thoughts on GGG ??

[boxing_rocks]

First of all, that was just one member. Second of all, he likely didn't read all your posting diarrhea, specifically the part of Golovkin fighting MW novices which remains a lie.

Here’s what I actually stated, in terms of “middleweight novices”:

Put it this way, by the 10th September, six of GGG’s world title victims would have been relative novices at 160lbs...

Here's the justification for this statement:
• Milton Nunez = Had only “officially” competed in two 160lb fights prior to facing Golovkin, with 16 of his opponents having never even won a single fight.
• Nilson Julio Tapia = Had spent the vast majority of his career as a light middleweight having sporadically competed in only a handful “technically” middleweight bouts against opponents that could not possibly be considered as legitimate 160lb-ers.
• Kassim Ouma = A former welterweight that had only competed in two middleweight bouts.
• Lajuan Simon = A former super-middleweight that had lost three of the five middleweight bouts he’d competed in, from (at that point) a 35 fight career. Had only managed to defeat one genuine 160lb-er prior to facing Golovkin.
• Dominic Wade = Spent his entire career campaigning as a 168lb-er, with the Golovkin bout being his debut at 160lbs.
• Kell Brook = A pro for 12 years, gained the IBF 147lb crown against the only universally recognised top-ten world class opponent he’s ever faced (Shawn Porter). Has competed in a few 154lb fights against journeymen, but is now making his middleweight debut against a man that he admits to being scared of and who also happens to consistently rehydrate to 171lbs+ for the last fourteen years.

That's exactly what liars do -- meddle with facts.

- Golovkin hasn't fought Brook yet
- Wade was a MIDDLEWEIGHT MANDATORY. The fact that he fought 1-2 pounds above 160 which is a usual practice doesn't make him a SMW.
- NINE OUT OF NINE Golovkin's last opponents were full blown middleweights having spent years at MW, but you prefer to list his opponents from ancient history.

EnLIARed One.

[Enlightened-One]

That's exactly what liars do -- meddle with facts.

My posting history in this thread is date and time-stamped. I have said what I said and nothing should be assumed… and I have only ever attempted to qualify my own statements.

The facts are there for everyone to check for themselves.

I have not lied.

Constantly repeating the same old “Liar! Liar! Pants on Fire!” nonsense claim over-and-over again, which has no foundation in fact, in the desperate hope that raw repetition alone will displace the truth, is quite simply a dishonest debating tactic employed by people who lack intellect.

Golovkin hasn't fought Brook yet

This was clearly catered for in my original claim.

Wade was a MIDDLEWEIGHT MANDATORY. The fact that he fought 1-2 pounds above 160 which is a usual practice doesn't make him a SMW.

Technically-speaking, I am correct. 163lbs, 164lbs, 167lbs etc., coupled with having never previously had an “official” weight of 160lbs validates my point.

NINE OUT OF NINE Golovkin's last opponents were full blown middleweights having spent years at MW, but you prefer to list his opponents from ancient history.

I have never commented on this point, nor have I made any attempt to endorse or undermine it.

If you want to discuss this particular issue with someone else, then please feel free.

[gilgamesh]

First of all, that was just one member. Second of all, he likely didn't read all your posting diarrhea, specifically the part of Golovkin fighting MW novices which remains a lie.

Here’s what I actually stated, in terms of “middleweight novices”:

Put it this way, by the 10th September, six of GGG’s world title victims would have been relative novices at 160lbs...

Here's the justification for this statement:
• Milton Nunez = Had only “officially” competed in two 160lb fights prior to facing Golovkin, with 16 of his opponents having never even won a single fight.
• Nilson Julio Tapia = Had spent the vast majority of his career as a light middleweight having sporadically competed in only a handful “technically” middleweight bouts against opponents that could not possibly be considered as legitimate 160lb-ers.
• Kassim Ouma = A former welterweight that had only competed in two middleweight bouts.
• Lajuan Simon = A former super-middleweight that had lost three of the five middleweight bouts he’d competed in, from (at that point) a 35 fight career. Had only managed to defeat one genuine 160lb-er prior to facing Golovkin.
• Dominic Wade = Spent his entire career campaigning as a 168lb-er, with the Golovkin bout being his debut at 160lbs.
• Kell Brook = A pro for 12 years, gained the IBF 147lb crown against the only universally recognised top-ten world class opponent he’s ever faced (Shawn Porter). Has competed in a few 154lb fights against journeymen, but is now making his middleweight debut against a man that he admits to being scared of and who also happens to consistently rehydrate to 171lbs+ for the last fourteen years.

In fairness one of those Middleweight Bouts Ouma had competed in was for the Middleweight Championship against Jermain Taylor. That was quite a few years in the past though by the time he fought Golovkin.

[Counter-puncher]

Aren't we all just thrilled to see little Fergus back?

[Pureist]

Yeah, hasn't even tried to hide his writing style

[jezzamundo]

[quoteGolovkin is certainly not any smaller than any of the men he has faced, with the notable exception of Curtis Stevens.

Tom Loeffler has also recently distanced Team Golovkin’s (Abel Sanchez’s) claims that Gennady was a small middleweight that could easily compete at 154lbs. In fact, Loeffler claimed that they were only prepared to do this for the Mayweather Jr. bout, which they concede is unlikely.][/quote]

Wade appears to be a naturally bigger man than GGG
Lemieux struggles to make middleweight, so while shorter, is naturally bigger than GGG
Murray is a huge middleweight and much bigger than GGG - taller, longer reach, broader torso, in the ring he looked a division bigger
While he started at lower weights, Rubio was clearly bigger than GGG

I think GGG could have easily made 154lb at one point, but into his mid 30s I think it would negatively affect his performance too much. I'd much rather see him take on challenges at 168lb, where he would be small for the division, but his skills and punching power should easily account for any size deficit.

[Enlightened-One]

Wade appears to be a naturally bigger man than GGG

Agreed.

Lemieux struggles to make middleweight, so while shorter, is naturally bigger than GGG

Lemieux appeared at the GGG face-off as much shorter. In the ring he looked fleshier than Gennady and was also a former light middleweight, but I won't make any attempt to argue about your point, because David had grown into the division

Murray is a huge middleweight

Not "huge", but yes... he's supposed to be naturally bigger than Golovkin, but the difference seems trivial and if you claim Murray is "huge", what does that make GGG?

While he started at lower weights, Rubio was clearly bigger than GGG

No. Rubio was clearly fleshier and a former welterweight. Golovkin not only appeared taller, but he was also stockier and had much more muscle definition.

I think GGG could have easily made 154lb at one point

Golovkin and Abel Sanchez have persistently made the very same claim, but despite such "ease", barring Mayweather Jr., they have flatly-refused to consider fighting anyone below 160lbs, even though that's where the money is.

I don't think what you've said disproves my previous statements though, which is...by the 10th September:
• At least six of GGG's world title fights were against relative 160lb novices
• Thirteen of Golovkin's world title opponents had competed in lower weight divisions (147lbs and/or 154lbs)
• In the last fourteen years , GGG has either been a 165lb amateur or a 160lb-er pro

[boxing_rocks]

Fergus just can't stop crapping

[Enlightened-One]

Well, he's pretty much cleared out the division which is very weak in this era. The only thing is he just seems small to be jumping to 168.

Once again, a legend about fighting smaller guys doesn't check out, as none of Golovkin's last 9 opponents were smaller than him.

Golovkin? A "small" middleweight?

[boxing_rocks]

Keep going, fergus !

[Enlightened-One]

Once again, a legend about fighting smaller guys doesn't check out, as none of Golovkin's last 9 opponents were smaller than him.

Murray is a huge middleweight

[boxing_rocks]

Fergus, keep the bullsh*t coming

[Enlightened-One]

I think you've conceded my point haven’t you? You cannot undermine statistical or photographic evidence, can you?

[boxing_rocks]

I think you've conceded my point haven’t you? You cannot undermine statistical or photographic evidence, can you?

Do you think people are idiots in this forum? Photographs are misleading. We have all seen these guys in the ring with Golovkin and know their measurements and weights in other fights.

We also know that fergus can't stop posting longer and longer messages until he gets banned.

[Enlightened-One]

That's exactly what liars do -- meddle with facts.

Do you think people are idiots in this forum? Photographs are misleading.

[Kalan]

One thought is that he's never been beaten or tied like those other ATGs mentioned -- and he has the best KO ratio in Middleweight Championship History.

Another thought is that He's 16-0 with 16 KO wins in Middleweight Title Defenses.

And Sugar Ray Robinson was 3-3 with 2 KO's in Middleweight Title Defenses -- including losing to a Welterweight Champion -- AND that was fine for SRR

That won't be the case for GGG... If Golovkin ever loses a fight it WON'T be fine... The world of social media is going to attack him like a swarm of bees

You can't afford to lose a fight today.. If a boxer ever loses a fight, his place in Fistic History drops below 17 ATG's who lost a dozen fights.

[boxing_rocks]

That's exactly what liars do -- meddle with facts.

Do you think people are idiots in this forum? Photographs are misleading.

Yes, that's exactly what you are trying to do - meddle with facts by posting misleading photos. You forgot this one "proving" that Golovkin is bigger than Tyson:

[Enlightened-One]

Yes, that's exactly what you are trying to do - meddle with facts by posting misleading photos. You forgot this one "proving" that Golovkin is bigger than Tyson:

Google and Boxrec has Golovkin taller than Mike Tyson. So the photo isn't misleading.

And let's just see how small Golovkin really is in comparison to Brook, shall we?

Golovkin stated the following: "This is the biggest test for me. It is not a big difference because [Brook] is the same size, he's strong and I think he has a different boxing style and speed - but there isn't a lot of difference."
http://www.skysports.com/boxing/news/12 ... ine-threat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYADyO9SgCg
Skip to the 40 second mark to see Gennady dwarf Brook, because it seems that you can't be convinced due to your belief that "photos are misleading".

[boxing_rocks]

Fergus, I know that you are not as dumb as you are pretending to be. You know that boxer's height has nothing to do with who is bigger. Otherwise, Khan is much bigger than Canelo. You also know that people's positions in pictures can drastically change an impression on who is bigger. Golovkin is in fact bigger than Brook, but he doesn't seem bigger at all in this picture:

[Enlightened-One]

You know that boxer's height has nothing to do with who is bigger. Otherwise, Khan is much bigger than Canelo. You also know that people's positions in pictures can drastically change an impression on who is bigger. Golovkin is in fact bigger than Brook, but he doesn't seem bigger at all in this picture

So you ignore my video, because you're trying to prove a point? Do you need me to provide videos of all the face-off's instead? Do you think I'm capable of misrepresenting those?

If you refute interview transcripts, videos of interviews (both from the proverbial horse's mouth), Boxrec stats, photos and videos of face-off's... what on earth is going to convince you that you're wrong?

Do you deem everything as "misleading" and "blatant lies" if it doesn't fit your narrative?

[boxing_rocks]

You know that boxer's height has nothing to do with who is bigger. Otherwise, Khan is much bigger than Canelo. You also know that people's positions in pictures can drastically change an impression on who is bigger. Golovkin is in fact bigger than Brook, but he doesn't seem bigger at all in this picture

So you ignore my video, because you're trying to prove a point? Do you need me to provide videos of all the face-off's instead? Do you think I'm capable of misrepresenting those?

If you refute interview transcripts, videos of interviews (both from the proverbial horse's mouth), Boxrec stats, photos and videos of face-off's... what on earth is going to convince you that you're wrong?

Do you deem everything as "misleading" and "blatant lies" if it doesn't fit your narrative?

I don't need your video. I know that Golovkin is bigger than Brook without any videos. All the talk about Brook weighing more than Golovkin is part of promotion.

However, when you are trying to "prove" that Golovkin's last 9 opponents were smaller than him, you are meddling with facts, i.e. lying.

[Enlightened-One]

However, when you are trying to "prove" that Golovkin's last 9 opponents were smaller than him, you are meddling with facts, i.e. lying.

You really do need to quote my precise words when I made that claim? Please... I dare you!

This is what you always resort to... you refuse to address my original claims because they're impossible to undermine, so instead you attack a fictitious argument that I have never proposed, simply because it's easier to refute.

You constantly play the straw man card, whilst persistently labelling me as a “blatant liar” and also claiming that I misrepresent facts, photos videos, interviews etc.

[boxing_rocks]

However, when you are trying to "prove" that Golovkin's last 9 opponents were smaller than him, you are meddling with facts, i.e. lying.

You really do need to quote my precise words when I made that claim? Please... I dare you!

This is what you always resort to... you refuse to address my original claims because they're impossible to undermine, so instead you attack a fictitious argument that I have never proposed, simply because it's easier to refute.

You constantly play the straw man card, whilst persistently labelling me as a “blatant liar” and also claiming that I misrepresent facts, photos videos, interviews etc.

I don't need to look for you precise stupid words. With your pictures, you were trying to "disprove" statements of other posters saying that Murray, Rubio, etc. were bigger than GGG.

[Counter-puncher]

Who's on first base, fergie?

[Pureist]

All I want to know is why is Fergus the troll allowed back