Golovking still hasn't beaten a P4P fighter

[satiev1]

No I'm not. And I'm disapointed in you Satiev, always saw you as one of the most balanced posters on there.

Take the case of Rigondeaux and Crawford for instance. Both fought fighters ranked higher than Jacobs and completely embarrassed them.

Rigondeaux fought donaire who's not on danny's level. Donaire is losing to journey man and getting koed cold. Who did crawford beat better than jacobs? Postol? Gamboa? I hope you're kidding.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

He had an unconvincing win against an unrated fighter who got flattened in 5 rounds by Dmitry Pirog.

A lot of people based his ranking on his supposed dominance on the division. He didn't look all that dominant against Jacobs.

After his last performance, I don't think he deserves that ranking.

How was Jacobs unrated? He was ranked highly by the ring at middleweight and held the WBA regular title which I grant is a useless title, but he'd won several straight fights by KO and held a first round KO over then unbeaten former title holder Peter Quillin. He was clearly rated highly.

[KingHippo]

Rigondeaux fought donaire who's not on danny's level. Donaire is losing to journey man and getting koed cold. Who did crawford beat better than jacobs? Postol? Gamboa? I hope you're kidding.

I'm pretty positive Donaire was ranked higher than Jacobs at the time Rigondeaux fought him. And he put on one of the most beautiful performances I've seen out of any fighter in my lifetime.

Postol had a resume comparable to Jacobs before the fight. Maybe he wasn't ranked higher, I'd have to check that, but to write him off as a bum is just disingenuous.

[KingHippo]

How was Jacobs unrated? He was ranked highly by the ring at middleweight and held the WBA regular title which I grant is a useless title, but he'd won several straight fights by KO and held a first round KO over then unbeaten former title holder Peter Quillin. He was clearly rated highly.

Yes, at MIDDLEWEIGHT, which is not a great division, I think you and I will agree.

When it comes to P4P rankings, I doubt anyone would rank Jacobs in the top 20.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Yes, at MIDDLEWEIGHT, which is not a great division, I think you and I will agree.

When it comes to P4P rankings, I doubt anyone would rank Jacobs in the top 20.

Oh I see. Well, by the same token, how many pound for pound guys have beaten other pound for pound guys?

At the same time, I don't think it matters. If you're handling or ruling your division, that's the main goal. How are heavyweights supposed to fight pound for pound fighters? Drop down fifty-a hundred pounds? Mythical rankings are pretty pointless.

[KingHippo]

Oh I see. Well, by the same token, how many pound for pound guys have beaten other pound for pound guys?

At the same time, I don't think it matters. If you're handling or ruling your division, that's the main goal. How are heavyweights supposed to fight pound for pound fighters? Drop down fifty-a hundred pounds? Mythical rankings are pretty pointless.

That's the whole point. If you aren't beating pound for pound guys, you have to at least dominate a great division or completely dominate fighters who aren't ranked.

There really is no rationale for how high Golovkin is ranked besides the way he fights.

[Citizen Koba]

That's the whole point. If you aren't beating pound for pound guys, you have to at least dominate a great division or completely dominate fighters who aren't ranked.

There really is no rationale for how high Golovkin is ranked besides the way he fights.

Meh. P4Ps a steaming pile of donkey droppings IMO but there's always a rationale - unless you're accusing the TBRB panel and all major publications of just pulling names out of a hat? In Golovkin's case I suspect it's the longevity of his dominance against good (though not elite) fighters. Having one tough fight doesn't negate the work that he's done to date, though it does give a better indication as to his current level. If he struggles again or loses in his next few fights his ranking will drop.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

That's the whole point. If you aren't beating pound for pound guys, you have to at least dominate a great division or completely dominate fighters who aren't ranked.

There really is no rationale for how high Golovkin is ranked besides the way he fights.

He's nearly unified the whole division. He beat Lemiuex and Stevens who just had a fight on HBO. He beat Murray and Rosado who just had their own fight as well on TV in the UK. He's beaten Jacobs who was highly ranked. He ran over then 36-0 titleholder Brook. When you have three of the four belts in the division and have done so with hardly losing a round outside of the Jacobs fight, you are the dominant one in your division. With a Canelo win, he's beaten the key players from the past few years and there are more coming up which is a good thing for him. He's the man at 160. I don't care about pound for pound crap. How many other fighters have gotten this close to unifying a division since Hopkins? Other than Kovalev of course. He has to take the Canelo fight and he has to beat him for a legacy. But if he does, all that's left is Saunders and Eubank, Jr. and then maybe Charlo. More fighters should be staying in one place and unifying. It truly is harder than just jumping up in weight every few fights. Plus it's better for boxing to have titles unified.

[KingHippo]

Meh. P4Ps a steaming pile of donkey droppings IMO but there's always a rationale - unless you're accusing the TBRB panel and all major publications of just pulling names out of a hat? In Golovkin's case I suspect it's the longevity of his dominance against good (though not elite) fighters. Having one tough fight doesn't negate the work that he's done to date, though it does give a better indication as to his current level. If he struggles again or loses in his next few fights his ranking will drop.

I think the TBRB are fans of Golovkin just like the majority of boxing observers. I think his ranking has more to do with the way he fights more than anything.

[RussB23]

He will in september.