Why do people rate Canelo's resume so high, even relative to GGG's?

[New England]

you rated Vanes as... " a good win "... for Golovkin LMAO

and you rated Mosley as..... " ok "..... for Canelo

could you possibly squeeze your casual-fan head, any further up Golovkin's over-rated ass than it already is? loooool

somebody who calls a washed up vanes a better win than a washed up mosley definitely has some splainin to do .

shane knocked floyd mayweather for a loop 2 years before the canelo fight. fought the two best fighters on the planet in the 2 years leading up to the canelo fight, floyd and pacquiao. vanes was almost completely inactive for the 2 years leading into the golovkin fight. and prior to that he was lackluster against ishe smith, lost to trout, charlo, andrade. his claims to fame are draws and close losses

[Boxing_1013]

well having a better resume helps. he beat lara when he was the boogeyman, trout with a head full of steam coming off of a victory over miguel cotto. beat golovkin, a genuinely fierce puncher and likely hall of famer. beat jacobs, a bigger man and an athletic fighter with power. got a meaningless trinket at 168, but it's a feather in his cap that golovkin does not have and makes him a three weight world champion. the titles at 154 and 160 are legit, you can easily argue that he beat his two best contenders at both weights.

I hear ya but I disagree overall...Lara was a great win and a legit one in my eyes...skillwise Lara would be a problem for anyone but he has an issue with fighting for 12 rounds...so I think that would be a terrible recipe for anyone with talent who keeps coming for 12 rounds...still a good win though but I feel over 12 GGG would have gotten to him.

Trout has lost to every other good fighter he ever fought...and I mean come on...that version of Cotto was not a great one.

Never saw him beat GGG or even really come that close so can't really co-sign that one.

GGG beat Jacobs first and I felt did so a little better...8-4 with a KD vs 7-5.

I do think he beat Lara so give him full credit for that...can't really give it for GGG but he gave it a good shot...he also never really fought anyone else besides Lara (and maybe Trout) at 154...no Charlos or Andrade...so that is kind of disappointing.

Would also say that Nelo has more or less benefited most of his career from the fact that he can lose 8-4 in a fight a still probably get the win...that makes it a little easier to even take some fights with that knowledge.

Yeah as I've said...I think when people list both guy's top 10 wins it becomes pretty apparent that Nelo's resume right now isn't above GGG's...you could argue Nelo has slightly better opposition in the top end of that top 10...I think it was basically the same but I could see that argument.

But GGG was more dominant in all of his fights there too so that would even it out for me and even give GGG an edge over him...also no real blemishes on GGG's resume and Canelo does have that rather embarrassing loss to Floyd.

[VERSION1 (V1)]

No doubt...not really hyping up that win for GGG...I don't really care about the coming off a loss angle as it was against Lara who I rate very highly...and it was competitive.

The 2 years inactivity was an issue though...but to be honest I think Vanes looked fine in there and actually caught GGG with a nice combo at the end of the round that may have won him the round despite GGG outlanding him heavily.

I think more of the issue for Vanes was the coming up in weight...GGG has shown his whole career imo that if you can't compete with him physically you are going out and going out quick and that is what happened...even a prime active Vanes I think would have suffered the same fate...just a styles makes fights thing imo.

everything you just said proves that it was not a good win nobody gave Vanes a shot to win that fight and it was on short notice

[Boxing_1013]

somebody who calls a washed up vanes a better win than a washed up mosley definitely has some splainin to do .

shane knocked floyd mayweather for a loop 2 years before the canelo fight. fought the two best fighters on the planet in the 2 years leading up to the canelo fight, floyd and pacquiao. vanes was almost completely inactive for the 2 years leading into the golovkin fight. and prior to that he was lackluster against ishe smith, lost to trout, charlo, andrade. his claims to fame are draws and close losses

Not really...Vanes was inactive and moving up in weight...but he wasn't shot like SSM more or less was...Shane was also fighting at 154 vs 147 with the Floyd fight you cited...going 12 with an old fat shot Mosley is not a better win imo than GGG crushing a 2 year inactive good JMW at 160 imo...it just isn't, sorry.

Vanes imo also got beat there because of the size, not really inactivity...he looked more or less the same he always has...many gave him round 1 due to the nice combo he landed even though GGG was outlanding him heavily...he just couldn't compete physically with GGG and that is a recipe for disaster.

Never really understood the slighting of Vanes to the extent that it happens tbh...he was obviously one of the best JMWs and showed he was basically the same level as Andrade JeCharlo and Lara...which is really good...so yeah never really understood the over the top nature of that stuff...but that's what you get when GGG is involved I suppose lol.

I would also add that Mosley is one of Canelo's top 10 wins...Vanes is not one of GGG's top 10 wins.

[aboutfkntime]

You have that the other way around

on the other thread..... you just stated that Golovkin beating Lemieux and Murray..... is more impressive to you than Canelo beating Lara and Cotto.....

YOU ACTUALLY SAID THAT !!

oh, and you also said that Lemieux would be a decent test for Canelo

nothing funnier than watching you smear faeces all over yourself

[Boxing_1013]

everything you just said proves that it was not a good win nobody gave Vanes a shot to win that fight and it was on short notice

If he went 12 rounds with him or had any real trouble I wouldn't list it as even an OK win...but he dusted him in 2...I find that impressive just as I find Nelo doing that to Kirkland impressive.

Difference though is Kirkland is a top 10 win for Nelo and that Vanes win is not in GGG's top 10.

[aboutfkntime]

somebody who calls a washed up vanes a better win than a washed up mosley definitely has some splainin to do .

shane knocked floyd mayweather for a loop 2 years before the canelo fight. fought the two best fighters on the planet in the 2 years leading up to the canelo fight, floyd and pacquiao. vanes was almost completely inactive for the 2 years leading into the golovkin fight. and prior to that he was lackluster against ishe smith, lost to trout, charlo, andrade. his claims to fame are draws and close losses

he just stated..... that Golovkin beating Lemieux and Murray..... was more impressive to him than Canelo beating Lara and Cotto.....

then he insisted that Lemieux would be a decent test for Canelo

Golovkin has the worst fanbase ever..... that moron is a total idiot

oh, and he also insisted that Monroe is a better win for Golovkin, than Trout was for Canelo

[Boxing_1013]

on the other thread..... you just stated that Golovkin beating Lemieux and Murray..... is more impressive to you than Canelo beating Lara and Cotto.....

YOU ACTUALLY SAID THAT !!

oh, and you also said that Lemieux would be a decent test for Canelo

nothing funnier than watching you smear faeces all over yourself

No you said that GGG feasted on Canelo leftovers...the only common opponent they have I believe is Jacobs...who GGG faced first.

There's no real opinions about what you said lol...it just isn't true lol.

[aboutfkntime]

he just stated..... that Golovkin beating Lemieux and Murray..... was more impressive to him than Canelo beating Lara and Cotto.....

then he insisted that Lemieux would be a decent test for Canelo

Golovkin has the worst fanbase ever..... that moron is a total idiot

oh, and he also insisted that Monroe is a better win for Golovkin, than Trout was for Canelo

wtf ?

it is now official.....

BoxingMoron1013 is officially the biggest idiot I have ever encountered on a boxing forum..... YES, even dumber than TonyGE

[aboutfkntime]

No you said that GGG feasted on Canelo leftovers...the only common opponent they have I believe is Jacobs...who GGG faced first.

There's no real opinions about what you said lol...it just isn't true lol.

according to you, Pepe Le Pew is Golovkin's 2nd best win

but GBP could not sell that fight for Canelo, because Lemieux is such a scrub

do you still think that Murray and Lemieux are better wins for Golovkin..... than Lara and Cotto were for Canelo?

oh, and how could I forget..... do you still think that Monroe is a better win for G, than Trout was for Canelo?..... you casual-fan moron