Comments Thread For: Canelo Alvarez is an Excellent Fighter... But Not The Best

[aboutfkntime]

Name all of the great fighters that Canelo fought... under the age of 35, active... and not pulled up in weight.

wait, so.... we got a Golovkin fan, criticizing other fighters resume?

Name all of the very good fighters that Golovkin fought... under the age of 35, active... and not pulled up in weight.

it's all fun-n-games until someone loses an eye, huh ?

[aboutfkntime]

No, that's BS. You can't imagine a fighter who was naturally large to begin with fighting in extreme lower weight classes.

There's NO DAMN WAY you're picturing James Toney vs. Roy Jones at 135. Yet many people had both those guys P4P at one point. Why? The weight didn't matter. Resume mattered.

of course you can, don't be ridiculous

why on earth would anyone imagine Toney at Jones at 135 ?

if resume matters.... then Pacquiao is obviously #1..... and Golovkin is obviously removed from the list.....

obviously

YOU did that

[aboutfkntime]

a " resume " guys P4P list:..........


1) Pacquiao
2) *****
3) *****
4) *****
5) *****
6) *****
7) *****
8) *****
9) *****
10) *****
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
* Golovkin

[Hmabshir]

Garbage article by a complete hater. Who has never stepped in the ring once, yet alone in a real fight.

Pathetic!

[Lomasexual]

That “disrespecting” excuse for getting dropped against Linares is bull****. Lomachencko got hit several times throughout the fight with the exact same punch he was dropped with.

Boxers get hit with numerous punches during fights. If they are dropped in a fight, then there is a good chance that they will be dropped by a type of punch which they have been hit by earlier in the fight.

That isn't relevant to whether they allow a punch through later in the fight due to being reckless or over confident. It's strange to think that it is relevant.

Loma got careless, that is all it was.

As for “keeping the Salido loss in context.” You day its irrelevant because it was so long ago. That would make sense if y’all didn’t act like beating Gary Russell was the equivalent of beating Ray Robinson and Henry Armstrong in a handicap match. I guess on planet Loma, in the three months between the Salido and Russell fights, it makes all the sense in the world that Loma turned into the GOAT. Must have been a helluva training camp.

As fighters progress in their career, they tend to improve until they reach their prime.

Losses show the floor, wins show the ceiling. The assumption is that the fighter's floor moves up, and their ceiling does too.

Which is why early losses lose their relevance, while early victories keep theirs.

As fighters begin to decline, the reverse process happens.

That's pretty obvious to anyone who knows about boxing.

But the real issue here is the hyperbole. "if y’all didn’t act like beating Gary Russell was the equivalent of beating Ray Robinson and Henry Armstrong in a handicap match."

No-one acts like that, and I don't get why you would post something so silly (Was it an attempt at humour? That doesn't always come across clearly on an internet forum.) But it was a very good win.

[Lomasexual]

This guy is fu.cking ridículous

Made like 709 excuses in just one comment

Salido beat Lomachenko, period.

Canelo would do this too.

Best win of Loma is Russell Jr

709? That's a lot.

What I am doing is correcting people. Yes, you and your little flunkies require a lot of correcting. By your own count, I am up to 709 corrections.

Salido beat Lomachenko. This is true. But it is also irrelevant. Anyone who knows anything about boxing knows this.

So do you keep repeating it because you don't know anything about boxing, or because it is all you have to cling to and you don't care that it is irrelevant?

When people bring up Salido as though it is meant to mean something today, it looks like they have nothing else to work with.

I mean, what effect do you think it has? Do you think I am here thinking "Oh no, not the Salido thing! That fight Loma lost in his 2nd pro fight... the one he has since won 12 straight title fights... oh no... Salido... so relevant it hurts!"

Because that would be a bit dopey.

[Death_Adder]

Yup and a total flip floping coward. The entire basis for his article tearing apart canelo contradicts his numerous articles trashing Floyd and the basis for why he refused to vote Floyd ahead of Pacquiao for fighter of the decade. He said despite losses, draws and contraversal wins and close fights Pacquiao was the better fighter because he fought better fighters then Floyd who was undefeated more dominating wins but in his mind in lesser caliber fights. Now saying the opposite with fighters no where near Floyd or even today near canelo caliber of opponents he keeps beating. But Manny going 4 fights with Marquez where you could make the case he never won any of those fights and a clear loss to Morales who cares you can't blow out the elite guys or not catch loses and controversial fights when you fight elites. That's what this phuk boy used to say to defend Pacquiao ahead of Floyd. Easy to make bs cases and when you just hate Floyd then contract everything you used to say because you now just hate canelo.

that guy is a complete idiot. Totally contradicting himself.

[Curtis Harper]

yep, that is why many questioned Golovkin's place on the P4P list

and, he was ranked too highly..... which is why he dropped a few places after fights with Jacobs/Canelo..... so, resume is relevant..... just not as relevant as style/skills/form, which is what got him there in the first place

Golovkin has only ever been ranked P4P because of style/skills/form

the thing is..... P4P is not definitive, nor is it supposed to be

resume adds a proven factor to the equation..... but plenty of supposed P4P fighters lost to non-P4P fighters..... and plenty of fighters hit that list, lost..... and were gone

P4P is over-rated

also, because style/skills/form are more relevant than resume..... as proven by the fact that Pacquiao has the best resume but is not ranked, and Golovkin has a poor resume but is ranked..... evaluating P4P requires knowledge and understanding.....

knowledgeable insiders are correct about Lomachenko and Crawford

I picked Loma to be P4P #1 well over two years ago, either just before or after the Walters fight, around that time

I will always have issues with the bold. We, as fans, are not supposed to further along a mistake. We all agree a guy will look like a HOFer if they fight bums.

Beating up bums should not be rewarded by us fans. The p4p list is supposed to be special. Nothing special about abusing no hopers.

Resumes, TO US FANS, should be the end all.

[Curtis Harper]

Absolutely, man, we all entitled to our opinions and if you believe Canelo to be qualitatively the best fighter on the planet then that's your right. If you can't wrap your head around the concept that a better fighter might not - in theory - have as good a resume (for lack of opportunity or whatever other reason) though then there ain't much point me wasting words trying to explain it to you.

Why the sport supports this act of ******ation, putting some random shlt above a proven resume is beyond me.

Once a guys superior resume is ignored just so a fan can make room for their hero, what's the point ?!?!?!?!

Rhetorical question. I wouldn't want you to waste your time.

[Curtis Harper]

a " resume " guys P4P list:..........


1) Pacquiao
2) *****
3) *****
4) *****
5) *****
6) *****
7) *****
8) *****
9) *****
10) *****
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
* Golovkin

Most recent opponents 1st -

Pac -
Broner
Lucas
Horn
Vargas
Timmy part 3
May
Algieri
Timmy 2

Nelo -
DJ
Rocky
GGG 2
GGG 1
JCC jr
Liam
Con
Cotto

Nelo should be p4p and there shouldn't be a debate about it.