Comments Thread For: Golovkin, Hopkins, Monzon: The Record at Middleweight

[Shadoww702]

Hard to tell. Vanes is slicker than many realize. He's gone toe to toe with some truly athletic guys. I can see him delaying the stoppage with some decent movement. But we don't know his conditioning level, and he's definitely not sharp at all. So you could be right about therapy stoppage. Wouldn't surprised me if he made into the middle to late rounds though.

True but slick fighters rely on timing and reflexes and staying sharp.... Kind of the complete opposite of not fighting in over 2 years. And taking a fight on very short notice.

If he makes it past round 5 I'm impressed

[Butch.McRae]

True but slick fighters rely on timing and reflexes and staying sharp.... Kind of the complete opposite of not fighting in over 2 years. And taking a fight on very short notice.

If he makes it past round 5 I'm impressed

Agreed with this

[Removed Now]

Man this trend has me thinking how ****** Jermain Taylor was he was so good. If he would had Boxed better during Kelly and learned how to hold against froch and king author in the last few seconds (I know those fights were at 168). He could be regarded as one of the greats. Oh well.

[kafkod]

He won the interim belt from Nunez, then it was changed to "Regular" and he defended it against Tapia next.

Was levated to "Super" against Geale.

That was an interim title. His first 10 defenses were with the "Regular" title. He was not the true title holder.

That is a fact. I don't consider Danny Jacobs a champion for the same reason.

GGG's interim title fight isn't incuded in his defences record doe. It begins with the Tapia fight.

Please somebody correct me if I'm wrong about this - but I believe that the WBC are different from the WBA in that the WBC "super" title is the same title that was held by Hagler, Monzon, Bhop, with the "regular" title being introduced later.

With the WBA, it's the other way round. The WBA "regular" is the lineal WBA title, if I can put it that way, with the super title being introduced later for WBA champs who were also unified champions.

In the case of GGG, that's an important difference, because for 2 years he was the No1 contender, then mandatory challenger, for the WBA MW title - because there was no "super" champion at that time - but the title was downgraded to "regular" before being awarded to him when Sturm was elevated to super champion.

Danny Jacobs, on the other hand, only became mando for the WBA super title by winning the regular. The WBA didn't switch titles on him without giving him a shot he'd earned, the way they did with GGG.

[UNBIASED BOXING]

Robinson
Monzon
Hagler
Grebb
Cerdan
LaMotta
Fitzsimmons
Ketchell
Williams (Holman)
Burley

My top ten and Hopkins isn't in my top twenty. If your counting "title defensive's" then you can rate him high. However I watch the films and I compare skills and willingness and Bernard would RUN against any of my top ten.
He was a good boxer and knew his own abilities very well.
He was no fighter and never fought at a high level.

Ray

Your list is getting disregarded for a good reason.

No Roy Jones Jr. (who absolutely beats every single fighter on that list), no James Toney (probably does as well), no Bernard Hopkins (and he probably does as well, or almost)? That's ridiculous.

[Dr Rumack]

Monzon had by far the best record of the 3. It's indisputable.

Whether Monzon would have beaten Hopkins is another story, but I'd have given him a shot.

Golovkin spent his prime out of the spotlight due to his 'promoter' absolutely ****ing him. Maybe he would have demolished Sergio circa 2010/2011 if he'd gotten the chance. But he didn't so we'll never know.

Without that evidence we can just speculate on the basis of what he did against lower tier fighters, and speculation just doesn't matter at the end of the day.

When a career is over all that matters is what a fighter did or didn't do. Why they didn't do certain things is no more than hearsay.

[mabulkhair]

GGG does not stand a chance against a prime Hopkins. I am a GGG fan but Hopkins has completely the wrong style for
GGG to beat. I remember when everyone was counting out Hopkins against Pavlik and Hopkins literally put on a clinic.

[mabulkhair]

Man this trend has me thinking how ****** Jermain Taylor was he was so good. If he would had Boxed better during Kelly and learned how to hold against froch and king author in the last few seconds (I know those fights were at 168). He could be regarded as one of the greats. Oh well.

Taylor had it all man and had one of the best jabs in the game if not the best at the time, but like you said if he learned how to clinch he could have been great.

[Marvlus Marv]

I would rank Canelo more of a A- he has a stamina flaw.

Jacob's B+ for his highly suspect chin keeps him away from an A. But after his last fight that might even be to high??

Think that's right. I was hesitant about calling Canelo A+, tbh.

[Marvlus Marv]

Canelo is not an A+ fighter. He's B+ at best.

Historically, he doesn't stack up with A fighters at all. Lol

I do agree. I wasn't convinced myself when I awarded him A+ status. A little too generous in the grand scheme of legends.