GGG's resume is better than you think, definitely HOF worthy

[ReggieKray]

I think you should quit kissing Canelo's ass and come up for air.

LOL how is he kissing his ass? He's also has a point. But nevertheless, there is no denying GGG is good regardless of his resume. It just would have been nice for him to have a little more balls in the past.

[aboutfkntime]

LOL how is he kissing his ass? He's also has a point. But nevertheless, there is no denying GGG is good regardless of his resume. It just would have been nice for him to have a little more balls in the past.

I'm with you... Golovkin is very good, no question... but his opponent selection has been downright timid

regarding the 20 " defences ".....

1) Golovkin defended a recently-invented junior title, that did not even exist back when Hopkins set the record

the WBA junior title(s) only exist because of greed and corruption... it is ridiculous to drop the standards within boxing because of greed and corruption... the casual-fans will probably accept it, but real boxing guys will scratch their heads

2) Golovkin avoided NUMEROUS opponents... opponents who were MUCH better than the guys he fought

no way should Golovkin get credit for knocking out no-hopers, while he avoided threats... especially when defending a junior title... that is the very dictionary definition of under-achieving

he is the most "well-managed" fighter ever... Golovkin's matchmakers deserve more credit than he does

#tiptoethroughthetulips

I don't see HOF there

I see...

- Jacobs*
- Lemieux
- Murray

like always... NAMES, not nameless achievements

the ONLY criteria for greatness is.....
WHO did you beat... with consideration given to when/how

[Boxing_1013]

I'm with you... Golovkin is very good, no question..

"Synonyms for very good

admirable
brilliant
distinguished
exceptional
exquisite
fantastic
glorious
gorgeous
grand
great
heroic
impressive
magnificent
marvelous
outstanding
remarkable
sublime
superb
superlative
wonderful
celebrated
divine
eminent
fine
first-class
matchless
peerless
premium
proud
rare
renowned
resplendent
royal
splendiferous
splendorous
sterling
supreme
transcendent
unparalleled
unsurpassed"

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/very%20good

Hop off that G train GGGroupie lol

[Boxing_1013]

With 'resumes' in fight sports people can generally make them out to be what they want/don't want...did a guy get a good win - well it was lucky/fixed, or that opponent ****** if you don't like the guy...did a guy get a good win - well it was a great win because of xyz, if you like the guy.

GGG's actual resume is no different...there are imo objective things to give him a lot of credit for and the amount of good-very good/great fighters he has been in with, and has basically shown very few flaws, and has lost very few rounds in those fights...I think the 'haters' only recourse to get on GGG is to try and underrate the quality of his opposition, because in truth there is no real other branch to grasp onto...he has been too dominant in almost all of his fights.

When you factor in how accomplished he was as an amateur, I think his place as an ATG and possible GOAT at MW. an ATG division, is pretty secure...some see it differently....I think his resume stacks up along with just about anyone else who has fought in boxing...history shows that the greats beat almost every 'non-great' and have a few losses/close debatable fights in those fights, and then when they face other greats they have close fights and usually have a .500 record in those.

For me GGG's only fairly competitive fights were against Ouma and Canelo (2)...He stopped Ouma late but it was a close fight before that and Ouma was a great fighter in his day but maybe not the best performance for GGG...Jacobs and Canelo (1) were straightforward 8-4 wins for GGG imo...and Canelo (2) I had the same 8-4 for GGG.

But I do feel that one was a competitive fight where at times GGG was looking as vulnerable as he ever had...but if that's the worst you can say about a guy when he is in with a great prime fighter, and he himself is 35+, well I mean I think that should be a big feather in his cap...for me GGG has another 15+ good wins, all by dominant KO, and most other 'great' fighters in history that have 15 or so run ins with guys like Proksa, Monroe, Murray, Stevens, Macklin, Lemieux, Vanes, Brook, Rosado, Ishida, Geale, Adama etc.

The other 'greats' usually drop a couple of those fights, have some controversial wins, and/or show some vulnerabilities...some seem to get up in arms when you mention the quality of those wins for GGG, especially as far as how dominant GGG was in all of them...but he never had a Boogie Watts or Willie Monroe on his loss sheet...never had an Iran Barkley on there etc...his dominance and never showing one moment of vulnerability against that quality of opposition is impressive and unique...just look at the past greats if you don't agree

Anyway it's a good debate to have though...I think it's a really strong resume, the actual fights, not the fantasy ones you mentioned Big Mac

[aboutfkntime]

"Synonyms for very good

admirable
brilliant
distinguished
exceptional
exquisite
fantastic
glorious
gorgeous
grand
great
heroic
impressive
magnificent
marvelous
outstanding
remarkable
sublime
superb
superlative
wonderful
celebrated
divine
eminent
fine
first-class
matchless
peerless
premium
proud
rare
renowned
resplendent
royal
splendiferous
splendorous
sterling
supreme
transcendent
unparalleled
unsurpassed"

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/very%20good

Hop off that G train GGGroupie lol

that is just your usual brand of casual-fan ******ity

" very good "..... does not equal..... " unparalleled "

you cannot mention quality opponents... but you sure can pull quality adjectives out of your ass

[aboutfkntime]

With 'resumes' in fight sports people can generally make them out to be what they want/don't want...did a guy get a good win - well it was lucky/fixed, or that opponent ****** if you don't like the guy...did a guy get a good win - well it was a great win because of xyz, if you like the guy.

GGG's actual resume is no different...there are imo objective things to give him a lot of credit for and the amount of good-very good/great fighters he has been in with, and has basically shown very few flaws, and has lost very few rounds in those fights...I think the 'haters' only recourse to get on GGG is to try and underrate the quality of his opposition, because in truth there is no real other branch to grasp onto...he has been too dominant in almost all of his fights.

When you factor in how accomplished he was as an amateur, I think his place as an ATG and possible GOAT at MW. an ATG division, is pretty secure...some see it differently....I think his resume stacks up along with just about anyone else who has fought in boxing...history shows that the greats beat almost every 'non-great' and have a few losses/close debatable fights in those fights, and then when they face other greats they have close fights and usually have a .500 record in those.

For me GGG's only fairly competitive fights were against Ouma and Canelo (2)...He stopped Ouma late but it was a close fight before that and Ouma was a great fighter in his day but maybe not the best performance for GGG...Jacobs and Canelo (1) were straightforward 8-4 wins for GGG imo...and Canelo (2) I had the same 8-4 for GGG.

But I do feel that one was a competitive fight where at times GGG was looking as vulnerable as he ever had...but if that's the worst you can say about a guy when he is in with a great prime fighter, and he himself is 35+, well I mean I think that should be a big feather in his cap...for me GGG has another 15+ good wins, all by dominant KO, and most other 'great' fighters in history that have 15 or so run ins with guys like Proksa, Monroe, Murray, Stevens, Macklin, Lemieux, Vanes, Brook, Rosado, Ishida, Geale, Adama etc.

The other 'greats' usually drop a couple of those fights, have some controversial wins, and/or show some vulnerabilities...some seem to get up in arms when you mention the quality of those wins for GGG, especially as far as how dominant GGG was in all of them...but he never had a Boogie Watts or Willie Monroe on his loss sheet...never had an Iran Barkley on there etc...his dominance and never showing one moment of vulnerability against that quality of opposition is impressive and unique...just look at the past greats if you don't agree

Anyway it's a good debate to have though...I think it's a really strong resume, the actual fights, not the fantasy ones you mentioned Big Mac

*** yawn ***


- Jacobs*
- Lemieux
- Murray


there is nobody else worth mentioning

defending junior titles is for... juniors

knocking out scrubs is for... scrubs

it's not like he is Hopkins, or Canelo... or even Martinez


*** yawn ***

[Boxing_1013]

that is just your usual brand of casual-fan ******ity

" very good "..... does not equal..... " unparalleled "

you cannot mention quality opponents... but you sure can pull quality adjectives out of your ass

I literally googled synonyms for 'very good'...that page came up and I linked it to you lol...I didn't make those up strange cat man lol

The dude has a litany of quality opponents lol...that's crazy man...but he has basically destroyed them all so you have to try and diminish their quality because it's all you have left to try and make you feel good I guess.

Hate on though man I know you love to do it, so do you

[aboutfkntime]

despite his somewhat empty resume, you could have a small argument for Golovkin...

... but not when you consider all those fights he ducked... wtf ?

ducking all of those slick black killers, I kinda understand...

but passing on fights with Cotto and Saunders... wtf ?

wants a big drama show... but does not want any actual drama

#timid

[aboutfkntime]

I literally googled synonyms for 'very good'...that page came up and I linked it to you lol...I didn't make those up strange cat man lol

The dude has a litany of quality opponents lol...that's crazy man...but he has basically destroyed them all so you have to try and diminish their quality because it's all you have left to try and make you feel good I guess.

Hate on though man I know you love to do it, so do you

no, the issue is....

1) they were average

2) you would not know a good fighter if he walked up and punched you in the face

[Boxing_1013]

*** yawn ***


- Jacobs*
- Lemieux
- Murray


there is nobody else worth mentioning

defending junior titles is for... juniors

knocking out scrubs is for... scrubs

it's not like he is Hopkins, or Canelo... or even Martinez


*** yawn ***

Martinez...great fighter..drew with Cintron, lost to PW, beat PW, beat Pavlik...mixed bag on top fights

Beat Macklin and Chavez...controversial win vs Murray and lost in a farewell fight to Cotto...anyone stacking up that list of wins/fights vs GGG's is just not a truth teller lol...

15+ guys worth mentioning for GGG (over and above the Nelo and Jacobs fights)...guys at the same level or above as Cintron Boogie Watts Willie Monroe Sr, Iran Barkley etc...and no L or close fights for GGG in any of those...very impressive...should give credit where it is due there...if no credit, have to really hammer guys like Martinez/Hagler/Hearns who dropped fights to those types of fighters ...hope that helps ya with the analysis friendo