Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why does GGG always get credit for imaginary wins???

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by ruedboy View Post
    How do you determine a "great" win? What's the criteria?


    this is why G always gets credit for imaginary wins

    Comment


    • Originally posted by aboutfkntime View Post
      oh for ****s sake.... stop it
      guy has to be trolling

      Comment


      • Originally posted by aboutfkntime View Post
        which one of the scrubs on G's resume, could have beaten Canelo?

        name him..... ?

        this will be funny

        name him, Tony Baloney !!

        FACT: the best win on Golovkin's resume was a HUGE underdog

        think about that
        Think about the fact that you can't read. I know you have a teeny tiny brain but do yourself a favor and reread what I wrote. You are embarrassing yourself. Again...

        Comment


        • Originally posted by larryxxx.. View Post
          Has he defeated anyone who was even close to great?? only 5 were even world champs for crying out loud...0 hall of famers..NONE!!!! what are you celebrating is the better question
          You don't get it. "Great" is a judgement. It can't be proven the way you can prove a fighter's won and loss record. A person can have an "educated" opinion or the y can be totally ignorant. Since opinions by their nature can't be proven or disproved, what's the sense of an argument that has no satisfactory ending.
          I can tell you've got some strong opinions about Golovkin. if you can come up with some facts {things that can be verified) I'm happy to continue the discussion.
          Ex."Floyd was great" (Opinion) "Floyd was 50-0"(Fact)

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ruedboy View Post
            You don't get it. "Great" is a judgement. It can't be proven the way you can prove a fighter's won and loss record. A person can have an "educated" opinion or the y can be totally ignorant. Since opinions by their nature can't be proven or disproved, what's the sense of an argument that has no satisfactory ending.
            I can tell you've got some strong opinions about Golovkin. if you can come up with some facts {things that can be verified) I'm happy to continue the discussion.
            Ex."Floyd was great" (Opinion) "Floyd was 50-0"(Fact)
            what are these wins he has that makes his resume not trash man..he is 37 and has only defeated 5 current or former world champs..while Canelo at 28 has already defeated 15..how can you spin that?

            Comment


            • these are the 5 champs GGG has defeated..

              Kassim Ouma, Daniel Geale, David Lemieux, Kell Brook, and Daniel Jacobs.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by larryxxx.. View Post
                Has he defeated anyone who was even close to great?? only 5 were even world champs for crying out loud...0 hall of famers..NONE!!!! what are you celebrating is the better question
                It's a bit tricky but I'll try to explain. "Great" is an opinion. Which means it can't be verified. There's no satisfactory conclusion to the discussion.
                A quick example. "Alvarez destroyed GGG in the 2nd Fight." (Judgement)
                "Alvarez won the 2nd fight by a MD." (Fact)
                I don't argue opinions.

                Comment


                • Jacobs without any contractual weight restrictions, the same fighter Golovkin faced, might well have given Canelo issues. We'll never know.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by ruedboy View Post
                    You don't get it. "Great" is a judgement. It can't be proven the way you can prove a fighter's won and loss record. A person can have an "educated" opinion or the y can be totally ignorant. Since opinions by their nature can't be proven or disproved, what's the sense of an argument that has no satisfactory ending.
                    I can tell you've got some strong opinions about Golovkin. if you can come up with some facts {things that can be verified) I'm happy to continue the discussion.
                    Ex."Floyd was great" (Opinion) "Floyd was 50-0"(Fact)


                    it can so

                    why are you so eager to ride the short-bus with the other casuals?

                    beating a good fighter............ is a good win
                    beating a very good fighter..... is a very good win
                    beating an excellent fighter..... is an excellent win
                    beating a great fighter............ is a great win

                    this is Golovkin's resume'.....

                    NOTE: I only count opponents who are better than " good "

                    - Jacobs *
                    - Murray

                    2x good, to very-good, wins

                    conclusion: Golovkin is a good, to very good, fighter

                    FACT: the best win on Golovkin's resume was a HUGE underdog who nobody gave a chance

                    FACT: the best win on Canelo's resume is a supposed killer who nobody thought he could beat

                    BIG diff there !!

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by larryxxx.. View Post
                      these are the 5 champs GGG has defeated..

                      Kassim Ouma, Daniel Geale, David Lemieux, Kell Brook, and Daniel Jacobs.


                      two of those guys were decidedly average

                      one of them did not belong at middleweight

                      one was better than average, but then got stopped by a guy who weighed 153

                      Jacobs was a HUGE underdog, and nobody gave him a chance

                      #average

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP