Comments Thread For: Golovkin Sues Managers, Hermann Brothers, For $3.5 Milllion

[Kiowhatta]

Gees, how things have turned out for the once deified superstar who was on top of the world.

I would really like to know exactly how things could have imploded so badly for the former middleweight king - who has been surprisingly and uncharacteristically quiet ever since his controversial decision loss to Canelo in September of last year.

the Golovkin I got used to before he became involved with negotiations with Golden Boy was an unassuming, light-hearted guy who just wanted to get in the ring and fight. He wanted to become undisputed champion, but IMO he went about it the wrong way.

Anyway, since then he has slipped from the news cycle, and I think most people are wondering what he is going to do with the few years he has left.

[R_Walken]

Unfortunately this is a common theme among athletes from all sports

Many aren’t financially literate and put their trust in someone who’s only objective is to take as much of the athletes $ without being caught

$ usually reveals a persons true character and most times it isn’t a good look

[petegrif]

It's common.
But if it is a contract dispute then the only really material variable is jurisdiction.
In any decent jurisdiction it will be a pretty straightforward case with regard to past payments. Getting money for fights not made however is going to be virtually impossible.

[Sweet Scions]

Stopped reading at, "Golovkin lost a debatable majority decision in that 12-rounder September 15 at T-Mobile Arena in Las Vegas."

There needs to be a way to block articles from biased writers like Keith Idec. It was not a debatable majority decision at all. The supposed "boogeyman" of the middleweight division backed up all night throwing nothing but jabs while being countered to death by a shorter fighter who was fighting at 160 for only the 2nd time in his career. I shouldn't be forced to support bad writers by giving him a view on his articles. At the very least, the name of the author should be displayed alongside the article.

Your personal thoughts on the decisiveness of Canelo's victory in the second go are utterly irrelevant to the fact that the decisions in both matches were highly controversial, as evidenced by the deluge of nearly-unavoidable and still persisting controversy that gushed from every corner of the internet in the immediate wake of both fights. Simply accurately conveying that state of affairs, which is objectively true and not up for debate, does not in of itself convey bias on the writer's behalf, nor does it necessarily even reveal his own personal thoughts on the matter, which may in fact align with your own. If you were slightly more intelligent and slightly less of a mindless Canelo ****rider ******, you wouldn't need to have this explained to you.

[aboutfkntime]

Your personal thoughts on the decisiveness of Canelo's victory in the second go are utterly irrelevant to the fact that the decisions in both matches were highly controversial, as evidenced by the deluge of nearly-unavoidable and still persisting controversy that gushed from every corner of the internet in the immediate wake of both fights. Simply accurately conveying that state of affairs, which is objectively true and not up for debate, does not in of itself convey bias on the writer's behalf, nor does it necessarily even reveal his own personal thoughts on the matter, which may in fact align with your own. If you were slightly more intelligent and slightly less of a mindless Canelo ****rider ******, you wouldn't need to have this explained to you.

if you had a clue, you would know Golovkin clearly lost the rematch

quoting the MULTITUDES of idiot Golovkin fans will not change that

we heard all that same rubbish when Pacquiao clearly lost to Mayweather

who cares what casuals think, most fighters/trainers insist Canelo won

[lparm]

Looks like a case of Golovkin using them until he got a big money fight and then wanting to drop them, not wanting to pay guys what they're owed.

Possibly

Too many fans want to side with the poor old fighter but in truth G could be the ruthless one here screwing people out of money

[pillowfists98]

Aren't DAZN offering him like 40 million or something to sign with them? Compared to that 3.5 mil is just chump change.

[spytactics]

Yes when a fighter(Canelo) outclasses his opponent with a body shot margin of 56-6 &57 to 6 in both fights,& outlands his opponent in power shots & much higher accuracy as well as 90% of all combos & total punches in 2nd fight,yes when those circumstances happen the judges (rightfully) hand in the scorecards that create the crying pssy fanbois scorned we see before us now,

as well as their idol running away crying to wash off the **** evidence,& then showing up to the post fight with colt-bottle stevie wonder loakes & a concussion that made him forget how to speak english.

After reading this, it sounds like you’re the one who forgot how to speak english. Ggg won the 1st fight...2nd I’d say was a draw

[Mexican_Puppet]

I'm sure he'll fare in court pretty well.

Man it's such a travesty seeing that 1-1 on his record. Just makes you want to throw up thinking about the corruption in boxing.

Stop crying

He lost the second fight against Canelo without a doubt

[Citizen Koba]

Stopped reading at, "Golovkin lost a debatable majority decision in that 12-rounder September 15 at T-Mobile Arena in Las Vegas."

There needs to be a way to block articles from biased writers like Keith Idec. It was not a debatable majority decision at all. The supposed "boogeyman" of the middleweight division backed up all night throwing nothing but jabs while being countered to death by a shorter fighter who was fighting at 160 for only the 2nd time in his career. I shouldn't be forced to support bad writers by giving him a view on his articles. At the very least, the name of the author should be displayed alongside the article.

Which bit of the bolded statement are you contesting? Are you saying that it wasn't a majority decision or simply revealing to the world that you don't understand the meaning of the word 'debatable'?