BoxRec

It is not the first time he has done this.

23 KOs in a row and GGG is in decline?

Like a Boss wrote:23 KOs in a row and GGG is in decline?

Quite funny when you put it like that. I guess GGG is held to a higher standard than other boxers.

Maybe if an opponent ever sees round 12 it will be time to retire Golovkin for his own safety...

The breathing hard thing was brought up on a thread in the past. I can't actually remember if GGG has done this in other fights but the exaggerated huffing and puffing in the corner might be an old Soviet recovery method because Povetkin does it and so did Vitali.

I've read so many posts on this and appreciate I'm swimming against the tide, but I just don't get why GGG is different from other fighters - what I mean by that is that if any other fighter got hit as cleanly and as regularly as GGG did, there'd be criticism. In his case though, so many people seem to be able to mentally write any flaw off as his own design.
I've heard it said he wanted a tear up - yeah probably, but doesn't explain getting hit when he didn't want to.
That he put in a deliberately substandard performance to try and entice other 160lbers to fight him - really?

GGG is amazing, one of the best at MW certainly in my lifetime. He was a clear winner v Brook because he was heavier handed, has good fundamentals and pressures/cuts the ring off better than anyone out there.
But I cannot give a fighter credit for taking punches he shouldn't take, and act like it's all part of a huge master plan that he wanted to take shots and was so amazing that he actually chose to be hit. It just doesn't sit right with me at all. It smacks of fans so biased that they will give him credit for absolutely anything... including the 'old Soviet recovery method' when you get out of puff. Not that he would get out of puff, of course.

Shirow wrote: The breathing hard thing was brought up on a thread in the past. I can't actually remember if GGG has done this in other fights but the exaggerated huffing and puffing in the corner might be an old Soviet recovery method because Povetkin does it and so did Vitali.

Yes, it is. You just need add a trainer fanning him with a towel to make it look completely Soviet.

Shirow wrote:As most are saying. He completely disregarded his defence as he was fighting his most skilled opponent so far who was faster and smaller. Top priority was landing his punches lowest priority was avoiding getting hit or trying to outbox someone used to fighting welterweights. As well as being very entertaining that was probably the most efficient way to apply maximum blunt force trauma.

It occurred to me on Sunday that GGG has a very good style for an aging fighter. On top of exquisite fundamentals he doesn't bounce around and run around the ring so if his legs start to go it won't be noticeable. Also his defence doesn't rely on great reflexes. These are the usually the first things to go with punch and chin being the last. As he gets older the pressure might ease off a little but he'll still be great at cutting off the ring but the punch output might drop a little which shouldn't hurt him too much.

I think he could still be highly effective by the end of 2019 even on 3 or 4 fights a year.

this is a great observant post. for me a good boxer can match the feet of his opponent, a very good boxer can cut the ring down with his feet and a very few at the highest level can actually steer their opponents around the ring and put them where they want them with their feet ,without letting a punch go. that is golovkin in a nutshell, so economical in everything he does bar the punches ,nearly everything he throws is nasty.

something i don't see mentioned much is his size, he looks a small-ish middleweight . will be interesting to see how he handles the step up in the future .

sharpei_louis wrote:I've read so many posts on this and appreciate I'm swimming against the tide, but I just don't get why GGG is different from other fighters - what I mean by that is that if any other fighter got hit as cleanly and as regularly as GGG did, there'd be criticism. In his case though, so many people seem to be able to mentally write any flaw off as his own design.
I've heard it said he wanted a tear up - yeah probably, but doesn't explain getting hit when he didn't want to.
That he put in a deliberately substandard performance to try and entice other 160lbers to fight him - really?

GGG is amazing, one of the best at MW certainly in my lifetime. He was a clear winner v Brook because he was heavier handed, has good fundamentals and pressures/cuts the ring off better than anyone out there.
But I cannot give a fighter credit for taking punches he shouldn't take, and act like it's all part of a huge master plan that he wanted to take shots and was so amazing that he actually chose to be hit. It just doesn't sit right with me at all. It smacks of fans so biased that they will give him credit for absolutely anything... including the 'old Soviet recovery method' when you get out of puff. Not that he would get out of puff, of course.

So, you would be more satisfied if Golovkin didn't take so many punches and finished Brook in round 1 proving that it was in fact a huge mismatch ? 20000 attenders and hundreds of thousands PPV buyers wouldn't appreciate that.

SFW wrote:Yeah, Brook ahead on the cards, hometown cooking was in the works. 2nd round was his, he had other moments that were great but probably not enough to take any other round. Lucky there wasn't a knockdown scored as well.

yep, the second round was brooks best,and he got a broken eye socket at the end of that round,that says it all for me. valiant effort ,but the result was never in doubt.

rab wrote:

SFW wrote:Yeah, Brook ahead on the cards, hometown cooking was in the works. 2nd round was his, he had other moments that were great but probably not enough to take any other round. Lucky there wasn't a knockdown scored as well.

yep, the second round was brooks best,and he got a broken eye socket at the end of that round,that says it all for me. valiant effort ,but the result was never in doubt.

I was surprised in the first round, with that monster hook to the body then head Brook got rocked by, he cleared his head so quickly. The recuperative power was quick almost Calzaghe like. But your right, the result was never in doubt. You have to be very elusive to not get hit by GGG, nobody has shown that yet.

I really wish GGG would fight Lara, or Andrade would move up to fight him. A very good boxer will trouble GGG. I don't GGG has slipped much. GGG at 75% though makes it a fair fight vs the rest of the middleweights.

I wish people would quit going on about how Brook did this or that to GGG. He didn't even make it half of the fight. Khan looked good vs Canelo early too. A LOT of boxers land good shots early. To have a chance against GGG, you have to outbox him for 12 rounds. That means you either have to have a tremendous chin, be a defensive wizard, or run like hell. I think it will take a combination of those things to beat him. Canelo will give him a good fight next fall if they fight. It won't be an easy fight for GGG.

RandomUsername wrote:... even Antwun Echols would have defeated this fellow.

That’s a pretty harsh statement! It sounds as though you’re not impressed with this Kazakh fellow.

RandomUsername wrote:Best middleweight blah blaj blah. RJJr would have murdered him. Bhop would have taken a decision victory and even Antwun Echols would have defeated this fellow.

"Would have", blah blah blah. Of course they would beat a half white, half Asian boy. How could they not ?

Shirow wrote:

Like a Boss wrote:23 KOs in a row and GGG is in decline?

Quite funny when you put it like that. I guess GGG is held to a higher standard than other boxers.

A higher standard by some yes. But much of it amounts to nothing more than tall poppy syndrome.

I don't think so, look Evander Holyfield he fought toe to toe with Nikolay Valuev a 7′ 0″ fighter.

He reminded me of Hagler in his last 3 fights against Hearns, Mugabi & Leonard.

Slower of hand & missing more punches than usual, alongside taking more punches, but his chin is so good that it doesn't appear to be a problem.

RandomUsername wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

RandomUsername wrote:... even Antwun Echols would have defeated this fellow.

That’s a pretty harsh statement! It sounds as though you’re not impressed with this Kazakh fellow.

Or maybe I was just impressed by a prime Antwun Echols? And considering that styles makes fights and such.

GGG may be good or even great but against historically great middleweights he's just lost in the crowd really.

I can't criticise your appreciation of Antwun Echols, because I have similar thoughts, as feel that prime versions of relatively anonymous names from the past, such as Mike McCallum and Herol Graham, would have deeply troubled GGG.

So fair enough, you're entitled to your opinions, as I guess we all have our favourite fighters.

I didn't see any sign of decline.

RandomUsername wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: I can't criticise your appreciation of Antwun Echols, because I have similar thoughts, as feel that prime versions of relatively anonymous names from the past, such as Mike McCallum and Herol Graham, would have deeply troubled GGG.

So fair enough, you're entitled to your opinions, as I guess we all have our favourite fighters.

Mike McCallum a relatively anonymous name from the past? I must not be understanding something correctly.

I believe that there was a certain level of fighter, during the mid-to-late eighties, that failed to received anywhere near the sort of recognition that their talents probably warranted (i.e. Nunn, McCallum, Kalambay, Graham, Jackson etc.).

For sure, if you were a genuine boxing fan during that era, you’ll be familiar with the ‘Bodysnatcher’, but in terms of the mainstream… it was all about the ‘Fab Four’ (Duran, Leonard, Hearns & Hagler). I guess that some of the younger fans of the sport are probably unfamiliar with the likes of McCallum, as their names are rarely brought up nowadays.

So when I used the phrase “relatively anonymous”, that should explain the context of why I used it.

[quote="RandomUsername"]Best middleweight blah blaj blah. RJJr would have murdered him. Bhop would have taken a decision victory and even Antwun Echols would have defeated this fellow.[/quote

I disagree completely and as history will be written, GGG will shatter any records either RJJR and BHOP. And don't even start with the competition argument because All three of them reigned over a division that didn't have marquee names. I personally think that all three were just so great during their time that they made their competitors within the division look paltry.

One thing is absolute truth though is that there's no way anyone would murder Golovkin. It's a ridiculous claim.