Why all the hate on GGG's resume?

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

I mean...I've heard most of the arguments already...but that talking point about GGG I've just never really understood.

I can understand if people just don't like a guy and want to root against him lol...and to be fair I think there is valid of criticism of any fighter and GGG is no different.

But as far as resume...guys very rarely have a clear win over a HOFer in their prime...I would argue GGG did that against Canelo but honestly not really the main point of the thread.

But if the attack on him is 'who else' other than Canelo...I mean many guys don't have a non-controversial clear win over a HOFer in their prime...because HOFers very rarely clearly lose in their prime, that's mainly why they are HOFers ya know.

I just think 15 KOs over good fighters, all in their relative primes, all at basically their best weight (Brook a notable exception) is really solid...especially to never have a hiccup in those fights and to win them all clearly.

GGG has never been the 'home' fighter and had to get a favorable decision in there as well...just think it is very respectable to handle business like that and never even go 12 rounds or have a hint of controversy in about 15 fights like that.

So yeah...Murray, Lemieux, Brook, Monroe, Geale, Ouma, Stevens, Macklin, Vanes, Proksa, Rubio, Adama, Ishida, Rosado, Rolls all by KO...I mean if he was struggling in half of those to get a decision I would agree with a lot of the criticism but never happened there.

Even the Jacobs/Canelo fights...I mean he outlanded them in 27/33 rounds (3 ties)...that certainly doesn't mean he takes all those rounds, but certainly an indication of his skill level and ability to box.

And when you factor in his punch stats with the fact that everyone acknowledges he is a big puncher, just leads to a lot of clear rounds for him from what I saw...and if he doesn't win it, it is usually a close round imo...he is just too active usually and landing too much.

So yeah interested in some nuanced arguments for or against it if anyone is interested. Or even some comparisons of who particularly has a better resume as a current fighter etc. I just think when I've really looked at GGG's stuff compared to other guys it has stacked up very well.

Agreed...
His resume is by no means outstanding but it’s not bad like some lunatics like to suggest.
GGG has a solid resume, regardless of what the haters say.

[alexnation]

Haters are going to hate no matter what. Just let them enjoy that poisonous feeling

[GelfSara]

Because there are not many Kazakh or Kazakh-American boxing fans on these boards. There ARE many Latinos and blacks here, however, and tribalism is a huge factor in these disputes.

Give it time. GGG has hired a very promising black trainer younger than himself, his career is still in progress, demographics will change over time, and above all, GGG is just about everything one could hope for in a boxer--both as an athlete and a human being.

[Cobra Curry]

quite the opposite- its part of Terrys elite ability that he has moved up with success.

When I say irrelevant I'm talking about the specific matchups (GGG v Canelo and Spence v Crawford) rather than their overall careers.

[icha]

I was answering both your posts. You said something about "every time Golovkin tries to do something great".

Light middleweight or super welterweight is indeed a weight class and if Canelo felt he was not big enough for middleweight he should have stayed there instead all that 155lb bull****.
The fact that he moved up in weight is great for him but largely irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. No one's giving Crawford extra time to settle into 147 and he's not defending his title at 144. He's a welterweight champion, fighting at the welterweight limit and we all want to see him fight Errol Spence asap.
We're not making special rules for him and he's not asking for any so why aren't we treating Canelo the same way?

crawford has yet to fight a top dog at welterweight, so is his comparison isnt the best, canelo was still a 154 champion 6 months before his first fight with GGG...

[Boxing_1013]

His resume ain't great, but people don't really care about that - not enough to make endless threads disparaging it, certainly - after all there's literally thousands of fighters with worse resumes. The real reason is to be found in the fanbase rivalries on here and the tribal nature of sports and boxing fandom. What people care about ain't GGG himself but scoring points over his fans - or rather certain among his fanbase.

Ultimately you can make any arguments you want to both make the case that GGGs resume is not as bad as some would have you believe and to explain why it does lack the top names that might garner more respect, but folk you're trying to convince ain't seeking genuine debate here, so don't expect to change any minds.

True good points my friend...was actually posting to see if there were any good takes from someone who has an opposite opinion of mine...I'm always willing to change my mind if new info comes in.

I know a few times when I've done a similar type thread on other topics...asking questions about xyz...I've gotten some good responses from the other side...so just was throwing it out there.

I do agree that a lot of support or criticism of all fighters is driven by tribalism...just how it is, we are all probably guilty of it to some degree...I just try to call it like I see it personally but we all probably have our biases.

[BoxingIsGreat]

Because there are not many Kazakh or Kazakh-American boxing fans on these boards. There ARE many Latinos and blacks here, however, and tribalism is a huge factor in these disputes.

Give it time. GGG has hired a very promising black trainer younger than himself, his career is still in progress, demographics will change over time, and above all, GGG is just about everything one could hope for in a boxer--both as an athlete and a human being.

The equivalency would be "white" not Kazakh. Black, white, Latino. There are a lot of white posters here too.

It's not only about race or nationality, it's also about the fact that his resume DOES truly suck, and the overhype throughout his career hasn't helped much, either.

[Boxing_1013]

Agreed...
His resume is by no means outstanding but it’s not bad like some lunatics like to suggest.
GGG has a solid resume, regardless of what the haters say.

Thanks man good post.

Yeah I mean honestly if he even had a hiccup or two in that stretch I don't think it would be indicative of 'bum' status or whatever people would say...styles make fights and when you get in there with a lot of different styles, odds are you will have a tough night.

Now if he went 12 in close fights with Lemieux and Stevens and Monroe, if Brook went 10 rounds with him and was beating him before he got KOed, and if he had a really close 50/50 fight with Murray...then yeah I would say it is not as impressive of a list and I would downgrade my overall opinion of GGG accordingly.

But the great Hagler lost to Willie Monroe...Hearns lost to Iran Barkley twice...that type of stuff..obviously Hagler and Hearns had some great wins too...just my opinion that to handle your business that well in those 15 or so fights, with no blemishes and no controversy, never really dropping any rounds is very impressive...if you were over-rated it would have been exposed in that timeframe imo.

[Boxing_1013]

Haters are going to hate no matter what. Just let them enjoy that poisonous feeling

True...it does seem to be such a self-killer to hate like that imo...you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink I suppose...to each his own...good point/post

[Boxing_1013]

The equivalency would be "white" not Kazakh. Black, white, Latino. There are a lot of white posters here too.

It's not only about race or nationality, it's also about the fact that his resume DOES truly suck, and the overhype throughout his career hasn't helped much, either.

True...he is essentially white and that will garner him a lot of support...a lot of stuff is tribal and this is no different really, on both sides I think.

Idk though...I mean even apart from Jacobs and Canelo he was in there with at least 15 other good fighters and just smashed all of them...no controversy, no close fights...if he had a few hiccups in there I could understand some of the pushback against him...but yeah based on who he has actually faced and what he did against them it's actually a really solid list.

I don't think going 12 rounds with an old 'shot' Cotto at 155 or an old 'shot' Mosley at 152 is any better of a win than dominating and KOing a Monroe or Brook...idk just in comparison with other fighters I don't really see the case that their resumes are really good compared to GGG's...my 2 cents...it's not just who you fight...but when/where/what conditions and what you do to them imo