Why all the hate on GGG's resume?

[Boxing_1013]

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.

I agree he is a good sportsman and a good professional as well...honestly for that reason it would be easy for me to give a guy credit if I felt they actually beat him...I know GGG is so professional that he would make them earn it...so it would be pretty easy to give that guy credit if I felt he actually beat him

[GelfSara]

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.

While GGG is--IIRC--3/4 white and 1/4 Asian (please correct me if I'm wrong)--he is not viewed by most white Americans as being "one of us"--as would be the case were he English or Danish--because of the very persistent legacy of the cold war. As a native of the former USSR GGG faces a degree of visceral distrust (and worse) among older Americans that may be hard for young boxing fans to understand--although Rocky IV (heh) may help. This is compounded by the language barrier.

[Boxing_1013]

Hey buddy. I think you've pretty much answered your own question. Fans are free to root against and unjustly mud-sling as much as they like, for whatever reasons. Convincing them to admit it's part of their Fandom is another story. Some boxing fans have a capacity for objectivity, many others do not. I think you've acknowledged as much, already.

With that in mind, because GGG's resume is not stellar and has some question marks, it's going to be a point of attack. What gets released in the press also impacts fans' reactions. PLENTY of fighters, and even some on the pound for pound list, have question marks on their resume, but GGG is who you often see talked about on BoxingScene NSB.
It doesn't help to see Golovkin quoted saying, "The bad thing about boxing today is the best are not fighting the best", the day before he is about to fight Steve Rolls. In other words, the press tends to give people ammunition. You don't see a ton of "resume threads" on Estrada, Mikey Garcia, or even Spence, because their media narratives are different.

At the end of the day, GGG is on all the professional P4P Lists for a reason. He doesn't have the best resume and he doesn't have the worst. He's had an impressive career, obviously. There's just been certain narratives throughout his career that have polarized fans and made him a mark for hate, criticism, and debate.

Peace.


FANDOM is a subculture composed of fans, characterized by feelings of camaraderie and insight with others who share a common interest.
Is this what motivates us to serve as mouthpieces and walking billboards for multi-millionaire athletes and entertainers, then engage in heated discussions about which one is better or worse ? Or is it something more ?

Hey my friend...I especially agree with the bolded part you wrote...and also the comments about fighting Rolls lol :0

Good to hear from you, hope all is well in your world

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

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.

GGG was completely destroying solid B level guys like Lemieux, Murray, Geale etc. That’s what proved he was an elite fighter. It’s just a shame he never got a career defining fight in his prime. I didn’t like the way they went about it but Team Canelo/GBP timed the GGG fights perfectly.

GGG’s middleweight run is most comparable to Hopkins’ run IMO. Throughout the 90’s Hopkins never really fought A level opposition aside from his loss to RJJ. His only two notable wins were against Glen Johnson who at the time was pretty unheralded and a past prime John David Jackson. Even after he won the Don King Middleweight tournament he was fighting guys like Eastman and Hakkar. I’m not trying to discredit B-Hops run, I’m actually a huge B-Hop fan, but alike GGG he spent a lot of his run dominating B and C level guys as opposed to beating elite opposition.

[BoxingIsGreat]

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

No knowledgeable boxing fan thinks Golovkin is a bum. That was not my point. He's beaten some okay C level fighters until he met Jacobs and Canelo.

Watching live, I thought the Jacobs fight was a draw (or either way) and Canelo beat him twice (I know you have it the opposite. Fair enough.).

If you remove Jacobs and Canelo from that resume, I'd rate the overall resume a solid C.

[Boxing_1013]

- -When has Canelo ever been a home fighter save coming up in Mexico?

GGG has become the adopted home fighter much more popular with fans who seldom disparage him racially like Canelo gets, but he and Loeffler dropped the ball when they ducked the immediate rematch.

Canelo laid some serious leather on GGG in the first fight without running like Jacobs, and fighters know when they get whipped.

So now his mojo is gone and his team and fans are claiming a sense of entitlement that give traction to the riffraff that are still fighting the Cold War.

By home fighter...I would say Canelo is always the home fighter now any time he fights, definitely in the US, and most definitely in Vegas...I mean he is the money man now in boxing...he brings in all the money...so especially in North America he will be the favored fighter...no real issue with it for me, just the way it is.

Along those lines, I do agree that GGG is in a way an adopted American/home fighter now...but even a lot of his fights in the US have been in the home town/area of his opponents...Jacobs/Stevens/Lemieux/Brook etc...Murray was in Monaco not Argentina like Martinez or GGG's home country...I just think little stuff like that matters when you put it all together.

And most notably GGG has never needed the judges in those fights...Jacobs went to decision but I don't really see the angle that that one was that debatable personally..and that one was in Jacobs' hometown so hard to say that GGG was the home fighter there ya know...if GGG was grinding out decisions in Kazkahstan I would agree that his resume was dubious for sure.

To be honest I don't really follow your last two paragraphs lol...Canelo fought well enough in both fights and had some good moments but I can't see him getting a ton of rounds in either fight...he got outlanded most rounds and some of those rounds were clear for GGG imo.

But hope they fight a 3rd time...honestly would prefer them to fight 30 rounds or until one guy is KOed lol...that seems to be the only way to reach consensus on who wins a fight these days....when two guys like that fight there are destined to be about half close rounds so if one side really wants to score it for their guy they can just slide all of those rounds to him ya know.

Thanks for your thoughts/response though man, peace

['b']

"Why all the [Dominic Wade] hate on [Steve Rolls] GGG's [Kell Brook] resume?"

It's a mystery.....

[Boxing_1013]

GGG was completely destroying solid B level guys like Lemieux, Murray, Geale etc. That’s what proved he was an elite fighter. It’s just a shame he never got a career defining fight in his prime. I didn’t like the way they went about it but Team Canelo/GBP timed the GGG fights perfectly.

GGG’s middleweight run is most comparable to Hopkins’ run IMO. Throughout the 90’s Hopkins never really fought A level opposition aside from his loss to RJJ. His only two notable wins were against Glen Johnson who at the time was pretty unheralded and a past prime John David Jackson. Even after he won the Don King Middleweight tournament he was fighting guys like Eastman and Hakkar. I’m not trying to discredit B-Hops run, I’m actually a huge B-Hop fan, but alike GGG he spent a lot of his run dominating B and C level guys as opposed to beating elite opposition.

Good post man...good thoughts...we more or less share the same sentiments.

I would probably shade more of his wins in the B category than C...and probably put Murray close to A at the time they fought...but overall I agree.

I would just add that imo when one elite or great guy steps in there with another one...it usually is a tight fight and that guy's results are 50/50 in those types of fights...and honestly I just feel it is very rare that two top guys in their primes fight each other at their best weights...just doesn't really happen from what I've seen.

Hearns/Hagler/Duran/Leonard an exception...and even then Duran was always the smallest of that bunch, though he had success in those fights obviously...if GGG had met Sergio Martinez and KOed him...I mean that's a good win I guess but it wouldn't have a been a prime Sergio ya know...so how would people have even rated that win...idk.

And I personally feel KOing/beating a solid fighter in his prime at his best weight, is better than beating/going 12 rounds with a 'big name' who is past his prime, a little shot, and maybe a little fat/fighting above their best weight...just my thoughts.

No knowledgeable boxing fan thinks Golovkin is a bum. That was not my point. He's beaten some okay C level fighters until he met Jacobs and Canelo.

Watching live, I thought the Jacobs fight was a draw (or either way) and Canelo beat him twice (I know you have it the opposite. Fair enough.).

If you remove Jacobs and Canelo from that resume, I'd rate the overall resume a solid C.

I would probably shade more of his wins in the B category than C...and probably put Murray close to A at the time they fought...but yeah we can agree to disagree.

Hey all we can do is call it like we see it my friend...we won't all agree on everything

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Good post man...good thoughts...we more or less share the same sentiments.

I would probably shade more of his wins in the B category than C...and probably put Murray close to A at the time they fought...but overall I agree.

I would just add that imo when one elite or great guy steps in there with another one...it usually is a tight fight and that guy's results are 50/50 in those types of fights...and honestly I just feel it is very rare that two top guys in their primes fight each other at their best weights...just doesn't really happen from what I've seen.

Hearns/Hagler/Duran/Leonard an exception...and even then Duran was always the smallest of that bunch, though he had success in those fights obviously...if GGG had met Sergio Martinez and KOed him...I mean that's a good win I guess but it wouldn't have a been a prime Sergio ya know...so how would people have even rated that win...idk.

And I personally feel KOing/beating a solid fighter in his prime at his best weight, is better than beating/going 12 rounds with a 'big name' who is past his prime, a little shot, and maybe a little fat/fighting above their best weight...just my thoughts.



I would probably shade more of his wins in the B category than C...and probably put Murray close to A at the time they fought...but yeah we can agree to disagree.

Hey all we can do is call it like we see it my friend...we won't all agree on everything

It’s just a shame he couldn’t get them defining matchups. A lot of top guys wanted no part of GGG when he was at his peak. The one fight I really wished came to fruition was GGG-Pirog the fight was agreed for August 25th 2012 on HBO but Pirog unfortunately suffered a career ending injury and the bout was scrapped. That would’ve been a great fight.

[Cobra Curry]

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...

That's not for the want of trying though is it? We've all seen the freeze out games they've been playing over there. Crawford's first fight was against a champion and the other guys refused to fight him.

Canelo's fight prior to Golovkin was at 164. Prior to Smith he'd been campaigning as a middleweight champion. I'm sorry but you can't hide behind being a smaller guy while holding the title. Either you're the champion or you're not. Canelo decided he wasn't when Golovkin came knocking.