BoxRec

Golovkin via stoppage. Canelo is flat footed and that pretty much equals doom against Golovkin unless you're an amazing inside fighter which Canelo isn't. To beat Golovkin you've either got to be an Andre ward type with great mobility and boxing IQ or you've got to be brilliant on the inside imo.

Ward can do both of those things which is why I think he's one of the few if not maybe the only one who can beat Golovkin as of now. Golovkin vs Froch would have been interesting because the latter has a great chin and has good power. Even then though I'd probably have favoured Golovkin to grind Froch down to a later round stoppage loss in all probability.

jezzamundo wrote:

BitPlayer wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:Golovkin wins because he's better than Canelo in just about every conceivable way. Canelo would be doing well to win 3 rounds. His only hope is a fluke injury from Golovkin in the fight or that the fix is in, and he's able to survive the distance. I don't think he would be able to, and even if he did he'd be a bloody mess so it'd be a lot harder to fool anybody on a robbery decision.

There's a reason why Team Canelo is avoiding Golovkin like the plague. While Floyd and Lara were threats to outbox him (and Floyd DID outbox him) nobody is gonna give Canelo the kinda beating Golovkin is. He may take the kinda ass whooping in that fight that'll see him never be quite the same fighter again, and that's what his promoters fear most I'm sure.

I disagree with you there. Not saying Canelo wins because, but he does definitely have advantages over GGG, his defense being the obvious one.

Also the reason about him not wanting the fight because it could likely give him career shortening punishment would still apply if they fought he could win the war.

Canelo also has clearly faster hands than GGG and his chin appears to be top notch too. GGG has the edge in footspeed, stamina and punching power. For me, Canelo's best strategy is to keep the fight on the inside and turn it into a war. GGG's best strategy is to box Canelo from the outside, jab and counter him, break him down and move in for the kill in the mid to late rounds.

My pick is GGG in an 8th round stoppage while well ahead on the scorecards.

Canelo was badly rocked by Miguel Cotto's little (in size) brother.

If this fight takes place in Nov of 2017, as they are saying, then i've got this fight as 50/50. Discount Canelo as much as you want and discount his opposition if you may, but he's turned into a dynamic fighter with tremendous power. GGG will be over a year plus older and even farther away from his prime.

Canelo did not stop banging for 9 rounds on Saturday. He'd take a quick break every round but then would continue to bang. The pace that Canelo had on Saturday would be very tough for GGG to keep up with. GGG isn't superhuman. Those body shots that Canelo was throwing would stop and hurt anyone.

Then you couple in the fact that Canelo appears to have judges in his pocket. I could easily see Canelo winning this fight or GGG winning this fight. 50/50. Canelo is a top 5 P4P fighter at this minute.

Canelo stopped banging many times and laid back on the ropes, where he took shots and was cut by a punch after only a round and a half. He still fights in spots and doesn't have a very high output, so I can't see his pace beaing a reason he'd defeat GGG; Golovkin definitely has the edge in stamina and unlike Canelo is comfortable fighting a round without shutting down for breathers.

By the way, would those body shots really stop anyone? He lands good body shots in most his fights but never came close to stopping Lara, Cotto, or Trout, and he couldn't even drop Angulo despite landing everything for 10 rounds. You should keep in mind that he fought a paper champ whose best opponent was John Thompson, and Smith never even had a lead in that fight.

crusader wrote:Canelo stopped banging many times and laid back on the ropes, where he took shots and was cut by a punch after only a round and a half. He still fights in spots and doesn't have a very high output, so I can't see his pace beaing a reason he'd defeat GGG; Golovkin definitely has the edge in stamina and unlike Canelo is comfortable fighting a round without shutting down for breathers.

By the way, would those body shots really stop anyone? He lands good body shots in most his fights but never came close to stopping Lara, Cotto, or Trout, and he couldn't even drop Angulo despite landing everything for 10 rounds. You should keep in mind that he fought a paper champ whose best opponent was John Thompson, and Smith never even had a lead in that fight.

True. However in all of those fights (Cotto included) they all adopted quite a lot of mocement. Golovkin is going to be more in front of you than those guys were. Going to be more opportunities to land meaty body shots.

He busted up Angulo to the body as well and never even had him wincing. He's a good body-puncher, but I highly doubt the shots he landed would've stopped anyone...I mean it took him nearly 10 rounds to stop Liam Smith with them.

lefty wrote:

jezzamundo wrote:

BitPlayer wrote: I disagree with you there. Not saying Canelo wins because, but he does definitely have advantages over GGG, his defense being the obvious one.

Also the reason about him not wanting the fight because it could likely give him career shortening punishment would still apply if they fought he could win the war.

Canelo also has clearly faster hands than GGG and his chin appears to be top notch too. GGG has the edge in footspeed, stamina and punching power. For me, Canelo's best strategy is to keep the fight on the inside and turn it into a war. GGG's best strategy is to box Canelo from the outside, jab and counter him, break him down and move in for the kill in the mid to late rounds.

My pick is GGG in an 8th round stoppage while well ahead on the scorecards.

Canelo was badly rocked by Miguel Cotto's little (in size) brother.

He was only 19 at the time though, and hasn't been rocked since. Including against the far superior Cotto brother

Tanzio wrote:

p4p1 wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:
Golovkin could beat Canelo any way he pleased really, but Boxing from the outside and then moving in for the kill later would be the way he'd take the least damage I'd imagine...but it also would increase Canelo's chances of going the distance in the fight where the fix could be in.

Canelo seems to be one guy you don't want to go the distance with for that reason.

It seems that everyone feels that GingerHead gets the benefit of the doubt in decisions but where are the examples beyond the Lara fight? Even the Lara fight was not clear cut. It could have gone either way. Imo, that loss falls on Lara's own shoulders. He did not do enough to secure the victory.

The Trout example that so many continually refer to makes no sense. That fight had open scoring. GingerHead knew his lead was essentially insurmountable going into the last quarter of the fight and he cruised accordingly. I see no controversary in the Trout fight.

It will make little difference because if this fight happens before 2018, someone is getting stopped.

The Khan scoring was dodgey I think.

caldo2025 wrote:If this fight takes place in Nov of 2017, as they are saying, then i've got this fight as 50/50. Discount Canelo as much as you want and discount his opposition if you may, but he's turned into a dynamic fighter with tremendous power. GGG will be over a year plus older and even farther away from his prime.

Canelo did not stop banging for 9 rounds on Saturday. He'd take a quick break every round but then would continue to bang. The pace that Canelo had on Saturday would be very tough for GGG to keep up with. GGG isn't superhuman. Those body shots that Canelo was throwing would stop and hurt anyone.

Then you couple in the fact that Canelo appears to have judges in his pocket. I could easily see Canelo winning this fight or GGG winning this fight. 50/50. Canelo is a top 5 P4P fighter at this minute.

I saw him absolutely taking it easy in the later minutes in the rounds. And whenever Smith's back was on the ropes, Canelo allowed him to turn him around and reverse the position. Because Liam Smith is like a bigger, slower version of Robert Guerrero, he posed no real threat in doing that. But Canelo was letting allowing a fighter of that level to keep doing that without him ever really doing anything about it shows his IQ may not be as great as everyone makes it out to be.

And even the shots Smith was getting in, Canelo will have trouble taking from GGG and GGG also goes to the body.

Isn’t it a bit premature to discuss this, because we’re at least twelve months away from the earliest possible date that this fight can take place… and an awful lot can happen over that time, such as defeats, injuries, physical decline in one or both of the participants, delays due to contract issues etc?

Anyway, whilst GGG has appeared much more dominant that Canelo, the quality of opposition he has faced has been inferior (i.e. guys that used to compete in lower weight classes or have not been recognised as world class by ESPN, Ring, BoxRec etc.).

That’s not to say that Golovkin isn’t every bit as good as he appears to be, it’s just that I think that’s the real reason why Canelo has failed to dominate his opposition as effectively as GGG has.

So those people boldly proclaiming that this bout could be a mismatch of epic proportions, that Canelo’s health is at such a risk that a tragedy seems inevitable and other fúckíng ridiculous things like that, need to get a grip on reality, because this is going to be a competitive fight, whilst it lasts.

I also expect to see Golovkin attempt to employ some of his underused boxing skills, because he isn’t facing a man that is significantly smaller than him, as he’ll appreciate the fact that Canelo is heavier handed and much bigger than the likes of Brook and Monroe Jr.

A lot of people became hideously aggressive, by defiantly proclaiming Martin Murray as a “massive” middleweight (claiming that was the reason why he was so resilient), when the photos and videos of the Brit standing next to Golovkin suggested that they were similar sized. We all know that Canelo is about the same height and build as GGG… and the Mexican is almost certainly a much heavier-handed than Murray is.

So I expect Canelo to fare much better than Murray did, especially considering GGG was 32 when he fought the Brit, but he’ll be heading towards 36 by September 2017.

Therefore, I reckon that GGG will show a lot more respect to Canelo than he does with his other opponents. He’ll adopt a patient, defensively responsible strategy and will probably try to wear down his younger opponent. Simply put: he won’t be actively looking to score an early stoppage.

All that being said, if Canelo and GGG shared the ring tomorrow, I would place a bet on the Kazakh either scoring a late stoppage or gaining a 116-112 decision victory, where the scorecards fail to reflect the truly competitive nature of the contest.

If the fight is unanimously very close on all the neutrals scorecards, then there’s every chance that the hometown (Texas or Nevada) crowd could sway the judges to the point that they award the decision to the Mexican instead.

Like I said before though, twelve months is a long time in boxing and Canelo could either prove himself to be a revelation at his new weight… or he could fail to impress and appear to be vulnerable. If it’s the latter, then I expect Golden Boy to protect their cash cow by forcing Alvarez to remain at 154lbs instead. If it's the former, then my opinion on who’ll likely emerge victorious from this super-fight will probably change.

Enlightened-One wrote: Anyway, whilst GGG has appeared much more dominant that Canelo, the quality of opposition he has faced has been inferior (i.e. guys that used to compete in lower weight classes or have not been recognised as world class by ESPN, Ring, BoxRec etc.).

If you take Mayweather (to whom he lost), Trout and Lara (with whom he drew at best) off the Canelo's resume, it becomes quite weak. Cotto is no bigger or better than Brook. Lemieux is better than Kirkland and Angulo. Murray is better than Smith. In fact, Trout is no better than the best Golovkin's opponents too.

boxing_rocks wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: Anyway, whilst GGG has appeared much more dominant that Canelo, the quality of opposition he has faced has been inferior (i.e. guys that used to compete in lower weight classes or have not been recognised as world class by ESPN, Ring, BoxRec etc.).

That’s not to say that Golovkin isn’t every bit as good as he appears to be, it’s just that I think that’s the real reason why Canelo has failed to dominate his opposition as effectively as GGG has.

If you take Mayweather (to whom he lost), Trout and Lara (with whom he drew at best) off the Canelo's resume, it becomes quite weak. Cotto is no bigger or better than Brook. Lemieux is better than Kirkland and Angulo. Murray is better than Smith. In fact, Trout is no better than the best Golovkin's opponents too.

It’s your prerogative to carry bias… and I won’t challenge your personal opinion, because everyone is entitled to have one, but if you objectively compare GGG and Canelo’s opponents, using barometers, such as ESPN, BoxRec, Ring ratings, coupled with an analysis of the their resumes (i.e. titles won, quality of opposition faced etc.)… the contrast is significant.

Put it this way, you're claiming that Cotto and Brook are equals, but has Kell ever KO’d or stopped a world-rated welterweight? Has he ever scored a clear-cut decision victory over a legitimate top-ten world-class 147lb-er?

I don’t want to go off-topic by engaging in a heated debate about the quality of GGG’s and Canelo’s opponents in this thread, but if you create a separate one, then we can discuss that unrelated matter there.

You were the one who introduced resumes, as if they are ones fighting in the ring. I think Brook beats current Cotto. Lemieux definitely would.

In any case, opponents' resumes have nothing to do with how a fight between Golovkin and Canelo goes.

boxing_rocks wrote:You were the one who introduced resumes, as if they are ones fighting in the ring.

In case you’ve missed it, here’s the title of this thread:

BitPlayer wrote:So, Canelo Vs GGG, who do you think wins and why?

I merely supplied my personal opinion and then articulated the reasons for my belief. There’s nothing wrong with that, is there? I simply kept to the topic of this thread.

boxing_rocks wrote:I think Brook beats current Cotto. Lemieux definitely would.

I’ll repeat myself once more, just to make myself clear, I won’t challenge your personal opinion on this particular matter in this thread, but if you create a separate one, then we can use that to discuss the quality of GGG’s and Canelo’s opponents. I don't want to go off-topic in this thread.

boxing_rocks wrote:In any case, opponents' resumes have nothing to do with how a fight between Golovkin and Canelo goes.

Information displayed by internet websites would have no bearing on the outcome of this fight, but in the context of the real-world, the benefits received by a fighter that constantly mixes with high quality opponents are fairly obvious.

If you believe otherwise, then that’s fine by me.

boxing_rocks wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: Anyway, whilst GGG has appeared much more dominant that Canelo, the quality of opposition he has faced has been inferior (i.e. guys that used to compete in lower weight classes or have not been recognised as world class by ESPN, Ring, BoxRec etc.).

If you take Mayweather (to whom he lost), Trout and Lara (with whom he drew at best) off the Canelo's resume, it becomes quite weak. Cotto is no bigger or better than Brook. Lemieux is better than Kirkland and Angulo. Murray is better than Smith. In fact, Trout is no better than the best Golovkin's opponents too.

I disagree with that- I thought he beat Lara and I don't think I'm the only one. The trout result is more debateable I think.

Enlightened-One wrote:in the context of the real-world, the benefits received by a fighter that constantly mixes with high quality opponents are fairly obvious.

Yes, if Canelo had faced somebody remotely similar to GGG, that would have been helpful. However, that is not true. Punchers Canelo faced are of a dumb kind, and skillful defensive boxers made Canelo himself look like a dummy.

I thought Trout and Lara both edged him. Doesn't change the fact that his opposition has been better than GGG's.

boxing_rocks wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:in the context of the real-world, the benefits received by a fighter that constantly mixes with high quality opponents are fairly obvious.

Yes, if Canelo had faced somebody remotely similar to GGG, that would have been helpful. However, that is not true. Punchers Canelo faced are of a dumb kind, and skillful defensive boxers made Canelo himself look like a dummy.

All you’ve done in this thread is to attack other people’s opinions (not just mine), as if it’s your duty to defend GGG at all cost, when there’s literally no need for you to do so. It’s not as if anyone has said anything particularly derogatory about the Kazakh…

Why don’t you stick to the topic of this thread, by explaining who you feel would emerge victorious from the GGG-Canelo fight and then explain your reasons why?

I think I can anticipate your opinion, but surprise me, let me see how much thought you’ve put into the subject matter?

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I thought Trout and Lara both edged him. Doesn't change the fact that his opposition has been better than GGG's.

You can't count opposition he didn't beat. Otherwise, Darnell Boone has the best resume in the sport.

Enlightened-One wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:in the context of the real-world, the benefits received by a fighter that constantly mixes with high quality opponents are fairly obvious.

Yes, if Canelo had faced somebody remotely similar to GGG, that would have been helpful. However, that is not true. Punchers Canelo faced are of a dumb kind, and skillful defensive boxers made Canelo himself look like a dummy.

All you’ve done in this thread is to attack other people’s opinions (not just mine), as if it’s your duty to defend GGG at all cost, when there’s literally no need for you to do so. It’s not as if anyone has said anything particularly derogatory about the Kazakh…

Why don’t you stick to the topic of this thread, by explaining who you feel would emerge victorious from the GGG-Canelo fight and then explain your reasons why?

I think I can anticipate your opinion, but surprise me, let me see how much thought you’ve put into the subject matter?

Golovkin will stop Canelo, no doubt about it. Depending on how angry Golovkin is with his purse, Canelo's behavior, other fight details, it can happen sooner or later in the fight.

Enlightened-One wrote:Isn’t it a bit premature to discuss this, because we’re at least twelve months away from the earliest possible date that this fight can take place… and an awful lot can happen over that time, such as defeats, injuries, physical decline in one or both of the participants, delays due to contract issues etc?

Anyway, whilst GGG has appeared much more dominant that Canelo, the quality of opposition he has faced has been inferior (i.e. guys that used to compete in lower weight classes or have not been recognised as world class by ESPN, Ring, BoxRec etc.).

That’s not to say that Golovkin isn’t every bit as good as he appears to be, it’s just that I think that’s the real reason why Canelo has failed to dominate his opposition as effectively as GGG has.

So those people boldly proclaiming that this bout could be a mismatch of epic proportions, that Canelo’s health is at such a risk that a tragedy seems inevitable and other fúckíng ridiculous things like that, need to get a grip on reality, because this is going to be a competitive fight, whilst it lasts.

I also expect to see Golovkin attempt to employ some of his underused boxing skills, because he isn’t facing a man that is significantly smaller than him, as he’ll appreciate the fact that Canelo is heavier handed and much bigger than the likes of Brook and Monroe Jr.

A lot of people became hideously aggressive, by defiantly proclaiming Martin Murray as a “massive” middleweight (claiming that was the reason why he was so resilient), when the photos and videos of the Brit standing next to Golovkin suggested that they were similar sized. We all know that Canelo is about the same height and build as GGG… and the Mexican is almost certainly a much heavier-handed than Murray is.

So I expect Canelo to fare much better than Murray did, especially considering GGG was 32 when he fought the Brit, but he’ll be heading towards 36 by September 2017.

Therefore, I reckon that GGG will show a lot more respect to Canelo than he does with his other opponents. He’ll adopt a patient, defensively responsible strategy and will probably try to wear down his younger opponent. Simply put: he won’t be actively looking to score an early stoppage.

All that being said, if Canelo and GGG shared the ring tomorrow, I would place a bet on the Kazakh either scoring a late stoppage or gaining a 116-112 decision victory, where the scorecards fail to reflect the truly competitive nature of the contest.

If the fight is unanimously very close on all the neutrals scorecards, then there’s every chance that the hometown (Texas or Nevada) crowd could sway the judges to the point that they award the decision to the Mexican instead.

Like I said before though, twelve months is a long time in boxing and Canelo could either prove himself to be a revelation at his new weight… or he could fail to impress and appear to be vulnerable. If it’s the latter, then I expect Golden Boy to protect their cash cow by forcing Alvarez to remain at 154lbs instead. If it's the former, then my opinion on who’ll likely emerge victorious from this super-fight will probably change.

I doubt Canelo is that much more heavy handled than Lemieux if he even is.

boxing_rocks wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I thought Trout and Lara both edged him. Doesn't change the fact that his opposition has been better than GGG's.

You can't count opposition he didn't beat. Otherwise, Darnell Boone has the best resume in the sport.

LOL, of course you can. Boone has faced tremendous opposition. Both of those fights were wins and close enough to be viewed as so.

Tanzio wrote:

Like a Boss wrote:

Tanzio wrote:The way it is building up, it could end up being the modern day version of Hitman v Hagler.

Possibly, but if it does, I see GGG playing the Hagler role.

I agree. However, that firefight was anything but a foregone conclusion.

That's for sure. One of the great fights of my lifetime.

IKSRTFO wrote: I doubt Canelo is that much more heavy handled than Lemieux if he even is.

Lemieux definitely has better one-punch power than Canelo. No surprise that Oscar isn't even talking about matching those two.

boxing_rocks wrote:

IKSRTFO wrote: I doubt Canelo is that much more heavy handled than Lemieux if he even is.

Lemieux definitely has better one-punch power than Canelo. No surprise that Oscar isn't even talking about matching those two.

I think Canelo would outbox Lemieux pretty clear. Not sure if he'd stop him, but I think he'd win a clear UD over him. There's no sense in playing these kid games though like beating up Golovkin's former opponents instead of fighting the man himself. It's one thing if you're a prospect that's building your name to do things like that to try to one up guys that are already at the top, but Canelo is at the top. Anything but the best fights is a letdown when you're in his position. In Canelo's case there's little only 1 fight I want to see him in. If he doesn't fight that fight, he could retire for all I care because I won't wanna see him.