BoxRec

I certainly don't think Golovkin would be avoiding this guy over fear of getting beat. From what I have seen I'd be very confident charlo gets stopped like the rest

Tanzio wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

caldo2025 wrote:With all that said, Sanchez DOES have a point here. Charlo has had 1 fight at MW and it was against a guy with one leg. Hardly deserving of a mandatory title defense at this weight. Stupid.

• Didn't Jorge Sebastian Heiland initially gain mandatory challenger status for the WBC title 2½ years ago, whilst remaining undefeated since he gained that moniker until his loss to Jermall Charlo?

• How many top-ten world-rated middleweight had Willie Monroe Jr. faced prior to fighting GGG?

• Didn't Matthew Macklin lose two of his previous three bouts prior to facing GGG?

• Wasn't Nobuhiro Ishida a former light middleweight that had failed to win ten of his bouts (at the time he fought GGG), entered the ring against Golovkin having tasted defeat in his previous two outings?

• Didn't the former light middleweight, Gabriel Rosado, lose five of his bouts prior to facing GGG, having never previously engaged in either a 160lb bout nor a world title fight?

• Didn't Lajuan Simon lose three of his previous five bouts at the time he fought Golovkin… and had even lost his previous bout immediately prior to facing GGG?

• Hadn't the former light middleweight Kassim Ouma taste defeat in five of his previous seven bouts at the time he entered the ring against Golovkin?

• Is a bout between Jermall Charlo any worse than Golovkin’s previous bouts against unrated (i.e. not true top-ten ranked) middleweights that we saw GGG defend his word titles against, such as?

Dominic Wade
Willie Monroe Jr.
Osumanu Adama
Nobuhiro Ishida
Gabriel Rosado
Makoto Fuchigami
Lajuan Simon
Kassim Ouma
Nilson Julio Tapia
Milton Nunez

• How many legitimate (not technical) middleweight fights had Canelo, Kell Brook, Dominic Wade and Gabriel Rosado had prior to facing GGG?

• What about Abel Sanchez's other comments? Do you feel that they are reminiscent of the opponents that previously refused to consider facing GGG?

Totally misleading post. Charlo is not coming to the table when any of those previous fights did. 3G is going into a superfight that may lead to a rematch. Charlo needs to up his value. There are plenty of fighters he can do that with.

- Heiland was lame coming into the Charlo fight.

- Let's see how Monroe Jr does v BJS.

- Macklin lost a controversial decision to Sturm and to SMartinez prior to suffering the 3G beatdown.

- Ishida had lost to Pirog and PWill by decision prior to 3G.

- Rosado was on a 7 fight win streak.

You do not mention that 3G was forced to wait his turn. 3G will fight the biggest $$$ fights going forward if he gets by GingerHead.

Win or lose, a rematch with GingerHead supercedes all other options. Sanchez is just laying it out. Charlo needs a good win over a Lemieux, Jacobs, or maybe the Ndam v Murata winner.

3G is busy for awhile.

There's nothing whatsoever "misleading" about any of my posts contained within this thread, since everything I've written is factually correct.

So instead of making excuses for the existence of these real-world facts, which you cannot possibly undermine their accuracy... why don't you instead attempt to explain the reason why the names I've mentioned above are better opponents for GGG than Jermall Charlo is?

You know what? I don't believe you'll be able to do this, since none of the names mentioned in my previous post above were worthy enough to carry Charlo's jockstrap.

Either address the questions I asked in my previous post above head-on or concede that you're wrong.

In my mind, when someone blatantly attempts to avoid answering simple questions, whilst attempting to discuss another subject matter (i.e. employing "red herring" debating tactics), they've effectively already admitted defeat!

Ossyrules wrote:I certainly don't think Golovkin would be avoiding this guy over fear of getting beat. From what I have seen I'd be very confident charlo gets stopped like the rest

The topic of this thread though is more about Abel Sanchez's long list of excuses that he's used to justify his belief as to the reason why a "Golovkin-Charlo" bout is supposedly "bad for boxing".

In my mind, it is abundantly clear that Sanchez is reciting the precise same excuses that Golovkin's big name rivals previously used when they dismissed the possibility of fights against GGG, but they were accused by fight fans of being "ducks".

Are fight fans really going to apply double standards by defending Abel Sanchez's words, when it's crystal clear that he's committing the very same crime as those that the same set of fans accused of being "ducks"?

In my opinion, when two people commit the same crime, then they're both criminals. I won't boldly proclaim one person as the "villain", with other being the "hero", based on nothing but personal bias.

Enlightened-One wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:I certainly don't think Golovkin would be avoiding this guy over fear of getting beat. From what I have seen I'd be very confident charlo gets stopped like the rest

The topic of this thread though is more about Abel Sanchez's long list of excuses that he's used to justify his belief as to the reason why a "Golovkin-Charlo" bout is supposedly "bad for boxing".

In my mind, it is abundantly clear that Sanchez is reciting the precise same excuses that Golovkin's big name rivals previously used when they dismissed the possibility of fights against GGG, but they were accused by fight fans of being "ducks".

Are fight fans really going to apply double standards by defending Abel Sanchez's words, when it's crystal clear that he's committing the very same crime as those that the same set of fans accused of being "ducks"?

In my opinion, when two people commit the same crime, then they're both criminals. I won't boldly proclaim one person as the "villain", with other being the "hero", based on nothing but personal bias.

They are just words right now so I'm not taking them too seriously

Right now golovkin is preparing for a super fight, arguably the biggest fight in boxing

If he wins, and doesn't go on to fight charlo, it'd depend entirely on the circumstances, opponent, weight, availability, would determine whether I think the situation is a duck

Ossyrules wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:I certainly don't think Golovkin would be avoiding this guy over fear of getting beat. From what I have seen I'd be very confident charlo gets stopped like the rest

The topic of this thread though is more about Abel Sanchez's long list of excuses that he's used to justify his belief as to the reason why a "Golovkin-Charlo" bout is supposedly "bad for boxing".

In my mind, it is abundantly clear that Sanchez is reciting the precise same excuses that Golovkin's big name rivals previously used when they dismissed the possibility of fights against GGG, but they were accused by fight fans of being "ducks".

Are fight fans really going to apply double standards by defending Abel Sanchez's words, when it's crystal clear that he's committing the very same crime as those that the same set of fans accused of being "ducks"?

In my opinion, when two people commit the same crime, then they're both criminals. I won't boldly proclaim one person as the "villain", with other being the "hero", based on nothing but personal bias.

They are just words right now so I'm not taking them too seriously

Right now golovkin is preparing for a super fight, arguably the biggest fight in boxing

If he wins, and doesn't go on to fight charlo, it'd depend entirely on the circumstances, opponent, weight, availability, would determine whether I think the situation is a duck

OK, I accept the point you've made, but please answer two questions:

Is a bout between Golovkin and Charlo bad for boxing?

Is Jermall Charlo unworthy of a shot at Golovkin, when he's universally considered by the hardcore boxing fraternity as a better fighter than those names that I've already mentioned in this thread that GGG has previously faced?

Enlightened-One wrote:

caldo2025 wrote:With all that said, Sanchez DOES have a point here. Charlo has had 1 fight at MW and it was against a guy with one leg. Hardly deserving of a mandatory title defense at this weight. Stupid.

• Didn't Jorge Sebastian Heiland initially gain mandatory challenger status for the WBC title 2½ years ago, whilst remaining undefeated since he gained that moniker until his loss to Jermall Charlo?

• How many top-ten world-rated middleweight had Willie Monroe Jr. faced prior to fighting GGG?

• Didn't Matthew Macklin lose two of his previous three bouts prior to facing GGG?

• Wasn't Nobuhiro Ishida a former light middleweight that had failed to win ten of his bouts (at the time he fought GGG), entered the ring against Golovkin having tasted defeat in his previous two outings?

• Didn't the former light middleweight, Gabriel Rosado, lose five of his bouts prior to facing GGG, having never previously engaged in either a 160lb bout nor a world title fight?

• Didn't Lajuan Simon lose three of his previous five bouts at the time he fought Golovkin… and had even lost his previous bout immediately prior to facing GGG?

• Hadn't the former light middleweight Kassim Ouma taste defeat in five of his previous seven bouts at the time he entered the ring against Golovkin?

• Is a bout between Jermall Charlo any worse than Golovkin’s previous bouts against unrated (i.e. not true top-ten ranked) middleweights that we saw GGG defend his word titles against, such as?

Dominic Wade
Willie Monroe Jr.
Osumanu Adama
Nobuhiro Ishida
Gabriel Rosado
Makoto Fuchigami
Lajuan Simon
Kassim Ouma
Nilson Julio Tapia
Milton Nunez

• How many legitimate (not technical) middleweight fights had Canelo, Kell Brook, Dominic Wade and Gabriel Rosado had prior to facing GGG?

• What about Abel Sanchez's other comments? Do you feel that they are reminiscent of the opponents that previously refused to consider facing GGG?

My guess is that Charlo and GGG will never fight. I think that GGG's got 3 or 4 more fights left as he's already hinted at retirement so you have the rematch with Canelo which is a given. Rematch with Jacobs. One fight against whomever holds the WBO belt sprinkled in as well so there's not much room for Charlo.

I just had a bad taste in my mouth over Charlo's fight last weekend. How THAT was a title eliminator made me laugh. Aside from the fact that the guy Charlo was fighting had a boxing style that resembled me walking out of the bar early this morning, he had one leg. Unlike you, i'm a purist fan that will never agree with undeserving "mandatory" defenses. Charlo's FIRST fight at MW is a title eliminator? Give me a break. Lemieux has been knocking guys out left and right and is 100 times more deserving.

caldo2025 wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

caldo2025 wrote:With all that said, Sanchez DOES have a point here. Charlo has had 1 fight at MW and it was against a guy with one leg. Hardly deserving of a mandatory title defense at this weight. Stupid.

• Didn't Jorge Sebastian Heiland initially gain mandatory challenger status for the WBC title 2½ years ago, whilst remaining undefeated since he gained that moniker until his loss to Jermall Charlo?

• How many top-ten world-rated middleweight had Willie Monroe Jr. faced prior to fighting GGG?

• Didn't Matthew Macklin lose two of his previous three bouts prior to facing GGG?

• Wasn't Nobuhiro Ishida a former light middleweight that had failed to win ten of his bouts (at the time he fought GGG), entered the ring against Golovkin having tasted defeat in his previous two outings?

• Didn't the former light middleweight, Gabriel Rosado, lose five of his bouts prior to facing GGG, having never previously engaged in either a 160lb bout nor a world title fight?

• Didn't Lajuan Simon lose three of his previous five bouts at the time he fought Golovkin… and had even lost his previous bout immediately prior to facing GGG?

• Hadn't the former light middleweight Kassim Ouma taste defeat in five of his previous seven bouts at the time he entered the ring against Golovkin?

• Is a bout between Jermall Charlo any worse than Golovkin’s previous bouts against unrated (i.e. not true top-ten ranked) middleweights that we saw GGG defend his word titles against, such as?

Dominic Wade
Willie Monroe Jr.
Osumanu Adama
Nobuhiro Ishida
Gabriel Rosado
Makoto Fuchigami
Lajuan Simon
Kassim Ouma
Nilson Julio Tapia
Milton Nunez

• How many legitimate (not technical) middleweight fights had Canelo, Kell Brook, Dominic Wade and Gabriel Rosado had prior to facing GGG?

• What about Abel Sanchez's other comments? Do you feel that they are reminiscent of the opponents that previously refused to consider facing GGG?

My guess is that Charlo and GGG will never fight. I think that GGG's got 3 or 4 more fights left as he's already hinted at retirement so you have the rematch with Canelo which is a given. Rematch with Jacobs. One fight against whomever holds the WBO belt sprinkled in as well so there's not much room for Charlo.

I just had a bad taste in my mouth over Charlo's fight last weekend. How THAT was a title eliminator made me laugh. Aside from the fact that the guy Charlo was fighting had a boxing style that resembled me walking out of the bar early this morning, he had one leg. Unlike you, i'm a purist fan that will never agree with undeserving "mandatory" defenses. Charlo's FIRST fight at MW is a title eliminator? Give me a break. Lemieux has been knocking guys out left and right and is 100 times more deserving.

So you wholeheartedly agree with Abel Sanchez when he says that a bout between Golovkin and Charlo is bad for boxing, despite the absolutely dire calibre of opposition that GGG has previously defended his titles against?

Enlightened-One wrote:

caldo2025 wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: • Didn't Jorge Sebastian Heiland initially gain mandatory challenger status for the WBC title 2½ years ago, whilst remaining undefeated since he gained that moniker until his loss to Jermall Charlo?

• How many top-ten world-rated middleweight had Willie Monroe Jr. faced prior to fighting GGG?

• Didn't Matthew Macklin lose two of his previous three bouts prior to facing GGG?

• Wasn't Nobuhiro Ishida a former light middleweight that had failed to win ten of his bouts (at the time he fought GGG), entered the ring against Golovkin having tasted defeat in his previous two outings?

• Didn't the former light middleweight, Gabriel Rosado, lose five of his bouts prior to facing GGG, having never previously engaged in either a 160lb bout nor a world title fight?

• Didn't Lajuan Simon lose three of his previous five bouts at the time he fought Golovkin… and had even lost his previous bout immediately prior to facing GGG?

• Hadn't the former light middleweight Kassim Ouma taste defeat in five of his previous seven bouts at the time he entered the ring against Golovkin?

• Is a bout between Jermall Charlo any worse than Golovkin’s previous bouts against unrated (i.e. not true top-ten ranked) middleweights that we saw GGG defend his word titles against, such as?

Dominic Wade
Willie Monroe Jr.
Osumanu Adama
Nobuhiro Ishida
Gabriel Rosado
Makoto Fuchigami
Lajuan Simon
Kassim Ouma
Nilson Julio Tapia
Milton Nunez

• How many legitimate (not technical) middleweight fights had Canelo, Kell Brook, Dominic Wade and Gabriel Rosado had prior to facing GGG?

• What about Abel Sanchez's other comments? Do you feel that they are reminiscent of the opponents that previously refused to consider facing GGG?

My guess is that Charlo and GGG will never fight. I think that GGG's got 3 or 4 more fights left as he's already hinted at retirement so you have the rematch with Canelo which is a given. Rematch with Jacobs. One fight against whomever holds the WBO belt sprinkled in as well so there's not much room for Charlo.

I just had a bad taste in my mouth over Charlo's fight last weekend. How THAT was a title eliminator made me laugh. Aside from the fact that the guy Charlo was fighting had a boxing style that resembled me walking out of the bar early this morning, he had one leg. Unlike you, i'm a purist fan that will never agree with undeserving "mandatory" defenses. Charlo's FIRST fight at MW is a title eliminator? Give me a break. Lemieux has been knocking guys out left and right and is 100 times more deserving.

So you wholeheartedly agree with Abel Sanchez when he says that a bout between Golovkin and Charlo is bad for boxing, despite the absolutely dire calibre of opposition that GGG has previously defended his titles against?

From an entertainment standpoint it would be an awesome fight. But from an integrity standpoint, I don't feel Charlo is worthy of a mandatory shot over a guy like Lemieux who has done all that he could to get a rematch and has mowed down some tough legitimate MW's to do it. He's deserving. I don't think Charlo deserves it.

You feel that people deserve title shots on the merit of their ability inside the ring. I feel that you also need to be deserving of a title shot by whom you've defeated in the particular weight class. I hates Lomachenko's title shots in his second and third pro fights and I dislike this favorable treatment of Charlo. It just doesn't make sense to me because i'm old school when it comes to shots at the title as some boxers never get one in a career. I just don't think that they should be handing them out as bargaining chips. I can't be talked out of that thinking.

Enlightened-One wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: The topic of this thread though is more about Abel Sanchez's long list of excuses that he's used to justify his belief as to the reason why a "Golovkin-Charlo" bout is supposedly "bad for boxing".

In my mind, it is abundantly clear that Sanchez is reciting the precise same excuses that Golovkin's big name rivals previously used when they dismissed the possibility of fights against GGG, but they were accused by fight fans of being "ducks".

Are fight fans really going to apply double standards by defending Abel Sanchez's words, when it's crystal clear that he's committing the very same crime as those that the same set of fans accused of being "ducks"?

In my opinion, when two people commit the same crime, then they're both criminals. I won't boldly proclaim one person as the "villain", with other being the "hero", based on nothing but personal bias.

They are just words right now so I'm not taking them too seriously

Right now golovkin is preparing for a super fight, arguably the biggest fight in boxing

If he wins, and doesn't go on to fight charlo, it'd depend entirely on the circumstances, opponent, weight, availability, would determine whether I think the situation is a duck

OK, I accept the point you've made, but please answer two questions:

Is a bout between Golovkin and Charlo bad for boxing?

Is Jermall Charlo unworthy of a shot at Golovkin, when he's universally considered by the hardcore boxing fraternity as a better fighter than those names that I've already mentioned in this thread that GGG has previously faced?

The fight is neither bad for boxing or charlo unworthy

why not Charlo - Jacobs fight?.... winner take on Canelo-GGG winner .... losers can meet each other too and we will have more interesting fights.

Charlo/Jacobs is the fight to make next. GGG and Canelo will probably have a rematch regardless who wins. Another interesting fight may be Andrade moving up vs Liemiex. Andrade wants it since he seems to be stuck with Lara not wanting to fight.

Enlightened-One wrote:

Tanzio wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: • Didn't Jorge Sebastian Heiland initially gain mandatory challenger status for the WBC title 2½ years ago, whilst remaining undefeated since he gained that moniker until his loss to Jermall Charlo?

• How many top-ten world-rated middleweight had Willie Monroe Jr. faced prior to fighting GGG?

• Didn't Matthew Macklin lose two of his previous three bouts prior to facing GGG?

• Wasn't Nobuhiro Ishida a former light middleweight that had failed to win ten of his bouts (at the time he fought GGG), entered the ring against Golovkin having tasted defeat in his previous two outings?

• Didn't the former light middleweight, Gabriel Rosado, lose five of his bouts prior to facing GGG, having never previously engaged in either a 160lb bout nor a world title fight?

• Didn't Lajuan Simon lose three of his previous five bouts at the time he fought Golovkin… and had even lost his previous bout immediately prior to facing GGG?

• Hadn't the former light middleweight Kassim Ouma taste defeat in five of his previous seven bouts at the time he entered the ring against Golovkin?

• Is a bout between Jermall Charlo any worse than Golovkin’s previous bouts against unrated (i.e. not true top-ten ranked) middleweights that we saw GGG defend his word titles against, such as?

Dominic Wade
Willie Monroe Jr.
Osumanu Adama
Nobuhiro Ishida
Gabriel Rosado
Makoto Fuchigami
Lajuan Simon
Kassim Ouma
Nilson Julio Tapia
Milton Nunez

• How many legitimate (not technical) middleweight fights had Canelo, Kell Brook, Dominic Wade and Gabriel Rosado had prior to facing GGG?

• What about Abel Sanchez's other comments? Do you feel that they are reminiscent of the opponents that previously refused to consider facing GGG?

Totally misleading post. Charlo is not coming to the table when any of those previous fights did. 3G is going into a superfight that may lead to a rematch. Charlo needs to up his value. There are plenty of fighters he can do that with.

- Heiland was lame coming into the Charlo fight.

- Let's see how Monroe Jr does v BJS.

- Macklin lost a controversial decision to Sturm and to SMartinez prior to suffering the 3G beatdown.

- Ishida had lost to Pirog and PWill by decision prior to 3G.

- Rosado was on a 7 fight win streak.

You do not mention that 3G was forced to wait his turn. 3G will fight the biggest $$$ fights going forward if he gets by GingerHead.

Win or lose, a rematch with GingerHead supercedes all other options. Sanchez is just laying it out. Charlo needs a good win over a Lemieux, Jacobs, or maybe the Ndam v Murata winner.

3G is busy for awhile.

There's nothing whatsoever "misleading" about any of my posts contained within this thread, since everything I've written is factually correct.

So instead of making excuses for the existence of these real-world facts, which you cannot possibly undermine their accuracy... why don't you instead attempt to explain the reason why the names I've mentioned above are better opponents for GGG than Jermall Charlo is?

You know what? I don't believe you'll be able to do this, since none of the names mentioned in my previous post above were worthy enough to carry Charlo's jockstrap.

Either address the questions I asked in my previous post above head-on or concede that you're wrong.

In my mind, when someone blatantly attempts to avoid answering simple questions, whilst attempting to discuss another subject matter (i.e. employing "red herring" debating tactics), they've effectively already admitted defeat!

The only one avoiding anything is you avoiding the admission that you consciously misled the forum with your completely biased post. But that is normal for you and your bore them to tears with a wall of words that no normal person is interested in countering because they do not have the time or inclination strategy.

First of all, you were not completely accurate with your deceptive argument. Ishida had not lost 10 fights prior to fighting 3G. He had lost 8. So stop with your grandstanding, broken record repetition of how fastidiously accurate you are. On top of that you list number of losses as an argument which is a tactic utililized by someone who has a very weak position or a casual fan.

Who they lost to, how they lost to them, and when are all factors to be considered when weighing the relative strength of an opponent on a resume. Two losses just prior to fighting 3G may appear to be a weakness but how would Charlo have faired v Pirog, PWill, SMartinez, and Sturm at the time that Ishida and Macklin fought them?

Whether or not Charlo is a better or worse / more or less dangerous opponent than your list of previous 3G opponents is completely immaterial to Charlo's viability as an opponent at this point in 3G's career. Charlo was not an option as an opponent when 3G fought the boxers on your list.

Is Charlo a more viable opponent than those individuals currently? Of course he is but none of them are being considered as an opponent currently.

The depth that you will go to mislead people on this subject is demonstrated by your parading of Charlo's most recent opponent before us as if a victory over a boxer that resembled a lame old warhorse headed for the glue factory equates to a significant achievement. The fight was a joke and should not have taken place, although Heiland was game for someone who should have been utilizing a wheel chair.

3G will fight for the most lucrative prizes going forward. GingerHead is the most lucrative prize for up to the next three fights. Lemieux, Jacobs and a move up to 168 may be more lucrative than a Charlo fight once the GingerHead saga runs its course.

Charlo's best course of action is to improve his worth as an opponent. The best way to do that is to fight someone of note in the division, rather than disabled veterans who need a paycheck.

caldo2025 wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

caldo2025 wrote:
My guess is that Charlo and GGG will never fight. I think that GGG's got 3 or 4 more fights left as he's already hinted at retirement so you have the rematch with Canelo which is a given. Rematch with Jacobs. One fight against whomever holds the WBO belt sprinkled in as well so there's not much room for Charlo.

I just had a bad taste in my mouth over Charlo's fight last weekend. How THAT was a title eliminator made me laugh. Aside from the fact that the guy Charlo was fighting had a boxing style that resembled me walking out of the bar early this morning, he had one leg. Unlike you, i'm a purist fan that will never agree with undeserving "mandatory" defenses. Charlo's FIRST fight at MW is a title eliminator? Give me a break. Lemieux has been knocking guys out left and right and is 100 times more deserving.

So you wholeheartedly agree with Abel Sanchez when he says that a bout between Golovkin and Charlo is bad for boxing, despite the absolutely dire calibre of opposition that GGG has previously defended his titles against?

From an entertainment standpoint it would be an awesome fight. But from an integrity standpoint, I don't feel Charlo is worthy of a mandatory shot over a guy like Lemieux who has done all that he could to get a rematch and has mowed down some tough legitimate MW's to do it. He's deserving. I don't think Charlo deserves it.

You feel that people deserve title shots on the merit of their ability inside the ring. I feel that you also need to be deserving of a title shot by whom you've defeated in the particular weight class. I hates Lomachenko's title shots in his second and third pro fights and I dislike this favorable treatment of Charlo. It just doesn't make sense to me because i'm old school when it comes to shots at the title as some boxers never get one in a career. I just don't think that they should be handing them out as bargaining chips. I can't be talked out of that thinking.

I couldn't agree more.

Jermall can punch. He's not his brother. Jermell is an accumulator. Jermall can get you outta there with one shot. He's very dangerous.

Eff lemeaux. He had his shot and blew it. Now its canelos and charlos time to fight ggg

Jip wrote:Eff lemeaux. He had his shot and blew it. Now its canelos and charlos time to fight ggg

Let's see what Charlo can do with Lemieux or Jacobs or BJS or anyone who is not disabled.

Charlo-Lemieux makes sense. Not sure Lemiuex is interested.

diddy wrote:Charlo-Lemieux makes sense. Not sure Lemiuex is interested.

. . . or vice versa.

Tanzio wrote:

Jip wrote:Eff lemeaux. He had his shot and blew it. Now its canelos and charlos time to fight ggg

Let's see what Charlo can do with Lemieux or Jacobs or BJS or anyone who is not disabled.

Haha....look at all the props bellew got from non experts for beating a handicaped.

Unlike bellew charlo is a very good boxer. He is easily the third best boxer at middleweight behind ggg & jacobs. I think charlo will be much better at mw than he was at 154. Not like canelo who will be slower than he already was at 154...

Tanzio wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

Tanzio wrote: Totally misleading post. Charlo is not coming to the table when any of those previous fights did. 3G is going into a superfight that may lead to a rematch. Charlo needs to up his value. There are plenty of fighters he can do that with.

- Heiland was lame coming into the Charlo fight.

- Let's see how Monroe Jr does v BJS.

- Macklin lost a controversial decision to Sturm and to SMartinez prior to suffering the 3G beatdown.

- Ishida had lost to Pirog and PWill by decision prior to 3G.

- Rosado was on a 7 fight win streak.

You do not mention that 3G was forced to wait his turn. 3G will fight the biggest $$$ fights going forward if he gets by GingerHead.

Win or lose, a rematch with GingerHead supercedes all other options. Sanchez is just laying it out. Charlo needs a good win over a Lemieux, Jacobs, or maybe the Ndam v Murata winner.

3G is busy for awhile.

There's nothing whatsoever "misleading" about any of my posts contained within this thread, since everything I've written is factually correct.

So instead of making excuses for the existence of these real-world facts, which you cannot possibly undermine their accuracy... why don't you instead attempt to explain the reason why the names I've mentioned above are better opponents for GGG than Jermall Charlo is?

You know what? I don't believe you'll be able to do this, since none of the names mentioned in my previous post above were worthy enough to carry Charlo's jockstrap.

Either address the questions I asked in my previous post above head-on or concede that you're wrong.

In my mind, when someone blatantly attempts to avoid answering simple questions, whilst attempting to discuss another subject matter (i.e. employing "red herring" debating tactics), they've effectively already admitted defeat!

The only one avoiding anything is you avoiding the admission that you consciously misled the forum with your completely biased post. But that is normal for you and your bore them to tears with a wall of words that no normal person is interested in countering because they do not have the time or inclination strategy.

First of all, you were not completely accurate with your deceptive argument. Ishida had not lost 10 fights prior to fighting 3G. He had lost 8. So stop with your grandstanding, broken record repetition of how fastidiously accurate you are. On top of that you list number of losses as an argument which is a tactic utililized by someone who has a very weak position or a casual fan.

Who they lost to, how they lost to them, and when are all factors to be considered when weighing the relative strength of an opponent on a resume. Two losses just prior to fighting 3G may appear to be a weakness but how would Charlo have faired v Pirog, PWill, SMartinez, and Sturm at the time that Ishida and Macklin fought them?

Whether or not Charlo is a better or worse / more or less dangerous opponent than your list of previous 3G opponents is completely immaterial to Charlo's viability as an opponent at this point in 3G's career. Charlo was not an option as an opponent when 3G fought the boxers on your list.

Is Charlo a more viable opponent than those individuals currently? Of course he is but none of them are being considered as an opponent currently.

The depth that you will go to mislead people on this subject is demonstrated by your parading of Charlo's most recent opponent before us as if a victory over a boxer that resembled a lame old warhorse headed for the glue factory equates to a significant achievement. The fight was a joke and should not have taken place, although Heiland was game for someone who should have been utilizing a wheel chair.

3G will fight for the most lucrative prizes going forward. GingerHead is the most lucrative prize for up to the next three fights. Lemieux, Jacobs and a move up to 168 may be more lucrative than a Charlo fight once the GingerHead saga runs its course.

Charlo's best course of action is to improve his worth as an opponent. The best way to do that is to fight someone of note in the division, rather than disabled veterans who need a paycheck.

Great post!

Charlo would basically be the best opponent Golovkin has fought, possibly except for Alvarez. Seems like he's doing a lot of talking just to excuse Golovkin from fighting someone dangerous.

Lackeos wrote:Charlo would basically be the best opponent Golovkin has fought, possibly except for Alvarez. Seems like he's doing a lot of talking just to excuse Golovkin from fighting someone dangerous.

Possibly. Possibly not.

By the time 3G is finished with GingerHead, Charlo will possibly the biggest fight. Possibly not.

I'd like to see Jacobs-Charlo

Charlo getting a lot of hype as a GGG boogeyman considering his best win was a super close decision over Trout. Lara did a far better job on the same opponent and Canelo hurt Trout worse than Charlo ever did.

crusader wrote:I'd like to see Jacobs-Charlo

Charlo getting a lot of hype for a guy whose best win was a super close decision over Trout. Lara did a far better job and Canelo hurt Trout worse than Charlo ever did.

I thought Canelo lost to Trout myself. I had the Charlo vs Trout fight a draw. Trout usually always does exceptionally well, but for whatever reason he's always written off as "The other guy" in the fight.

I thought Canelo deserved the win over Trout, and have a hard time seeing how he lost with the KD accounted for. Either way, him and Lara hurt Trout more seriously than Charlo did.