I agree. This fight isn't even in my top 5 list for who Golovkin should fight. It's obviously not going to be Canelo, so it better be Saunders in a unification match. Anything else is just bull****.
I've defended Golovkin for the Vanes matchup. I understood why that came about. But if he fights Murata, there is no defending that.
Educate yourself before posting next time, you biased casual racist joke of a (im)poster.
Murata = Olympic Gold Medalist, sells out huge venues in Japan, he is close to e megastar in Japan and has an amazing pedigree.
Murata >> Charlo, no debate needed. Charlos best win is Trout, a gatekeeper, he fights on Broners undercard and has terrible ratings, brings no money, cant sell tickets and has beaten nobody at 160.
G should be fighting Saunders in a unification match, not this Murata guy. This does nothing for the legacy for Golovkin. Nothing. So don't try and defend this bull****.
Let's see, a gold medalist and beat a decent gatekeeper quality fighter.
Originally posted by larryxxx..
He lost to N'DAM so how is he undefeated?? and who the hell has N'dam EVER BEATEN????? STOP!!!!!!!
Guys, I'm starting to see the problem with Larry. He doesn't actually watch boxing. He uses blatant robberies in fights that were not even close as justification.
Originally posted by larryxxx..
So now we are going to claim this nobody got robbed by another nobody? really?
Still a better win on his middleweight career than Jermall. I guess Golovkin should pass up on Jermall, in that case.
LOL, Larry doesn't even realize the two judges who scored it for N'Dam were suspended. That's how bad a robbery it was.
Seriously man, how about you watch boxing, because it's clear as day you've never even seen the fights.
Comment