Top 10 active boxers in terms of resume

[KillaMane26]

Idk man maybe it comes from following those divisions more closely...I followed 147 and up more closely than 140 and below so I can't really say too much about the Khan and Matthyse wins...it does look like Khan had just lost before he faced Danny...and it probably wasn't like the 'loss' that Murray had vs the other top dog at MW in Sergio...but the Matthyse win looks pretty good.

But just on face value I can't really see how those two wins are better than GGG's top two of Murray and Jacobs...and then Lemieux...I won't even list SD as I feel that was a very competitive fight...but again if we are just giving credit based on official wins you have to give GGG credit for that one...which is probably fair considering we can't give him anything for those 2 Canelo fights.

So yeah without being an expert on DSG and Keith's resumes...it looks like GGG has at least 4 official top wins...Lemieux Jacobs Murray and SD...while DSG has like 2 and Keith 2...and then GGG has like a lot more quality wins than those two guys too.

So yeah idk man I guess we just have to look at all the data and try to call it like we see it.

Khan lost a controversial fight to Patterson but Khan and Bradley was being positioned as "the fight" at 140 b4 DSG knocked him out. And Mattysee was a huge win at the time he was undefeated and just knocked out Petterson in 2/3 rounds. People at the time thought Danny would duck him. And the winner was being postioned to fight Floyd ( was on the undercard of Canelo/Floyd) one of the best cards in recent memory btw. Jacobs who already was knocked out is not a better win than either. Now Murray on the other hand stopped Sergio Martinez winning streak so ill give him points for that.

But you overrated GGGs win over David... Who was KOed by Rubio. It was a good win but wasn't great since David was basically a power puncher with avg. Box skills.

Look at what those guys rank was at 160 when GGG beat them...Compared to Porter and DSG rank at 147 when Thurman beat them.

GGG fought everyone "at the time" but none of those wins stand out.

Maybe just maybe u can argue his resume is better/as good as Thurman but no way in hell can you compare any win on GGG resume to DSG upsets over Mattysee and Khan

No way no how

[aboutfkntime]

Man tbh I literally had to pick my jaw off the floor seeing you having DSG and Keith as like having clearly better resumes than GGG lol...I just can't see that at all...I'll list Danny's good wins here and GGG's and Keith's....if I am missing any let me know:

Paulie
Peterson
Matthyse
Judah
Khan
Moralesx2 (I guess...I mean this is like giving Ali to Berbick ya know)

Compared to that list for GGG:

SD
Jacobs
Brook
Murray
Lemieux
Monroe
Stevens
Macklin
Ouma
Geale

And tbh I could add like 7 more quality wins for GGG in there too...Adama, Rosado, Rubio, Proksa, Vanes etc.

Keith:
Danny
Porter

Collazo
Bundu
Guerrero
Lopez

I had to separate those last 4 because they don't belong near the top 2...am I missing any for those 2 guys?

But DSG wins over Khan and Mattysee were big wins.

Thurman wins over DSG and Porter were big wins.

GGG big wins were Jacobs, Murray

Most of GGG wins weren't big wins at all but just decent.

No way any of his wins match up with DSG knocking out Khan who was a beast at 140 and Mattysee who was the boogeyman at the time.

Then you have Thurman beating DSG and Porter who both have good resumes.

You named all of GGG wins both most were decent at best. Im sorry but withought Canelo his resume is avg.

Its like if you took away Paul willams and Kelly Pavlik from Martinez resume it automatically becomes dry asf. Decent/ok at best.

there was a thread exposing Boxing1013 for his lack of understanding about levels

he thinks that Lemieux/Murray... are the same level as Canelo/Jacobs...

Lemieux, Murray pretty clearly around the level of SD Canelo Jacobs...
https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/s...9#post20112309

and he thinks that that Andre Ward is no better than Bika Barrera and Miranda...

I just never really saw the skills from him..... if he was born in a different country I don't think he would have been looked at much differently than Bika Barrera or Miranda etc.....
https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/s...2#post19903762

in that thread, the dumb kid had Vanes listed as a 'good' win for Golovkin... and Mosley listed as 'ok' for Canelo

everyone knows you only count genuine world-class opponents when discussing greatness... why would you need to mention anyone who is not world-class when discussing genuine greatness lol

e.g. I would not even mention Lemieux, as he is distinctly B-grade... but unlike others, I would include Murray... he may not be a genuine world-class fighter, but he was VERY good imo and there were world-class aspects to his game

Golovkin has (in order of appearance)...
Murray (W)
Jacobs (W*)
Canelo x2 (D/L)
Derevyanchenko (W*)

for a record of 3-1-1

the best guy Golovkin beat with a clean win... is not even a genuine world-class fighter

Canelo has (in order of appearance)...
Mosley (W)
Trout (W)
Mayweather (L)
Lara (W)
Cotto (W)
Golovkin x2 (W)
Jacobs (W)
Kovalev (W)

for a record of 7-1-1

here is the bottom line...

Golovkin's best win is scraping past Jacobs, who was a HUGE underdog... lets not forget, Golovkin was like a 10/1 favorite

Canelo has better wins over much better opponents... Kovalev, Cotto, Lara, Mosley, Trout, Golovkin

Canelo's resume is FAR better... it is not even close, let alone debatable

this is a typical silly debate, with a silly casual-fan..

the threads that he creates are typical casual-fan nonsense

but he exposes himself in most of them lol

[aboutfkntime]

Khan lost a controversial fight to Patterson but Khan and Bradley was being positioned as "the fight" at 140 b4 DSG knocked him out. And Mattysee was a huge win at the time he was undefeated and just knocked out Petterson in 2/3 rounds. People at the time thought Danny would duck him. And the winner was being postioned to fight Floyd ( was on the undercard of Canelo/Floyd) one of the best cards in recent memory btw. Jacobs who already was knocked out is not a better win than either. Now Murray on the other hand stopped Sergio Martinez winning streak so ill give him points for that.

But you overrated GGGs win over David... Who was KOed by Rubio. It was a good win but wasn't great since David us basically a power puncher with avg. Box skills.

Look at what those guys rank was at 160 when GGG beat them...Compared to Porter and DSG rank at 147 when Thurman beat them.

GGG fought everyone "at the time" but none of those wins stand out.

Maybe u can argue his resume is better/as good as Thurman but no way in hell can you compare any win on GGG resume to DSG upsets over Mattysee and Khan

No way no now

he is clearly not a genuine world-class opponent

you know whats up

but I do include Murray

I know that others do not... but I rated him, so I am keeping it real

[aboutfkntime]

Golovkin has (in order of appearance)...
Murray (W)
Jacobs (W*)
Canelo x2 (D/L)
Derevyanchenko (W*)

for a record of 3-1-1

the best guy Golovkin beat with a clean win... is not even a genuine world-class fighter

Canelo topped Golovkin's resume back in July 2014 when he beat Lara

he had already beaten Mosley and Trout

every win since then is just cream on the top

#notevenclose

[KillaMane26]

he is clearly not a genuine world-class opponent

you know whats up

but I do include Murray

I know that others do not... but I rated him, so I am keeping it real

Have to give Murray credit he stopped Sergio Martinez crazy winning streak. Nothing compared to when Cotto beat him, where they literally dragged him from the local morgue lmao

[KillaMane26]

there was a thread exposing Boxing1013 for his lack of understanding about levels

he thinks that Lemieux/Murray... are the same level as Canelo/Jacobs...



and he thinks that that Andre Ward is no better than Bika Barrera and Miranda...



in that thread, the dumb kid had Vanes listed as a 'good' win for Golovkin... and Mosley listed as 'ok' for Canelo

everyone knows you only count genuine world-class opponents when discussing greatness... why would you need to mention anyone who is not world-class when discussing genuine greatness lol

e.g. I would not even mention Lemieux, as he is distinctly B-grade... but unlike others, I would include Murray... he may not be a genuine world-class fighter, but he was VERY good imo and there were world-class aspects to his game

Golovkin has (in order of appearance)...
Murray (W)
Jacobs (W*)
Canelo x2 (D/L)
Derevyanchenko (W*)

for a record of 3-1-1

the best guy Golovkin beat with a clean win... is not even a genuine world-class fighter

Canelo has (in order of appearance)...
Mosley (W)
Trout (W)
Mayweather (L)
Lara (W)
Cotto (W)
Golovkin x2 (W)
Jacobs (W)
Kovalev (W)

for a record of 7-1-1

here is the bottom line...

Golovkin's best win is scraping past Jacobs, who was a HUGE underdog... lets not forget, Golovkin was like a 10/1 favorite

Canelo has better wins over much better opponents... Kovalev, Cotto, Lara, Mosley, Trout, Golovkin

Canelo's resume is FAR better... it is not even close, let alone debatable

this is a typical silly debate, with a silly casual-fan..

the threads that he creates are typical casual-fan nonsense

but he exposes himself in most of them lol

Withought Canelo on his resume.... Its lackluster just a bunch of stay busy fights. And until Jacobs does something even that win isnt so great especially the fact that it was controversial.

No way in hell does he compare to DSG. And lets be honest most of us don't necessary like DSG from his cherry picking days and that Aggravated assualt on Salka lmao. But anybody with a brain knows not to argue against those big upsets at 140

[aboutfkntime]

Withought Canelo on his resume.... Its lackluster just a bunch of stay busy fights. And until Jacobs does something even that win isnt so great especially the fact that it was controversial.

No way in hell does he compare to DSG. And lets be honest most of us don't necessary like DSG from his cherry picking days and that Aggravated assualt on Salka lmao. But anybody with a brain knows not to argue against those big upsets at 140

yea he over-achieved at 140

also... in my list of Canelo opponents, I kept it real... unlike Tweedle-Dum

I did not mention his lower-level wins like Smith, Fielding, Chavez, Khan, Kirkland, Angulo, Cintron, Rhodes etc...

even his lower-level wins are better than Golovkin's lower-level wins against guys like Monroe, Stevens, Macklin, Ouma, Geale

#notevenclose

[aboutfkntime]

anyway, Pac has the best resume'... not Canelo

[KillaMane26]

yea he over-achieved at 140

also... in my list of Canelo opponents, I kept it real... unlike Tweedle-Dum

I did not mention his lower-level wins like Smith, Fielding, Chavez, Khan, Kirkland, Angulo, Cintron, Rhodes etc...

even his lower-level wins are better than Golovkin's lower-level wins against guys like Monroe, Stevens, Macklin, Ouma, Geale

#notevenclose

I swear i think in his mind listing all those D level wins add up to a B+ or something.

Vanes???? "VANES"???? Lmao I wouldn't even mention that guy.

But he namedrops these guys like he adding up nickels and dimes at the cashregister lmfao

[Marchegiano]

No offense man, but I'm not really sure if you understand what resume actually means. Resume is defined as - a brief account of a person’s education, qualifications, and previous experience

In Porter's case for example...one could rate him somewhat high and say he has a good resume...according to how they saw him perform in those fights vs top competition..if he impressed somewhat, that would help his 'resume'...a resume is an account of your qualifications and experience.

That could mean clear wins against good fighters...or it could mean good performances vs better fighters...it certainly could take all of that into account.

There's a lot of semantics in boxing and the redefining of very well known terms is one of those things you'll just have to get with or be prepared to argue like all the damn time.

We all know what lineage means. Outside of boxing we all use that term properly. In boxing context it takes on a new meaning that has enough room for us to argue about.

Same with like puncher and boxer. If you're gonna use those terms properly then you're going to run into a ****load of argument and misunderstanding. In boxing boxer and puncher take on new meanings

Resume is a list of best names. Period and end of. Not trying to be a ****, but, that is what we mean. resume isn't limited to best wins, though that's often the case, a good loss is a resume worthy loss.

For example, loads put Lennox on Big V's resume. Lennox won that fight but Vitali had a good showing so it's fair to mention his loss.

More contemporary; Wilder is all over Fury resumes atm.

A good showing against a no name is not a resume fight.