Prime for prime who wins in a fight between golovkin and martinez?

[aboutfkntime]

Who did Martinez prove his world class against that was above the level of a Canelo or Jacobs?

FACT: Golovkin's best win is scraping past Danny Jacobs

well, who did Jacobs prove his world-class against..... ?

FACT: nobody gave Jacobs the slightest chance to beat Golovkin

FACT: Jacobs has done nothing since Golovkin, other than a solid win against Derevyanchenko..... putting in less than stellar performances against mid-level opponents like Arias and Sulecki

Martinez, was a 154lb'er who was punching above his weight..... so his wins over Pavlik and Williams are MUCH better than Golovkin scraping past the unheralded under-dog Danny Jacobs

[aboutfkntime]

Great breakdown and something that often gets overlooked with martinez was his fantastic positioning in the ring plus being a slick southpaw I'm convinced that similarly to your opinion we would have seen a defensive ggg less willing to plod forward due to sergios movement, speed of foot.

One thing to consider to is would ggg be able to land the jab consistent or would he get frustrated and try to swarm martinez?

good point, that is the key

depends if he was being effective, or able to build anything off the jab..... but I see Golovkin getting frustrated like he did with Jacobs and Canelo

that KO of Williams was violently beautiful

[aboutfkntime]

And GGG was in his prime against Canelo and Jacobs? Read the thread title again, prime GGG fought at a higher tempo.

I dont think Martinez was even in his prime when fighting at 160, would be a good fight but if Margarito can wear down and eventually KO are Martinez you know GGG would

Martinez was a green rookie when he fought cheato

the question was..... prime Martinez, the best version

Sergio learned on the job, and he learned really fast

[LacedUp]

Tarver, Trinidad, take your pick

even his win over the road warrior Johnson is better than anything Golovkin ever did

he has strong career-defining wins, and master-class performances over the likes of Pavlik, etc..... their resume's are not even close

also, those guys are not cut from the same cloth..... they went about their business completely differently

Hopkins entered a sudden-death knockout tourney..... he unified a division by fighting actual champions..... he took short-money..... he gave concessions..... he jumped divisions..... often fighting the best opposition, right into his 40's..... he challenged himself and earned his position within the sport

Golovkin is an entitled diva who avoided a LOT more big fights than he took..... even now, after being widely criticized for YEARS for his poor opponent selection, Golovkin is still repaying his fans with second rate fights against no-hoper opponents

knowledgeable observers would not mention those guys in the same sentence

Hopkins over-achieved, Golovkin under-achieved..... big difference there

Hopkins best win is a welterweight, and a middleweight who he dragged up to light heavyweight.

Tarver is a good win. GGG has good wins too.

There’s not much difference between the two resumes. Hopkins’ is one of the most overrated resumes of recent times. He has some good wins. But so does GGG.

Whilst Hopkins probably does have a better resume, it’s not by that much.

[LacedUp]

FACT: Golovkin's best win is scraping past Danny Jacobs

well, who did Jacobs prove his world-class against..... ?

FACT: nobody gave Jacobs the slightest chance to beat Golovkin

FACT: Jacobs has done nothing since Golovkin, other than a solid win against Derevyanchenko..... putting in less than stellar performances against mid-level opponents like Arias and Sulecki

Martinez, was a 154lb'er who was punching above his weight..... so his wins over Pavlik and Williams are MUCH better than Golovkin scraping past the unheralded under-dog Danny Jacobs

Asks a question about Martinez, proceeds to talk about golovkin.

Tells you everything really.

Golovkin is a small middleweight too.

His wins over Jacobs and should be Canelo is better than anything Martinez did.

And I was a Martinez fan, but he also fought in a horrible division

[aboutfkntime]

Hopkins best win is a welterweight, and a middleweight who he dragged up to light heavyweight.

Tarver is a good win. GGG has good wins too.

There’s not much difference between the two resumes. Hopkins’ is one of the most overrated resumes of recent times. He has some good wins. But so does GGG.

Whilst Hopkins probably does have a better resume, it’s not by that much.

p1ss off

Tarver was a GREAT win, Golovkin has done nothing even close

sorry, but you do not get to mention Tarver and Jacobs in the same sentence and then escape with any credibility

even Glen Johnson > Golovkin scraping past Danny Jacobs..... who is Golovkin's best win, despite not even having a career-defining win himself

you guys need to realize that a HUGE pile of " goods " do not equal even 1 "great"..... boxing simply does not work that way.....

there is a HUGE level between Hopkins and Golovkin historically..... and as I mentioned earlier, those guys are clearly not cut from the same cloth

Hopkins achieved things that Golovkin was unwilling to even try

absurd conversation

[aboutfkntime]

Asks a question about Martinez, proceeds to talk about golovkin.

Tells you everything really.

Golovkin is a small middleweight too.

His wins over Jacobs and should be Canelo is better than anything Martinez did.

And I was a Martinez fan, but he also fought in a horrible division

* SIGH *..... more golov-bullshlt.....

Golovkin is a career-middleweight, Martinez was not

this is the killer.....

Golovkin had a storied amateur career..... Martinez had none

despite that fact..... Martinez tried more, and achieved more, than Golovkin ever did

Golovkin ran around for SIX YEARS lying about " 154-168 "..... despite that fact Martinez, (like Hopkins, and unlike Bullshltkin) agreed to drop weight for huge money-fights, with Mayweather Pacquiao Cotto and Canelo..... and Golovkin, was not

Martinez > Golovkin

Danny Jacobs was a huge underdog vs Golovkin, and has done nothing since losing that fight..... neither Pavlik nor Williams were huge underdogs vs Martinez, so both are better wins

[LacedUp]

you guys need to realize that a HUGE pile of " goods " do not equal even 1 "great"..... boxing simply does not work that way.....

Who are you guys? You seem to think i'm a GGG fan or something. haha.

I call bs when I see it, and Hopkins resume whilst good is totally overrated.

Just the fact that you bring up Glen Johnson, a journeyman, shows you that.

history certainly wasn't kind to that win. haha

[LacedUp]

* SIGH *..... more golov-bullshlt.....

Golovkin is a career-middleweight, Martinez was not

this is the killer.....

Golovkin had a storied amateur career..... Martinez had none

despite that fact..... Martinez tried more, and achieved more, than Golovkin ever did

Golovkin ran around for SIX YEARS lying about " 154-168 "..... despite that fact Martinez, (like Hopkins, and unlike Bullshltkin) agreed to drop weight for huge money-fights, with Mayweather Pacquiao Cotto and Canelo..... and Golovkin, was not

Martinez > Golovkin

Danny Jacobs was a huge underdog vs Golovkin, and has done nothing since losing that fight..... neither Pavlik nor Williams were huge underdogs vs Martinez, so both are better wins

continues to talk about GGG.....

[aboutfkntime]

Who are you guys? You seem to think i'm a GGG fan or something. haha.

I call bs when I see it, and Hopkins resume whilst good is totally overrated.

Just the fact that you bring up Glen Johnson, a journeyman, shows you that.

history certainly wasn't kind to that win. haha

you sound like a casual fan, talking about Johnson like that

fyi - Johnson was as tough as they come, and undefeated at the time

the Pavlik/Johnson wins were dominating showcase exhibitions against rated opponents..... something that Golovkin has never done

Hopkins has GREAT wins/excellent wins, as well as many very-good wins, against rated opponents..... he was a HUGE underdog and completely written-off against Pavlik.....

..... whereas Golovkin mainly has good, with 1 or 2 very-good wins, to his name..... with no signature wins and no career-defining fights

that are literally levels apart..... both historically, and as champions

comparing Golovkin to Hopkins/Hagler/Monzon used to happen..... back when there were many unanswered questions about Golovkin..... but that is a thing-of-the-past, most of those questions have been answered now

and head-to-head, forget it..... Golovkin looked hesitant and non-commital against Jacobs, and against Canelo at times in the rematch..... just like Pavlik did with Hopkins

that fight would not have ended well for Gennady, just like the Ward fight

I give him very little chance of beating Hopkins, and no chance whatsoever of beating Ward (because of style, not because Ward is greater)..... not even a punchers chance, because Golovkin does not one-punch guys and would be totally outclassed by Ward..... whereas Bernard would possibly offer him more opportunities but was waaaaay too ring-savvy, smart, durable for Golovkin