comments on the article...
1) this is the most important point...
like I have always said, there is only one valid criteria for greatness... who did you beat, with consideration given to when/how
2) Keith Thurman is not a HOF'er... wtf ?
3) this comment was the funniest in light of recent "discussions"...
like I have always said... Golovkin is very good, just not as good as advertised
1) this is the most important point...
Larry Holmes (who deserves to be called "great") gets it right when he says... "What makes a fighter great is the opponents he beats."
2) Keith Thurman is not a HOF'er... wtf ?

3) this comment was the funniest in light of recent "discussions"...
Gennady Golovkin looked great until he was tested. Then he began to look exceptionally good.
Comment