How would you honestly rate Golovkin?

[tonysoprano]

Best MW of his generation. Just a shame there aren't that many A+ fighters on his resume. He was unlucky or avoided, if you prefer but he missed a few marquee names that would have helped his record.

Class act as a person though. No BS, no trash-talk, just train hard, fight hard and repeat.

[Scipio2009]

I only make the case that Golovkin should be recognised for the defenses of the regular title when their was no incumbent super titlist (ie. he should be credited with 15 or so). I believe the poster I was replying to argues that none of Golovkins defenses of the World title should be counted irrespective of whether there was a 'Super' titlist or not.

If you take this stance it necessitates that you apply the same ruling to any other regular 'world' champ since 2001 if you are to be consistent. At least - that's the way I see it. Any and all WBA 'regular' World titles would have to be derecognised unless you're going to apply some mental contortions to explain why Golovkins shouldn't count but other fighters' should.

Besides - the WBAs own rules state that Super Champion status is bestowed merely for the accomplishment of making 5 defenses of the world title - which curiously also brings Golovkin's title defenses to the same number (15 or so), as you get if you count only those defense he made whilst there either was no super champion or whilst Golovkin himself held that title.

Of course - I have both Maidana and LInares and all the other WBA champs as legitimate as long as there was no super champion at the time - I was merely illustrating the absurdity of the position Dream Fighter was taking.

Only issue with that is that it's not true; Felix Sturm was the WBA's champion from April 2007, when he beat Javier Castillejo, through September 2012, when he got beat by IBF champ Daniel Geale.

Rather than make his mandatory defense of the WBA title against Golovkin, he vacated the belt to continue on with a money fight in Australia against Anthony Mundine the coming January.

Depending on when the formal decision was made by the WBA, Golovkin was elevated to full champion at some point after the Proksa fight, with Gabriel Rosado being his first title defense of the full championship.

So basically, Golovkin has made 15 defenses of the WBA championship where he's 14-0-1, a respectable mark nonetheless.

If there's a recognized champion above you, regardless of what the organization wants to call your championship, you're an interim champion, and defenses of interim belts don't count, full stop.

Daniel Jacobs is a good fighter, but he lost his WBO title shot to Pirog, and lost his WBA title shot against Golovkin (regardless of how I scored the fight). He's still got time, but he's yet to be a full world champion.

Note: have read your post a handful of times, and I'm pretty sure that we mostly agree on this point, unless I'm missing something.

[amuroray]

GGG is a good fighter with a very average resume. Fought 2 top level fighters and coulda lost both.

Hes not an atg and imo has wasted his talent.

[Tomjas]

H2H top of the line elite fighter who would give the best middleweights a tough fight and would be 50/50 to win against them in my eyes. Resume very strong but nothing crazy.

Personally, I think he is outside his prime at this point, logically speaking (i mean he is what 36/37... that's old for a fighter). One of the best power jabs, one of the best Chins, Crazy stamina, very good fundamentals and boxing IQ. I wish that he had a chance to mix it up with the best of them in his early 30s... but unfortunately, the best waited until he was out of his physical prime to mix it up.

This is fair

[daggum]

how can you rate him? hes just a prospect until he steps up. we all saw what happened to ocampo. i think the same happens to ggg against charlo

[Citizen Koba]

Only issue with that is that it's not true; Felix Sturm was the WBA's champion from April 2007, when he beat Javier Castillejo, through September 2012, when he got beat by IBF champ Daniel Geale.

Rather than make his mandatory defense of the WBA title against Golovkin, he vacated the belt to continue on with a money fight in Australia against Anthony Mundine the coming January.

Depending on when the formal decision was made by the WBA, Golovkin was elevated to full champion at some point after the Proksa fight, with Gabriel Rosado being his first title defense of the full championship.

So basically, Golovkin has made 15 defenses of the WBA championship where he's 14-0-1, a respectable mark nonetheless.

If there's a recognized champion above you, regardless of what the organization wants to call your championship, you're an interim champion, and defenses of interim belts don't count, full stop.

Daniel Jacobs is a good fighter, but he lost his WBO title shot to Pirog, and lost his WBA title shot against Golovkin (regardless of how I scored the fight). He's still got time, but he's yet to be a full world champion.

Note: have read your post a handful of times, and I'm pretty sure that we mostly agree on this point, unless I'm missing something.

Yes. You are correct. We basically agree on all points - I'm not quite sure which bit you're saying isn't true, since there's nothing I've said I think that contradicts what you said or vice versa.

Put simply the rule I apply is that defenses of the Regular title count unless there is an incumbent 'super' champion in which case only defenses of that title should be counted towards a defense record. ie, there is only a maximum of one 'champion' of the WBA at any one time for the purposes of title defense records and the 'super' takes precedence over the 'world' title.

Dream Fighter - who I initially addresed my post to was claiming that Golovkin only had 9 (or so) defenses since he was only counting those defenses after Golovkin was elevated to super champion, not those made during the period when GGG was regular champion but there was no 'super' champion. I can understand his stance to a degree, but that position raises a whole load of consistency issues regarding other WBA 'regular' champs in other divisions or times.

[Scipio2009]

I think Daggum has it mostly right but I am not getting into it that much.

When you say Golovkin talking all that . . . you should reference the time frames between his comment and when Ward "accepted" the challenge. Quite a lot had changed for Golovkin and Ward as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKGbttrMLag


BTW I am not slamming nor have I ever slammed Ward about Golovkin. I have said that fight might have been possible at one point. But it was it was only a slight possibility, like 5% chance.

Gennady Golovkin fought May 2015, Andre Ward fought June 2015 (after showing the world he was already at 172lbs almost three weeks before the Paul Smith fight), went on ESPN I believe the Monday after his fight, brought the "lil G" moniker to the forefront, and let the world know that he wanted that smoke. Deal points won't ever be known for sure, but the offer seemed to be 50/50 of everything for a fight at 168lbs.

Golovkin's camp may have had the Lemieux fight already worked out for October, but that didn't stop them from keeping Chavez Jr and Carl Froch in their mouths, and hindsight will show us that Golovkin didn't fight for another 6 months before taking on house arrest Dominic Wade.

Golovkin-Ward could've rightfully happened in October 2015 (in lieu of the Lemieux fight) or March/April 2016 (in lieu of the Wade fight), and nothing that K2 had in the works for Golovkin would've been affected, if we're honest here.

[daggum]

Gennady Golovkin fought May 2015, Andre Ward fought June 2015 (after showing the world he was already at 172lbs almost three weeks before the Paul Smith fight), went on ESPN I believe the Monday after his fight, brought the "lil G" moniker to the forefront, and let the world know that he wanted that smoke. Deal points won't ever be known for sure, but the offer seemed to be 50/50 of everything for a fight at 168lbs.

Golovkin's camp may have had the Lemieux fight already worked out for October, but that didn't stop them from keeping Chavez Jr and Carl Froch in their mouths, and hindsight will show us that Golovkin didn't fight for another 6 months before taking on house arrest Dominic Wade.

Golovkin-Ward could've rightfully happened in October 2015 (in lieu of the Lemieux fight) or March/April 2016 (in lieu of the Wade fight), and nothing that K2 had in the works for Golovkin would've been affected, if we're honest here.

its called a publicity stunt and it was nothing more than that. hook line and sinker...ward thought his reputation had been hurt by ggg making him look bad so he tried to counter by making him an offer that he knew wouldn't be accepted. i don't call that "wanting it" the guy had just fought paul smith and yet he needed another tune up before ggg when ggg was available. what confidence...it was an appeal to low info non critical thinkers. it was smart without a doubt cause hey it worked but lets not pretend he expected that fight to come about with that offer.

there's a whole thread of this i made which completely disproves all your claims. ward didnt offer the fight for 2015 so not sure why you are speaking about things you don't even know about. roc nation said so. look up the thread with quotes. he needed a tune up first. it was a 2 fight deal.

to your second point lets try to think logically here(for once) ggg was not going to preemptively postpone/step aside fighting cotto-canelo by signing to fight ward in 2015 for a fight in 2016. its just a ridiculous thing to suggest. ggg was on a fight by fight basis pending if cotto/canelo wanted to fight after their november fight. by november ward had already signed that 3 fight deal at light heavyweight and that was that. no offer for a fight right away and the offer for a future fight conflicted with ggg's plans for a much bigger fight.

[Scipio2009]

If you rate him a B fighter . . . it demonstrates you really do not know boxing or you cannot separate your emotion from reason.

You do not accomplish what he has in boxing as a B level fighter. He is A level, among the best in the sport. The question isn't is he good, it is how good.

You came with that sht in front of boxing people you would be laughed right off the stage.

I simply go off what my eyes tell me.

The 15 title defenses of the WBA belt isn't anything to turn your nose up at, but look at the fighters that he's fought and judge for yourself.

Daniel Jacobs is a good fighter, maybe even a really good fighter; you line him up against the 15 guys that Golovkin fought to defend his belt and he likely blows through the 13 defenses and has tough fights with Golovkin and Alvarez.

Golovkin is arguably even with Alvarez and Jacobs, and it's not even clear if he's all that much better than Billy Joe Saunders or Jermall Charlo (or arguably Derevyanchenko, but that's another conversation), and none of those guys are openly considered A fighters.

Floyd Mayweather Jr was an A+ fighter; issues with his hands aside, it was clear as day that he was head and shoulders better than a field that also had really good fighters (an aging Oscar, Cotto, Pacquiao, Mosley, Marquez, etc).

Floyd is retired now, but we know that Keith Thurman is a hair better than both Porter and Garcia, Kell Brook is at least a hair better than Shawn Porter, and we're still not sure how good Errol Spence Jr is, but he's a head better than Kell Brook. Terrence Crawford is seen as maybe a wunderkind, but he hasn't fought anyone yet to really gauge that out.

Keith Thurman is likely an A fighter at this point, so the fight with Spence Jr will help confirm where Spence Jr is; Spence saws through Thurman like he did Brook and Peterson, and likely does to Danny Garcia, and he'd be confirmed as an A fighter on his way to maybe being an A+ fighter.

Calling Golovkin an A fighter would mean that you're also calling Alvarez and Jacobs A fighters

[daggum]

I simply go off what my eyes tell me.

The 15 title defenses of the WBA belt isn't anything to turn your nose up at, but look at the fighters that he's fought and judge for yourself.

Daniel Jacobs is a good fighter, maybe even a really good fighter; you line him up against the 15 guys that Golovkin fought to defend his belt and he likely blows through the 13 defenses and has tough fights with Golovkin and Alvarez.

Golovkin is arguably even with Alvarez and Jacobs, and it's not even clear if he's all that much better than Billy Joe Saunders or Jermall Charlo (or arguably Derevyanchenko, but that's another conversation), and none of those guys are openly considered A fighters.

Floyd Mayweather Jr was an A+ fighter; issues with his hands aside, it was clear as day that he was head and shoulders better than a field that also had really good fighters (an aging Oscar, Cotto, Pacquiao, Mosley, Marquez, etc).

Floyd is retired now, but we know that Keith Thurman is a hair better than both Porter and Garcia, Kell Brook is at least a hair better than Shawn Porter, and we're still not sure how good Errol Spence Jr is, but he's a head better than Kell Brook. Terrence Crawford is seen as maybe a wunderkind, but he hasn't fought anyone yet to really gauge that out.

Keith Thurman is likely an A fighter at this point, so the fight with Spence Jr will help confirm where Spence Jr is; Spence saws through Thurman like he did Brook and Peterson, and likely does to Danny Garcia, and he'd be confirmed as an A fighter on his way to maybe being an A+ fighter.

Calling Golovkin an A fighter would mean that you're also calling Alvarez and Jacobs A fighters

yeah and whitaker and chavez are arguably even. also thurman is an A fighter but saunders isn't...i would say saunders has a better resume. at best they are around even. yes everyone at middle sucks and everyone at welter is awesome especially guys like guerrero who sucked ballz or garcia who hasn't beaten anyone there but shot fighters.