GGG vs Pavlik

[oogiebe]

Pavlik was never close to 2012-2015 version of Golovkin who was better than Pavlik in basically every aspect of boxing.

Both Pavlik and GGG have gathered impressive winning-streaks with fearsome KO-rate, but Pavlik's one includes an unquestionable work of a then-unbeaten Taylor: Golovkin has never ever KO'd an unbeaten, former-unified-world champion as dangerous as Taylor. The closest thing to that GGG ever did is, in my opinion, beating Brook: a welterweight who, with all due respect, has never unified anything.
If you're among the ones considering Lemieux as "great opposition", our conversation might end now, without making a dime of damage.
If you consider GGG's victories as having been obtained against more-dangerous opposition than Pavlik's, I might give you some time to get a grip about this, as it's not as grievous as the above-stated issue would be.

You are desperately trying to avoid the obvious: GGG is a much better boxer than Pavlik. He may have thinner bones, shorter penis, less body hair, etc., and not have an undefeated unified victim on his record, but he would handily beat Pavlik in the ring.

LMAO!!! Where do you come up with stuff like that! I agree!

[Counter-puncher]

Peaking Pavlik had more means than Golovkin.

The most ridiculous statement ever.

Pavlik was a 1-2, he had a pretty good jab-right hand and that was literally it.
shitty left hook
no real body punching ability
slow, heavy feet
no head movement
stiff knees, stiff waist, stiff back, stiff stiff stiff upright target.

one of the least versatile fighters to have been genuine world level in the last few years, and he's got 'more means'?! he has literally one 'means' to win anything, you can hear his trainer in the corner 'simple fvcking fight Kell, double jab right hand' he'#d just say this sh1t over and over as they had no other gameplan, lol like Pavlik could even do anything different anyway.

this guy's just pulling random supposed-justifications, that are actually meaningless, out of his ass, cos he has a hard-on for Pavlik. like some of the shite lampley used to come out with.

[Cyclops]

Peaking Pavlik had more means than Golovkin.

The most ridiculous statement ever.

Pavlik was a 1-2, he had a pretty good jab-right hand and that was literally it.
shitty left hook
no real body punching ability
slow, heavy feet
no head movement
stiff knees, stiff waist, stiff back, stiff stiff stiff upright target.

one of the least versatile fighters to have been genuine world level in the last few years, and he's got 'more means'?! he has literally one 'means' to win anything, you can hear his trainer in the corner 'simple fvcking fight Kell, double jab right hand' he'#d just say this sh1t over and over as they had no other gameplan, lol like Pavlik could even do anything different anyway.

this guy's just pulling random supposed-justifications, that are actually meaningless, out of his ass, cos he has a hard-on for Pavlik. like some of the shite lampley used to come out with.

Hopkins fight he kept on saying that as Pavlik got soul crushingly schooled.

[Counter-puncher]

The Martinez fight too

[Jacopodb]

Peaking Pavlik had more means than Golovkin.

The most ridiculous statement ever.

Pavlik was a 1-2, he had a pretty good jab-right hand and that was literally it.
shitty left hook
no real body punching ability
slow, heavy feet
no head movement
stiff knees, stiff waist, stiff back, stiff stiff stiff upright target.

one of the least versatile fighters to have been genuine world level in the last few years, and he's got 'more means'?! he has literally one 'means' to win anything, you can hear his trainer in the corner 'simple fvcking fight Kell, double jab right hand' he'#d just say this sh1t over and over as they had no other gameplan, lol like Pavlik could even do anything different anyway.

this guy's just pulling random supposed-justifications, that are actually meaningless, out of his ass, cos he has a hard-on for Pavlik. like some of the shite lampley used to come out with.

As much as I have my hard-on for great fighters ("hard on", for sure...) , you forgot to list one of Pavlik's main assets you might have underestimated: a solid chin, altho he shares that feature with Golovkin, I reckon. Anyway, if GGG couldn't hurt Canelo, what does make you think that he could hurt a bigger guy like Pavlik..? Just curiosity.

As Pavlik might not have had a great left hook, as you've written, he had a terrific right uppercut, quick reflexes, the ability to hit while moving on his feet (he wasn't flat-footed at all, and had a very effective footwork... I could even be forgetting other assets he could also have had, as well I might have not recognised all of GGG's assets: you might try and list them, and compare them to Pavlik's ones), and could work viciously as much as accurately at body-shots: you don't need to be a cheerleader to notice this. Golovkin just doesn't hit that hard, altho he's pretty accurate.

I've sparred with a guy as stiff as they get, but man did he hurt. As much as people underestimated Calzaghe because he "slapped", people can forget how effective both peaking Pavlik and Calzaghe were. Stiff guys can hurt, nevertheless.

Pavlik had clearly more potential than Golovkin, and it was evident from the start.
Pavlik is a middleweight version of Mike Tyson (not in their style, obviously, but in their career span, both boisterous and precocious), Tyson being much more hyped-up than Pavlik ("Tyson is the baddest man on the planet", and so on...), therefore you have fans and crybabies claiming a possible Tyson victory over a peaking Frazier, and a sure, even handy GGG's victory over Kelly: I don't believe that.

A match between both-peaking Pavlik and Golovkin, would be a joy for the eyes, because none of them has ever fought dirty; but, according to general GGG-hype, a fantasy fight with Pavlik would be less-close than it actually could be.

It would be a rather close fight, as I've already written, and you sound like you're chanting "victory" a little too easy and early, for some reason...

[Jacopodb]

The Martinez fight too

You don't judge Tyson's dangerousness at his peak by the fights vs Buster Douglas and later Lennox Lewis, you don't judge Lewis' potential by his loss to Rahman, or even the whole Golovkin's career by his failures against Canelo, as much as I don't judge Pavlik's value only by his losses, against excellent fighters: you can also notice that Pavlik is still 40-2 and no draws, for example, which, considering that his opposition was still more dangerous than GGG's, altho Pavlik has retired at only 30 years old, it's a remarkable record.

Don't mistake Pavlik's mental fragility with lack of ring-I.Q. and smarts. Tyson too, was as fragile as dangerous.

I guess that Pavlik vs GGG could be a sort of Canelo vs GGG-bis...

[Jacopodb]

Pavlik was a 1-2, he had a pretty good jab-right hand and that was literally it.
shitty left hook
no real body punching ability
slow, heavy feet
no head movement
stiff knees, stiff waist, stiff back, stiff stiff stiff upright target.

You only listed as many cheap-common places as any fashion-victim could sort out. :-)

one of the least versatile fighters to have been genuine world level in the last few years, and he's got 'more means'?! he has literally one 'means' to win anything, you can hear his trainer in the corner 'simple fvcking fight Kell, double jab right hand' he'#d just say this sh1t over and over as they had no other gameplan, lol like Pavlik could even do anything different anyway.

Trainers are trainers: they will always speak roughly to you, specially during a match.
I don't know if you can understand: a lot like Manny Steward did with Wlad Klitschko, for example...

[Jacopodb]

you can hear his trainer in the corner 'simple fvcking fight Kell, double jab right hand' he'#d just say this sh1t over and over as they had no other gameplan

The fact that Pavlik had a so-much-limited trainer, brings even more props to Kelly: imagine Pavlik under Manny Steward, or Roger Mayweather, or Freddie Roach...: alongside similar trainers, Kelly Pavlik could've become a potential serial-killer...

I think you're still underestimating Pavlik.
I've rarely seen a fighter with such great potential, and I might be a little biased about him for this reason, as you might be a little biased about GGG's remarkable fundamentals.
GGG might have also benefited from a better entourage, which means a lot.

[Jacopodb]

Regardless of any possible outcome, you must grant me I brought some rather serious arguments, if not reckon that most of GGG's hype is based on roughly shallow topics.

[Jacopodb]

Moreover, I've never tried to make you believe that I was a more-proficient boxer than I actually was, or tried to look tougher than I am.
I've exposed my arguments openly and honestly as anyone could.

"You never give me a fair shake... and you know sh*t about boxing!"

:-)

[Cyclops]

Moreover, I've never tried to make you believe that I was a more-proficient boxer than I actually was, or tried to look tougher than I am.
I've exposed my arguments openly and honestly as anyone could.

"You never give me a fair shake... and you know sh*t about boxing!"

:-)

So you’re Kelly Pavlik?

[apollo creed]

Moreover, I've never tried to make you believe that I was a more-proficient boxer than I actually was, or tried to look tougher than I am.
I've exposed my arguments openly and honestly as anyone could.

"You never give me a fair shake... and you know sh*t about boxing!"

:-)

Ok Kelly. You would beat a prime peaked GGG 10 times out of 10.

[Jacopodb]

Moreover, I've never tried to make you believe that I was a more-proficient boxer than I actually was, or tried to look tougher than I am.
I've exposed my arguments openly and honestly as anyone could.

"You never give me a fair shake... and you know sh*t about boxing!"

:-)

So you’re Kelly Pavlik?

No, sir: I am "Pretty Boy" Floyd Mayweather Jr., it's pretty obvious:

[Jacopodb]

By some scandalized posts I have read, it almost looks like I claimed that Gatti was tougher than motherf*ckin' Roberto Duran...

The GGG vs Pavlik fight would be closer than most people think, arguably.

I don't mean to be provocative: I've followed Pavlik more than I have followed GGG, because, with all due respect, Pavlik was more exciting, even if he never gave me a hard-on... when old Kelly from Youngstown, Ohio, got inside the ring, it seemed like the old 70's were back. I might be a little biased about this, as much as anyone else might be biased about GGG's work-ethics and mild manners...
Take a look at Pavlik's amateur record, and try to tell me what could have happened if Kelly had kept being an amateur until his 23 years old...

Don't throw at me any sh*t regarding the Martinez's bout: it's not a fight decided by a mere cut over the eye, that will condemn one with Pavlik's kind of record... nor it will be a loss at a catchweight against an all-timer boxer, in great shape, who went on to fight easily at light-heavyweight: that's how big was B-Hop...

...and you believe I should put all the above-written aside for your pretty faces..?

Pavlik deserves way more recognition than his "low profile" lifestyle has granted him til now.

[apollo creed]

By some scandalized posts I have read, it almost looks like I claimed that Gatti was tougher than motherf*ckin' Roberto Duran...

The GGG vs Pavlik fight would be closer than most people think, arguably.

I don't mean to be provocative: I've followed Pavlik more than I have followed GGG, because, with all due respect, Pavlik was more exciting, even if he never gave me a hard-on... when old Kelly from Youngstown, Ohio, got inside the ring, it seemed like the old 70's were back. I might be a little biased about this, as much as anyone else might be biased about GGG's work-ethics and mild manners...
Take a look at Pavlik's amateur record, and try to tell me what could have happened if Kelly had kept being an amateur until his 23 years old...

Don't throw at me any sh*t regarding the Martinez's bout: it's not a fight decided by a mere cut over the eye, that will condemn one with Pavlik's kind of record... nor it will be a loss at a catchweight against an all-timer boxer, in great shape, who went on to fight easily at light-heavyweight: that's how big was B-Hop...

...and you believe I should put all the above-written aside for your pretty faces..?

Pavlik deserves way more recognition than his "low profile" lifestyle has granted him til now.

It would be such a wonderful debate about this interesting subject with Enlighten One. It's very curious that EO is absent here on this thread !

[Boxerbeetle]

By some scandalized posts I have read, it almost looks like I claimed that Gatti was tougher than motherf*ckin' Roberto Duran...

The GGG vs Pavlik fight would be closer than most people think, arguably.

I don't mean to be provocative: I've followed Pavlik more than I have followed GGG, because, with all due respect, Pavlik was more exciting, even if he never gave me a hard-on... when old Kelly from Youngstown, Ohio, got inside the ring, it seemed like the old 70's were back. I might be a little biased about this, as much as anyone else might be biased about GGG's work-ethics and mild manners...
Take a look at Pavlik's amateur record, and try to tell me what could have happened if Kelly had kept being an amateur until his 23 years old...

Don't throw at me any sh*t regarding the Martinez's bout: it's not a fight decided by a mere cut over the eye, that will condemn one with Pavlik's kind of record... nor it will be a loss at a catchweight against an all-timer boxer, in great shape, who went on to fight easily at light-heavyweight: that's how big was B-Hop...

...and you believe I should put all the above-written aside for your pretty faces..?

Pavlik deserves way more recognition than his "low profile" lifestyle has granted him til now.

It would be such a wonderful debate about this interesting subject with Enlighten One. It's very curious that EO is absent here on this thread !

[apollo creed]

By some scandalized posts I have read, it almost looks like I claimed that Gatti was tougher than motherf*ckin' Roberto Duran...

The GGG vs Pavlik fight would be closer than most people think, arguably.

I don't mean to be provocative: I've followed Pavlik more than I have followed GGG, because, with all due respect, Pavlik was more exciting, even if he never gave me a hard-on... when old Kelly from Youngstown, Ohio, got inside the ring, it seemed like the old 70's were back. I might be a little biased about this, as much as anyone else might be biased about GGG's work-ethics and mild manners...
Take a look at Pavlik's amateur record, and try to tell me what could have happened if Kelly had kept being an amateur until his 23 years old...

Don't throw at me any sh*t regarding the Martinez's bout: it's not a fight decided by a mere cut over the eye, that will condemn one with Pavlik's kind of record... nor it will be a loss at a catchweight against an all-timer boxer, in great shape, who went on to fight easily at light-heavyweight: that's how big was B-Hop...

...and you believe I should put all the above-written aside for your pretty faces..?

Pavlik deserves way more recognition than his "low profile" lifestyle has granted him til now.

It would be such a wonderful debate about this interesting subject with Enlighten One. It's very curious that EO is absent here on this thread !

The problem is this is a 'GGG vs' thread and EO didn't say anything 'well documented' which is really strange.

Only 'Jacopodb ' was very vocal with some long replying posts.

[Jacopodb]

Moreover, I've never tried to make you believe that I was a more-proficient boxer than I actually was, or tried to look tougher than I am.
I've exposed my arguments openly and honestly as anyone could.

"You never give me a fair shake... and you know sh*t about boxing!"

:-)

Ok Kelly. You would beat a prime peaked GGG 10 times out of 10.

Not really...

[Jacopodb]

I'm not afraid of being proven wrong, and I know I might change my mind later on, as I've done thousands times before: I'm only afraid of arrogance, and everything that comes with it.

As long as everyone will stick to constructive arguments, no one will get hurt...

[Jacopodb]

I'm not afraid of being proven wrong, and I know I might change my mind later on, as I've done thousands times before: I'm only afraid of arrogance, and everything that comes with it.

As long as everyone will stick to constructive arguments, no one will get hurt...

[Jacopodb]

I'm not afraid of being proven wrong, and I know I might change my mind later on, as I've done thousands times before: I'm only afraid of arrogance, and everything that comes with it.

As long as everyone will stick to constructive arguments, no one will get hurt...

[Jacopodb]

I'm not afraid of being proven wrong, and I know I might change my mind later on, as I've done thousands times before: I'm only afraid of arrogance, and everything that comes with it.

As long as everyone will stick to constructive arguments, no one will get hurt...

[Jacopodb]

For the chronicles: I've never said that Pavlik would 100% win, I've said it would be a rather close fight, and I'd pick Pavlik: it's not more your problem than it is mine.

[Jacopodb]

Moreover, I've never tried to make you believe that I was a more-proficient boxer than I actually was, or tried to look tougher than I am.
I've exposed my arguments openly and honestly as anyone could.

"You never give me a fair shake... and you know sh*t about boxing!"

:-)

Ok Kelly. You would beat a prime peaked GGG 10 times out of 10.

lie-la-laa-la-lie-la-laa-la-la-la-laa... lie...

[Jacopodb]

your schtick just reads like the musings of a housebound dilettante

Oh, anyhow: fighting at your best is fighting-at-your-best period.

With the due proportions, every prize-fight resembles any other prize-fight in the whole goddamn*d universe, be it a 50 euros or a 100 million dollars bout... for your information.