monzon and hopkins never have any close fights in there careers?

Never. Never lost and certainly never had any decisions against top opponents.

[Robbie Barrett]

Never. Never lost and certainly never had any decisions against top opponents.

Difference is they had quality wins too. Golovkin doesn't. He was hyped on the "eye test", he failed the "eye test" last night.

[Madison Boxing]

Difference is they had quality wins too. Golovkin doesn't. He was hyped on the "eye test", he failed the "eye test" last night.

what was the result?

[SweetPbfAli]

Fight wasn't a robbery....But G lost.
These dudes be on a 24 hour high after Saturday night.

Suddenly someone's a bum
Suddenly someone's is GOAT

That's the thing. GGG lost a close fight to a very good middleweight but his fanbase keep rationalising why GGG won and not acknowledging Danny's performance and flaws he revealed in their hero. He's human, it's fine! Lol

[Robbie Barrett]

what was the result?

A close fight with a B level fighter that could have gone either way. That was the "eye test" result or do you want the official?

[-PBP-]

I have him top 5 pound for pound so yes I do.

[Vasyl’s dad]

I have always been reserved about him because I wanted to see him go through the levels before I made a true judgement. I'll tell you what though, the little opinions I did put forward before last night were pretty accurate. I thought we were watching a B level fighter with A+ power, and I can confirm now that is exactly what he is.

The problem with his career before last night was that he had racked up so many title defences without having fought anyone particularly good. So he divided opinion massively thus creating fierce debate/argument on here.

Me I'm a little bit old fashioned I guess, I want to see evidence before I label a guy - I want to see him in with top competition. Its the same with Errol Spence now, I have never jumped on that bandwagon because we have to see what he can do with someone good under the lights, not in the gym in sparring. We'll surely find out against Brook what he has.

With GGG fans hopefully the comparisons with Hagler, Monzon, Hopkins, etc. will stop now. I don't hold my breath though.

So Hagler , Hops and Monzon never had a tough fight with the number 2 guy in the division?