GGG ranking if.....

[Duran1970]

Where would you blokes rank GGG in the P4P category had he got the decisions against Canelo??
It's obvious hes getting a lil long in the tooth and eroding a bit but woulda been undefeated with a high ko% and clean out division after beating Jacobs and 2 superfight wins over Canelo. And woulda broke Hopkins defense record I believe?
Do you keep him high or do you lower him cuz he's near the end

[jas80s]

When measuring a fighter in an "all-time" sense, the only thing that matters is his performance against the very top echelon guys that they fought. The manner in which they dominated fighters that had nowhere near their talent level is irrelevant. There are some particularly ordinary fighters that managed to put together incredibly glossy records. I'm not saying GGG is some hype job, but ultimately the only really talented fighter he was in there with was Canelo. Jacobs and Brook are very good fighters, but they are not great fighters in my opinion.

GGG is an excellent fighter and a guy who would have likely been a champion at any point in history. But he's just a man, he's not a breed apart from other great fighters as some seem to want to believe. One can believe that he would've beaten any MW in history and they might very well be right, but to make that assumption based on how great he looked against Curtis Stevens and David Lemieux is nothing more than a leap of faith, the opponent matters.

As for how I'd rate him if he got the decisions? About the same as I do now, they were close fights, who cares what the judges had to say??

[Duran1970]

I should have said current p4p ranking

[jamamb]

gggs a very good fighter, but to me the type who may be a modern hof fighter w/o being a true atg to be mentioned in the class of hagler, monzon etc. i think he was slightly better then mik kessler or dariusz m

[jas80s]

I should have said current p4p ranking

It's tempting to say that he would easily be number 1 pound for pound, but if he HAD gotten the two decisions against Canelo, think of how we would be talking about Canelo then?? Here is how it might read..

"Let's see, loses twice to GGG after getting clowned by Mayweather. He can't beat the top MW, he can't beat the top WW, he looked bad against Trout and Lara...Other than having a good enough beard to go 24 rounds with GGG, what has this guy ever done??"

So, that might diminish GGG. At the very least, it would give ammunition to those that still would want to argue that GGG is not that great. If you have it in for a fighter, you can dump on his record no matter what he does. That's why most of the arguments about ranking (current or all time) are among fans who just love to argue in general.

[chrisjs1985]

I rank him #4. I count the Canelo fights as wins on MY rankings because, well, he won both fights. Having said that he's just an inferior fighter to Lomachenko, Crawford and Usyk. Could you imagine any of those three having fairly close/competitive fights with Canelo? I personally can't.

[Onetimeonly]

I rank him #4. I count the Canelo fights as wins on MY rankings because, well, he won both fights. Having said that he's just an inferior fighter to Lomachenko, Crawford and Usyk. Could you imagine any of those three having fairly close/competitive fights with Canelo? I personally can't.

I think Crawford would beat canelo straight up.

[chrisjs1985]

I rank him #4. I count the Canelo fights as wins on MY rankings because, well, he won both fights. Having said that he's just an inferior fighter to Lomachenko, Crawford and Usyk. Could you imagine any of those three having fairly close/competitive fights with Canelo? I personally can't.

I think Crawford would beat canelo straight up.

I think he would too but he'd "lose" a decision.