Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 12:02
Golovkin vs Mundine - let's get it on! 
I gave up trying to read the title.
BoxRec
I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Page 3 of 4
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 12:03
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 12:09
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 16:56
You’re out of your depth and it shows. That’s why you wrote the above tripe. You’re critical of Golovkin and co believing should have done things according to your standards and your limited experience in that world. You have applied your definition and standards to the word “contingency plan” and it makes no sense because you were happy with the google definition. Again you are pointing fingers, making assumptions Yet you do not know the facts of the situation. Did they have a plan that failed? What Is the cost of putting an opponent on guaranteed standby? What are the competing factors? All you know is that they don’t currently have an opponent. If you re-read the entire thread. Nothing you have argued would be considered persuasive. You have added nothing to this debate.Enlightened-One wrote: ↑14 Apr 2018, 09:14This isn't a religious argument where you're claiming I'm unable to prove that the universe wasn't created nor currently ruled by some sort that of divine omnipotent supreme being.
A contingency plan has never existed to cater for GGG's current predicament, because there's no evidence that proves that one was in place prior to Canelo's withdrawal from the Golovkin bout.
Are you seriously asking me to prove the existence of something that I claim does not exist? It's like asking me to provide evidence to prove that Santa Claus, fairies, ghosts, reincarnation and the afterlife don't exist!
Where you like to point fingers and failures I have sympathy for Golovkin and the situation. It can’t be easy. On top of organising the mega event that was Canelo Golovkin two you expected that had a perfect foolproof plan for Golovkin to fight an acceptable replacement fighter on 4 weeks notice. Unfortunately life’s not perfect and any plan or plans they had seems to have fallen through. Is that the fault of his management? Maybe or maybe they did the best they could in the situation. A very unfortunate situation that begins with Canelo testing positive to PEDS.
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 16:58
He's not on the decline as of yet. He may be looking for a soft opponent, but that would be cause he's been preparing for Cannelo and turning the wheel towards another fighter can be difficult. (see Witherspoon v. Smith; Lewis v. Klitchko). JMHO.
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 17:00
I will read your response EO (if you have one). But if it isn’t persuasive I will not respond. Enough has been said by you unless you’re bringing some new facts or opinions to the table. If it’s the same recycled criticism I will not entertain it.
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 17:01
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 17:03
Enlightened one. EO. Not you I agree with your comment...except I think he’s slightly on the decline. He’s at that age.....
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 17:05
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 17:06
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 18:07
There's a lot of emotion expressed within that post of yours, but it doesn't explain the reason why GGG Promotions, or its spokesman Tom Loeffler, didn't implement a suitable contingency plan to cater for the possibility of Canelo's potential withdrawal from the bout.lazboy wrote: ↑14 Apr 2018, 16:56You’re out of your depth and it shows. That’s why you wrote the above tripe. You’re critical of Golovkin and co believing should have done things according to your standards and your limited experience in that world. You have applied your definition and standards to the word “contingency plan” and it makes no sense because you were happy with the google definition. Again you are pointing fingers, making assumptions Yet you do not know the facts of the situation. Did they have a plan that failed? What Is the cost of putting an opponent on guaranteed standby? What are the competing factors? All you know is that they don’t currently have an opponent. If you re-read the entire thread. Nothing you have argued would be considered persuasive. You have added nothing to this debate.Enlightened-One wrote: ↑14 Apr 2018, 09:14This isn't a religious argument where you're claiming I'm unable to prove that the universe wasn't created nor currently ruled by some sort that of divine omnipotent supreme being.
A contingency plan has never existed to cater for GGG's current predicament, because there's no evidence that proves that one was in place prior to Canelo's withdrawal from the Golovkin bout.
Are you seriously asking me to prove the existence of something that I claim does not exist? It's like asking me to provide evidence to prove that Santa Claus, fairies, ghosts, reincarnation and the afterlife don't exist!
Where you like to point fingers and failures I have sympathy for Golovkin and the situation. It can’t be easy. On top of organising the mega event that was Canelo Golovkin two you expected that had a perfect foolproof plan for Golovkin to fight an acceptable replacement fighter on 4 weeks notice. Unfortunately life’s not perfect and any plan or plans they had seems to have fallen through. Is that the fault of his management? Maybe or maybe they did the best they could in the situation. A very unfortunate situation that begins with Canelo testing positive to PEDS.
I'm not suggesting that Canelo is completely blameless in this situation, but Team GGG didn't implement a contingency plan... and that is something that is clearly not up for debate, since it simply didn't happen.
When I claim that Team GGG should have implemented a contingency plan, it's because competent promoters like GBP and Matchroom ensure one is in place for any events that are televised as PPV's.
Gennady is a great fighter, probably Hall-of-Fame worthy, but the people he employs to manage the promotions of his event shouldn't be considered as being immune from receiving criticism, simply because the Kazakh is one of your favourite fighters!
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 18:30
Just because a plan doesn’t work, doesn’t mean that there is no plan. Just because other companies have successful plans, it doesn’t make them comparable to the current situation or make this an easy endeavour. You are well out of your depth and recycling the same tired argument.
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 18:32
I do agree with the fact that his promotional team appears to be inept at best.Enlightened-One wrote: ↑14 Apr 2018, 18:07There's a lot of emotion expressed within that post of yours, but it doesn't explain the reason why GGG Promotions, or its spokesman Tom Loeffler, didn't implement a suitable contingency plan to cater for the possibility of Canelo's potential withdrawal from the bout.lazboy wrote: ↑14 Apr 2018, 16:56You’re out of your depth and it shows. That’s why you wrote the above tripe. You’re critical of Golovkin and co believing should have done things according to your standards and your limited experience in that world. You have applied your definition and standards to the word “contingency plan” and it makes no sense because you were happy with the google definition. Again you are pointing fingers, making assumptions Yet you do not know the facts of the situation. Did they have a plan that failed? What Is the cost of putting an opponent on guaranteed standby? What are the competing factors? All you know is that they don’t currently have an opponent. If you re-read the entire thread. Nothing you have argued would be considered persuasive. You have added nothing to this debate.Enlightened-One wrote: ↑14 Apr 2018, 09:14
This isn't a religious argument where you're claiming I'm unable to prove that the universe wasn't created nor currently ruled by some sort that of divine omnipotent supreme being.
A contingency plan has never existed to cater for GGG's current predicament, because there's no evidence that proves that one was in place prior to Canelo's withdrawal from the Golovkin bout.
Are you seriously asking me to prove the existence of something that I claim does not exist? It's like asking me to provide evidence to prove that Santa Claus, fairies, ghosts, reincarnation and the afterlife don't exist!
Where you like to point fingers and failures I have sympathy for Golovkin and the situation. It can’t be easy. On top of organising the mega event that was Canelo Golovkin two you expected that had a perfect foolproof plan for Golovkin to fight an acceptable replacement fighter on 4 weeks notice. Unfortunately life’s not perfect and any plan or plans they had seems to have fallen through. Is that the fault of his management? Maybe or maybe they did the best they could in the situation. A very unfortunate situation that begins with Canelo testing positive to PEDS.
I'm not suggesting that Canelo is completely blameless in this situation, but Team GGG didn't implement a contingency plan... and that is something that is clearly not up for debate, since it simply didn't happen.
When I claim that Team GGG should have implemented a contingency plan, it's because competent promoters like GBP and Matchroom ensure one is in place for any events that are televised as PPV's.
Gennady is a great fighter, probably Hall-of-Fame worthy, but the people he employs to manage the promotions of his event shouldn't be considered as being immune from receiving criticism, simply because the Kazakh is one of your favourite fighters!
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 14 Apr 2018, 18:36
I never really thought about who f'd up a contingency. I guess because I only wanted Cannelo for GGG. But...interesting points.
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 15 Apr 2018, 04:03
O'Sullivan speaking about the offer to fight GGG :
“Money-wise it’s not on PPV and the fight’s not worth the money that it should be. They dragged it out for over a week and we got nothing official. And the money kept on diminishing as well. They made an initial offer I agreed to then they came back with half of that," O'Sullivan told SiriusXM Boxing Radio.
“It’s better to stick to the plans we have now. I’d love to fight [Golovkin] down the road with a bit more notice and more money,” O'Sullivan said.
“I was very excited [when first asked about the fight]… Ken [Casey] called me and asked me would I take the fight and I said absolutely, but I think they were looking to get a junior middleweight instead of me looking toward a more safer option."
As I said they want a very soft opponent for GGG. Rod Salka is available atm.
“Money-wise it’s not on PPV and the fight’s not worth the money that it should be. They dragged it out for over a week and we got nothing official. And the money kept on diminishing as well. They made an initial offer I agreed to then they came back with half of that," O'Sullivan told SiriusXM Boxing Radio.
“It’s better to stick to the plans we have now. I’d love to fight [Golovkin] down the road with a bit more notice and more money,” O'Sullivan said.
“I was very excited [when first asked about the fight]… Ken [Casey] called me and asked me would I take the fight and I said absolutely, but I think they were looking to get a junior middleweight instead of me looking toward a more safer option."
As I said they want a very soft opponent for GGG. Rod Salka is available atm.
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 15 Apr 2018, 05:42
Isn't part of the problem the fact that HBO are refusing to pay more than $1m towards fighter purses for any replacement event?
Is so, how would team GGG pay any decent fighter an amount they would be willing to accept?
They couldn't even match Spike's demands.
Also, regarding contingency plans, I think it's slightly different a lead promoter having a reserve fighter in place (i.e. an undercard fighter promoted to main event), and the 'away' promoter having a similar one. Team GGG probably couldn't do much more than see who's available in the aftermath, as they would have no way of guaranteeing a fight to that reserve fighter (they aren't just going to go through camp and avoid signing for any other fight for free). It all seems a bit of a shambles, but there may not have been another option. We don't know.
The best option all along may have just been to ditch may 5th entirely, and set something up for June/July.
Is so, how would team GGG pay any decent fighter an amount they would be willing to accept?
They couldn't even match Spike's demands.
Also, regarding contingency plans, I think it's slightly different a lead promoter having a reserve fighter in place (i.e. an undercard fighter promoted to main event), and the 'away' promoter having a similar one. Team GGG probably couldn't do much more than see who's available in the aftermath, as they would have no way of guaranteeing a fight to that reserve fighter (they aren't just going to go through camp and avoid signing for any other fight for free). It all seems a bit of a shambles, but there may not have been another option. We don't know.
The best option all along may have just been to ditch may 5th entirely, and set something up for June/July.
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 15 Apr 2018, 05:45
spike is plenty soft, which is why he was in the running and got an offerapollo creed wrote: ↑15 Apr 2018, 04:03 O'Sullivan speaking about the offer to fight GGG :
“Money-wise it’s not on PPV and the fight’s not worth the money that it should be. They dragged it out for over a week and we got nothing official. And the money kept on diminishing as well. They made an initial offer I agreed to then they came back with half of that," O'Sullivan told SiriusXM Boxing Radio.
“It’s better to stick to the plans we have now. I’d love to fight [Golovkin] down the road with a bit more notice and more money,” O'Sullivan said.
“I was very excited [when first asked about the fight]… Ken [Casey] called me and asked me would I take the fight and I said absolutely, but I think they were looking to get a junior middleweight instead of me looking toward a more safer option."
As I said they want a very soft opponent for GGG. Rod Salka is available atm.
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 15 Apr 2018, 07:05
He got lowballed.jamamb wrote: ↑15 Apr 2018, 05:45spike is plenty soft, which is why he was in the running and got an offerapollo creed wrote: ↑15 Apr 2018, 04:03 O'Sullivan speaking about the offer to fight GGG :
“Money-wise it’s not on PPV and the fight’s not worth the money that it should be. They dragged it out for over a week and we got nothing official. And the money kept on diminishing as well. They made an initial offer I agreed to then they came back with half of that," O'Sullivan told SiriusXM Boxing Radio.
“It’s better to stick to the plans we have now. I’d love to fight [Golovkin] down the road with a bit more notice and more money,” O'Sullivan said.
“I was very excited [when first asked about the fight]… Ken [Casey] called me and asked me would I take the fight and I said absolutely, but I think they were looking to get a junior middleweight instead of me looking toward a more safer option."
As I said they want a very soft opponent for GGG. Rod Salka is available atm.
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 15 Apr 2018, 07:06
its gonna be low, they have very little to go around, they were clearly after spike, and thats because hes soft
if you want to talk avoiding, mention guys like derev, andrade etc, not f@cking gary o sullivan
if you want to talk avoiding, mention guys like derev, andrade etc, not f@cking gary o sullivan
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 15 Apr 2018, 07:42
Exactly. HBO are offering peanuts, whoever the opponent is.
Unless they want to make a guaranteed loss, the fight has to be against someone who's willing to fight for almost nothing.
Nobody with any sense is going to put on an event where they're guaranteed to make a loss...
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 15 Apr 2018, 08:21
Mundine or Bundrage for GGG.
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 15 Apr 2018, 14:44
Deleted_Scenes wrote: ↑15 Apr 2018, 07:42Exactly. HBO are offering peanuts, whoever the opponent is.
Unless they want to make a guaranteed loss, the fight has to be against someone who's willing to fight for almost nothing.
Nobody with any sense is going to put on an event where they're guaranteed to make a loss...
What's peanuts for Spike?
$200,000 -$250,000?
That's terrific money for a guy who has no name, no title.
Desensitized fans have become so accustomed to Mayweather/Pacquiao paydays, that they blithely dismiss a few hundred thousand dollars as "peanuts."
Most fighters will never come anywhere close to making that much for a fight.
But I do understand that if Spike has been promised an even more lucrative Canelo fight within the next year by GB, why he would suddenly bolt.
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 15 Apr 2018, 15:31
They offered Spike a certain amount, and he agreed. Then they come back with a lower offer.
What is so hard to understand about why he declined it? Its not a future offer to fight Canelo.
What is so hard to understand about why he declined it? Its not a future offer to fight Canelo.
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 15 Apr 2018, 15:34
Re: I think Golovkin is really on a decline way because they still looking for that soft opponent for him
Posted: 15 Apr 2018, 15:51
GGG has faced his 3 best fighters in his last 3 fights. He deserves an easy touch in this short negotiation period.
Brook, Jacobs and Canelo were all big tough fights.
I'm not going to be pissed if he fights Joe Schmo in this fight
Brook, Jacobs and Canelo were all big tough fights.
I'm not going to be pissed if he fights Joe Schmo in this fight