Is GGG getting old or as he not just now had touher opponents?

[BillyBoxing]

Someone that was still improving technically and mentally in their 30s because they didn't turn pro until their mid 20s. So called boxing fans should know that technical ability and mental are just as important as physical. The improvements Golovkin has made in his technical and mental ability far outweighs what he could possibly have lost physically. He's a better fighter now than he was in his 20s. If you're too stupid to see it, so be it.

A fighter like Klitschko was still improving in his early 30s and he turned pro at 20.

Early 30s is not 35.

And Klitschko was not improving at 35.

Again a bunch of sore salty excuses, it's pointless to argue with you.

You're in every GGG related thread hating like a btch.

[Robbie Barrett]

Early 30s is not 35.

And Klitschko was not improving at 35.

Again a bunch of sore salty excuses, it's pointless to argue with you.

You're in every GGG related thread hating like a btch.

Don't quote me then you faggot. If you think physical ability is the be all and end all you don't know shit about boxing anyway.

The point is Klitschko wasn't improving physically. But was improving, just like Golovkin.

[Mr Objecitivity]

I'm still waiting for this one past pressure fighter in boxing who beat an opponent of Canelo Alvarez's or Daniel Jacob's caliber, at age 35 or more, whilst being 5 years older or more.

The typical response is 'which past pressure fighter fought their first A level opponent at their 30's'. There's no way to prove if Golovkin did, or didn't fight A level fighters before his current age. He beat the best opponents available to become the best middleweight / 160 pound boxer with the most titles. Thus, those opponents can be classified as 'A' level boxers.

Another response is 'Golovkin doesn't have the same wear and tear DOE'. Except, he has had nearly 400 professional +amateur bouts combined in total. That's as many rounds as any past pressure fighter has had to endure in total.

There is ABSOLUTELY no reason to make Golovkin an exception to this rule / norm.

[BillyBoxing]

Don't quote me then you faggot. If you think physical ability is the be all and end all you don't know shit about boxing anyway.

The point is Klitschko wasn't improving physically. But was improving, just like Golovkin.

So if Golovkin is improving, give him a little bit of credit.

[satiev1]

It's a combo of both but he is not in his prime. At 35 no one is. Those are facts. GGG will be 38 and the tards will still say he's in his prime.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Combination of both..


Obviously Jacobs, Brook, canelo is a tough stretch of opponents for anybody. These are all high caliber world class fighters, and they won't crumble with ease like other ggg opponents.

And at 35, I do think golovkin is slipping. He reminds me of hagler when he fought Mugabi n Leonard. He just looked slower and lethargic. Doesn't seem to have the same snap on his punches as when he fought proska or macklin or Stevens.
And golovkin blocks a lot of punches with his head, and that will slow you up over the years

[escudo]

hard to admit for a detractor like you that GGG is better than you thought and still dominated a Nelo being past it.

GGG is obviously past prime.

Who is getting better by the age of 35?
Bring me up one fighter in history (hope you won't duck the question as usual) and why GGG would be the exception.

Bernard Hopkins

[satiev1]

Bernard Hopkins

He wasn't getting better with age. At 35 he was not better than he was at 30.