Golovkin prime

[Cent0089]

Just rewatched lot of his fights recently. IMO he was definitely at prime in second Alvarez fight. But you can clearly see some decline in Rolls fight. Maybe Rolls is not B class fighter as everyone saying, but he hit GGG with some clean, head snapping punches. Well, his offensive arsenal is still here, his toughness too. But that decline in defensive reflexes can cost him fights against elite in future. If he wanna fight Andrade and Derevyanchenko, or get a 168 lbs belt, he should do that ASAP. I do not wanna see young fighters build career on defeating an old man.

[Enlightened-One]

I’m interested to know whether Golovkin is agreeable to facing Derevyanchenko next, since they’ve been heavily-rumoured to have been in line to face each other for several weeks now and fight negotiations rarely take as long.

I’m wondering what’s causing the hold-up.

[3132DW]

I’m interested to know whether Golovkin is agreeable to facing Derevyanchenko next, since they’ve been heavily-rumoured to have been in line to face each other for several weeks now and fight negotiations rarely take as long.

I’m wondering what’s causing the hold-up.

Derveychenko was with Di Bella so wouldn’t have thought it would be that difficult with GGG being with DAZN.

[boxing_rocks]

If there is hold-up, it would be money. Derevo/DiBella demanded too much for Canelo fight and they could do the same with Golovkin.

[world ranked]

To me GGG prime ended Canelo 1.

[Bandog]

Most fighters are declining at the age of 34, if not a year or two before. A lot of factors of course weigh into that. Heavyweights seem to be the exception.

I think GGG peaked about 2015-2016. It wasn't until he looked vulnerable against Jacobs when Canelo found his boys and decided to face him. He blatantly ducked him giving up his belt after his unimpressive run beating a faded Cotto, Khan, and Liam Smith.

I really don't think we saw the best GGG vs Canelo, but he was still good enough to make great fights. I thought the first was a clear GGG win, the second a draw or slim Canelo win.

[ironbeard]

Most fighters are declining at the age of 34, if not a year or two before. A lot of factors of course weigh into that. Heavyweights seem to be the exception.

I think GGG peaked about 2015-2016. It wasn't until he looked vulnerable against Jacobs when Canelo found his boys and decided to face him. He blatantly ducked him giving up his belt after his unimpressive run beating a faded Cotto, Khan, and Liam Smith.

I really don't think we saw the best GGG vs Canelo, but he was still good enough to make great fights. I thought the first was a clear GGG win, the second a draw or slim Canelo win.

X2 Good post

[boxing_rocks]

I strongly suspect that Golovkin had an injury before or during Jacobs fight where he stopped fully using his right arm. To me, this is when his prime ended.

[squiggy]

Well, outfighting Canelo six months after that was at least real close to still prime.

[ironbeard]

Well, outfighting Canelo six months after that was at least real close to still prime.

I felt it showed just how excellent he was in his prime (a year or more prior) and how strategically correct Team GingerHead was waiting until he was past it.

[margaret thatcher]

Hard to say, he fought weak opposition so long, and him looking worse coincided with him fighting his best opposition. That said, I did think he beat Jacobs and Canelo I in close fights, though legitimately lost the Canelo rematch.

[Enlightened-One]

It’s hard to gauge when Gennady Golovkin was in his prime, because the calibre of opposition he faced prior to the Danny Jacobs’ bout of 2017 was faily lacklustre or at least underwhelming.

I'm not being a hater either, but it's hard to argue otherwise if you consider the situation objectively.

[apollo creed]

It’s hard to gauge when Gennady Golovkin was in his prime, because the calibre of opposition he faced prior to the Danny Jacobs’ bout of 2017 was faily lacklustre or at least underwhelming.

I'm not being a hater either, but it's hard to argue otherwise if you consider the situation objectively.

Martin MURRAY, who technically beat Sturm and Martinez but he got blatantly robbed "was faily lacklustre or at least underwhelming" ?

Daniel Geale, who also beat Sturm (officially in Germany) "was faily lacklustre or at least underwhelming" ?

David Lemieux (ibf champ), faily lacklustre ?

If these wins were faily lacklustre or at least underwhelming, then what about Charlo's wins over Heiland or Centeno Jr at mw ? How they are? Miserable poor wins ?

[apollo creed]

2011-2015 is when GGG was fresh and sharp.

[DrDuke]

It's not easy to point at it, as the good opposition appeared after he entered the age, which is generally considered as being old for boxers. Anyway, if he is even past it now, I won't say, that he declined much.

[Roars Like Me]

I would say that when he is fighting a 'Rolls' type fighter he does get hit more. I saw that before with him. Against lesser opposition, he walks through them more, thus taking more in the process. Of course he must be on the slide now but the real proof would come in a 3rd Canelo fight, in terms of his defence at least.

[apollo creed]

I would say that when he is fighting a 'Rolls' type fighter he does get hit more. I saw that before with him. Against lesser opposition, he walks through them more, thus taking more in the process. Of course he must be on the slide now but the real proof would come in a 3rd Canelo fight, in terms of his defence at least.

GGG will be a 38 y/o faded fighter and Canelo a 30 y/o at the peak of his prime.

[Enlightened-One]

It’s hard to gauge when Gennady Golovkin was in his prime, because the calibre of opposition he faced prior to the Danny Jacobs’ bout of 2017 was faily lacklustre or at least underwhelming.

I'm not being a hater either, but it's hard to argue otherwise if you consider the situation objectively.

Martin MURRAY, who technically beat Sturm and Martinez but he got blatantly robbed "was faily lacklustre or at least underwhelming" ?

Daniel Geale, who also beat Sturm (officially in Germany) "was faily lacklustre or at least underwhelming" ?

David Lemieux (ibf champ), faily lacklustre ?

If these wins were faily lacklustre or at least underwhelming, then what about Charlo's wins over Heiland or Centeno Jr at mw ? How they are? Miserable poor wins ?

Why are you mentioning Charlo? It's as if you can't defend GGG, so you're employing red-herring debating tactics to divert attention away from the original argument.

There was a time when GGG was on the outside, perceived as being a high-risk/low-reward paper champ looking for a decent payday against an established star.

The likes of Saunders, Andrade and Charlo are currently in the same position.

And for the record, Martin Murray didn't "technically" beat Sturm and Martinez. Why do you persistently misuse the word "technically"?

Even if English wasn't your first language, there's been enough forum posters that have attempted to educate you on the meaning of this word.

[apollo creed]

Martin MURRAY, who technically beat Sturm and Martinez but he got blatantly robbed "was faily lacklustre or at least underwhelming" ?

Daniel Geale, who also beat Sturm (officially in Germany) "was faily lacklustre or at least underwhelming" ?

David Lemieux (ibf champ), faily lacklustre ?

If these wins were faily lacklustre or at least underwhelming, then what about Charlo's wins over Heiland or Centeno Jr at mw ? How they are? Miserable poor wins ?

Why are you mentioning Charlo? It's as if you can't defend GGG, so you're employing red-herring debating tactics to divert attention away from the original argument.

There was a time when GGG was on the outside, perceived as being a high-risk/low-reward paper champ looking for a decent payday against an established star.

The likes of Saunders, Andrade and Charlo are currently in the same position.

And for the record, Martin Murray didn't "technically" beat Sturm and Martinez. Why do you persistently misuse the word "technically"?

Even if English wasn't your first language, there's been enough forum posters that have attempted to educate you on the meaning of this word.

Yeah Murray beat Martinez and Sturm. In my eyes he's a two times world champion. As for Bjs, Andrade and Charlo, they are native english speakers from very known countries like US and UK. Also they are pro boxers since a good period of time, so they have no excuse.

GGG was/is a foreign fighter from an unknown country who didn't speak english. Not to mention that G's last promotional company didn't represent his best interests when he was younger. Yet GGG succeed to accomplish a lot by willing to make concessions to fight the best in his division. Even at this stage GGG is gonna fight a top fighter like Derevyachenko.

[Enlightened-One]

Why are you mentioning Charlo? It's as if you can't defend GGG, so you're employing red-herring debating tactics to divert attention away from the original argument.

There was a time when GGG was on the outside, perceived as being a high-risk/low-reward paper champ looking for a decent payday against an established star.

The likes of Saunders, Andrade and Charlo are currently in the same position.

And for the record, Martin Murray didn't "technically" beat Sturm and Martinez. Why do you persistently misuse the word "technically"?

Even if English wasn't your first language, there's been enough forum posters that have attempted to educate you on the meaning of this word.

Yeah Murray beat Martinez and Sturm. In my eyes he's a two times world champion. As for Bjs, Andrade and Charlo, they are native english speakers from very known countries like US and UK. Also they are pro boxers since a good period of time, so they have no excuse.

GGG was/is a foreign fighter from an unknown country who didn't speak english. Not to mention that G's last promotional company didn't represent his best interests when he was younger. Yet GGG succeed to accomplish a lot by willing to make concessions to fight the best in his division. Even at this stage GGG is gonna fight a top fighter like Derevyachenko.

The GGG being a foreginer theory doesn't hold water.

GGG was HBO's biggest stars (in terms of audience figures) since he signed for that network in 2012. For example: GGG’s average 1.25m US viewership figures during 2013 far exceeded the vast majority of the 40 fighters that competed in the top 25 most viewed non-PPV HBO & Showtime cable fights televised that year (ahead of the likes of Timothy Bradley, Bernard Hopkins, Andre Ward and Nonito Donaire).

[apollo creed]

Yeah Murray beat Martinez and Sturm. In my eyes he's a two times world champion. As for Bjs, Andrade and Charlo, they are native english speakers from very known countries like US and UK. Also they are pro boxers since a good period of time, so they have no excuse.

GGG was/is a foreign fighter from an unknown country who didn't speak english. Not to mention that G's last promotional company didn't represent his best interests when he was younger. Yet GGG succeed to accomplish a lot by willing to make concessions to fight the best in his division. Even at this stage GGG is gonna fight a top fighter like Derevyachenko.

The GGG being a foreginer theory doesn't hold water.

GGG was HBO's biggest stars (in terms of audience figures) since he signed for that network in 2012. For example: GGG’s average 1.25m US viewership figures during 2013 far exceeded the vast majority of the 40 fighters that competed in the top 25 most viewed non-PPV HBO & Showtime cable fights televised that year (ahead of the likes of Timothy Bradley, Bernard Hopkins, Andre Ward and Nonito Donaire).

It does because GGG had a very difficult road with lots of obstacles as a foreign fighter. All he did to succeed was/is to work hard and push it for the bigger fights. He was a serious fighter who did all the 'talk' inside the ring. That's why HBO gave him a big opportunity. GGG had that big hunger and desire to achieve big things in boxing.