lets sum up golovkin

[stealthradon]

without getting too intricate or into many details

pros-seems like a legit good guy. a competitor. very good at what he does. skilled. good for boxing.

cons-garbabge resume. garbage online fans. may be overrated. resume or lack of one may not be completely his fault but it is still glaring. will have career defining fight against a guy that has 0 wins at MW. ducked a true p4p matchup against ward. hasnt moved up but brought a WW up two classes.

So only fought 4-5 top 10 MW'ers, in their prime, only has one of the best amateur pedigrees of all time, 37 wins, only 20 title fights, which is almost twice as many title fights as Ward. Ward hasn't been 168 in years.
The Brook thing has been debunked so many times.

[maracho]

That's a very silly statement. Jose Luis Castillo and Antonio Margarito had multiple losses too. Many excellent fighters. Try again.

You're second paragraph is a lot of blabber. Who are these very good opponents that Quillin beat? You're not really making a point other than they're better because you say so. If you can't come up with a substantive post, just move on and find someone your level to talk boxing with.

Um you are the one who just said losses don't count on a resume, which would meant Cherife and McCracken opponants would hardly have any resume..lol

it's also very bias for you to compare losses by mexicans such as Margarito and Castillo who go into pro boxing at early ages and basically learn on the job but even then they didn't have multiple losses until they were way past their prime.

Funny that Mayweather thought Castillo had all kinds of blueprints to lose too so didn't know what he was in for

[Ray*]

You can't fault his recent competition.

[maracho]

What is humorous is when these alts say the same thing.
That Glovkin needs to move up and the only guy who could give him legitimacy is to fight Ward, the number one guy at his weight.
Not even the 2nd, 3rd, 10th. Jermall Charlo hasn't even moved up, yet he's already legit and sealed it with a nobody like Helland.
Guys like Broner moved up and fought retired Malignaggi, not Mayweather.
Their hate message always never ends without mentioning Ward.
In effect they're actually Glovkin's biggest fans. Hehe...
Glovkin = hypejob vs Andre Ward = number one.
The logic just isn't there.

great points

[IMDAZED]

Um you are the one who just said losses don't count on a resume, which would meant Cherife and McCracken opponants would hardly have any resume..lol

it's also very bias for you to compare losses by mexicans such as Margarito and Castillo who go into pro boxing at early ages and basically learn on the job but even then they didn't have multiple losses until they were way past their prime.

Funny that Mayweather thought Castillo had all kinds of blueprints to lose too so didn't know what he was in for

What does this have to do with Mayweather? You're all over the place. I think you need to go do your homework and come back. You're going to respond with something ****** because you're too pig-headed to do that and admit your wrongs so just letting you know, I won't respond anymore until I see a substantive post. Take care.

[Diego Rodriguez]

Pros:
Good guy. Respectful, polite lives a clean fight.
Tehnically sound.
Good at cutting off the ring.
Great jab
Excellent chin
Underrated defense
Power in both hands.
Great body puncher
Hi ring IQ.
Cons
Sometimes neglects his defense if he doesn't respect his opponent
Needs to improve his fighting in clinches
Needs to impove his combination punching.
Not a good communicator in English.
Polarizing. Why???? Who the hell knows. LOL
Attracts fanatical and **** detractors. Some are borderline mentally ill.
Some fans are over the top.

Very fair. I consider myself a big fan. But I'm not ever going to sacrifice my intellectual honesty for fandom. Haters tend to set me off more than fanatics.

[Diego Rodriguez]

I never said a thing about Trinidad so quit weaseling out of the subject where you insisted that Howard Eastman was better than everyone on GGG's record and you didnt back it up because anyone can see that Eastman's best wins were a extremely padded McKracken and a very green (11-4) Sam Soliman.

Tito is clearly better than anyone on Golovkin's resume, and that includes Canelo. But yeah Howard Eastman, give me a break. He was a decent fighter but he beat total rubbish. Against better competition he lost. There is nothing IMO you can point to on paper or watching him fight that tells me he is better than Jacobs. Heck he would have just been another guy on Golovkin's resume.

Listen to the British commentators about McCraken:

https://********/gN0nRIJUZ_k?t=7m11s

McCraken would have been an early round KO for Golovkin.

People talk about why Golovkin gets more hype than Hopkins, well it has to do with knocking out people and Bernard being a horrible watch. Great at what he does but IMO he was one of the worst watches in boxing for pure excitement. Sorry but people like to watch boxers knock people on their asses. That's why they liked Tyson infinity more than Larry Holmes. IMO I think Holmes was the better fighter.

[maracho]

Tito is clearly better than anyone on Golovkin's resume, and that includes Canelo. But yeah Howard Eastman, give me a break. He was a decent fighter but he beat total rubbish. Against better competition he lost. There is nothing IMO you can point to on paper or watching him fight that tells me he is better than Jacobs. Heck he would have just been another guy on Golovkin's resume.

Listen to the British commentators about McCraken:

https://********/gN0nRIJUZ_k?t=7m11s

McCraken would have been an early round KO for Golovkin.

People talk about why Golovkin gets more hype than Hopkins, well it has to do with knocking out people and Bernard being a horrible watch. Great at what he does but IMO he was one of the worst watches in boxing for pure excitement. Sorry but people like to watch boxers knock people on their asses. That's why they liked Tyson infinity more than Larry Holmes. IMO I think Holmes was the better fighter.

thanks, well put

[maracho]

What does this have to do with Mayweather? You're all over the place. I think you need to go do your homework and come back. You're going to respond with something ****** because you're too pig-headed to do that and admit your wrongs so just letting you know, I won't respond anymore until I see a substantive post. Take care.

ah reduced to ad hominems

anyway, Floyd fought Castillo because he had losses so he learned to avoid Margarito who basically had no recent losses, other than a robbery

[Curt Henning]

I can't envision it just like I can't see Canelo beating Golovkin but time will tell. That's all we can do. As a Golovkin fan I'm only looking at this fight and then go from there.

In my opinion Charlo should be doing everything he can to get fights because how long will it be before Golovkin might be ready to fight him if he wins vs. Canelo? You know he wants BJS,you know there is a rematch clause vs Canelo and Jacobs is still out there. As you say Charlo really brings high risk and low reward. If I was Charlo and looking at this practically and I really believed I was the man at 160lbs I'd be calling out Jacobs. Abel already said he's the second best MW. So if you get him and win how can Golovkin avoid you? Plus Jacobs has some name brand now.

I hope I'm wrong but some of these guys seem like they are going to do their own waiting game.

i dont disagree with alot of what you said....the only thing is "abel already said he(jacobs) is the second best MW"...well of course...do you expect him to say anything else? jacobs went 12 with golovkin and came close....sanchez says alot of things...like how golovkin could beat everyone that fights at 175....but i dont believe even half of that to be true....

charlo needs to just keep fighting on tv and winning in good fashion

i know charlo/jacobs is a fight that golovkin fans want to see ...because it eliminates one of them from a future golovkin fight basically......he should be looking to beat both of those guys to prove something to us