BoxRec

For a guy that has had two championship belts handed to him without a fight (WBA super & WBC) I still rate him the best @ middle weight. Was disappointed the young Eubank Jr didn't take the fight with him.

aint no one ever gonna beat him ever. throw canelo at him and he gets chewed to bits

Yes he's gonna blast Kel Brook from the O2 to Mars.

I've been listening to Eddie and Brooks team about how they are gonna shock the world. The only way they do that is if Brook enters the ring with a gun.

Just words.

Best middleweight since Hagler.

PredatorHayds wrote:Best middleweight since Hagler.

Better than Hopkins?

Golovkin would have had a hell of a fight on his hands against Bernard.

Syntax Error wrote:

PredatorHayds wrote:Best middleweight since Hagler.

Better than Hopkins?

Golovkin would have had a hell of a fight on his hands against Bernard.

Aye, or Jonesy

PredatorHayds wrote:Best middleweight since Hagler.

Technically-speaking, you’re absolutely correct.

By the 10th September, it intrigues me the vast majority of the men Golovkin would have fought in world title fights had competed in lower weight divisions (i.e. 13 of them have either fought as a welterweight or a light middleweight), whereas GGG has been 165lbs as an amateur and 160lbs as a pro in the last fourteen years.

Similarly, six of Hagler’s world title challengers were against guys that had competed in the lower weight divisions... and most were arguably his legacy defining bouts.

Enlightened-One wrote:

PredatorHayds wrote:Best middleweight since Hagler.

Technically-speaking, you’re absolutely correct.

By the 10th September, it intrigues me the vast majority of the men Golovkin would have fought in world title fights had competed in lower weight divisions (i.e. 13 of them have either fought as a welterweight or a light middleweight), whereas GGG has been 165lbs as an amateur and 160lbs as a pro in the last fourteen years.

Similarly, six of Hagler’s world title challengers were against guys that had competed in the lower weight divisions... and most were arguably his legacy defining bouts.

Hmm, and the point is? Golovkin also fought as low as a light welter when he was 19. People are moving up.

PredatorHayds wrote:Best middleweight since Hagler.

Ha ... this is typical Boxrec.

GGG VS Hopkins (2001)
GGG Vs Jones Jr. (1993)

GGG is not winning both.
Also, GGG has great potential, but his projections are a bit ridiculous.
It takes a lot of LUCK to be Haggler or any other ATG.

GGG hasn't even fought any top p4p fighter.

WHY IS IT SO HARD FOR YOU GUYS TO WAIT?

boxing_rocks wrote:Hmm, and the point is? Golovkin also fought as low as a light welter when he was 19. People are moving up.

The point is… part of the reason why Golovkin and Hagler have steamrollered over their opponents is because of their “natural” size advantages over them.

Put it this way, by the 10th September, six of GGG’s world title victims would have been relative novices at 160lbs (i.e. 0, 1 or 2 fights at that weight class beforehand)… and it’s kind of telling that 13 of them had not campaigned in that division anywhere near as long as Gennady had.

I’m not proclaiming GGG a bully for picking on smaller men – instead I’m merely pointing out an intriguing fact.

Tom Loeffler, Abel Sanchez and the bigwigs at HBO are responsible for the men Golovkin faces.

Enlightened-One wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:Hmm, and the point is? Golovkin also fought as low as a light welter when he was 19. People are moving up.

The point is… part of the reason why Golovkin and Hagler have steamrollered over their opponents is because of their “natural” size advantages over them.

Put it this way, by the 10th September, six of GGG’s world title victims would have been relative novices at 160lbs (i.e. 0, 1 or 2 fights at that weight class beforehand)… and it’s kind of telling that 13 of them had not campaigned in that division anywhere near as long as Gennady had.

I’m not proclaiming GGG a bully for picking on smaller men – instead I’m merely pointing out an intriguing fact.

Tom Loeffler, Abel Sanchez and the bigwigs at HBO are responsible for the men Golovkin faces.

Who did he have a "natural" size advantage over? Rubio or Murray who moved up after his beating? Lemieux who kills himself to make weight? Stevens who came down from 168? Wade, Monroe, Geale, Adama ? Maklin who tried to move down after a few defeats, but moved back up immediately? NONE of Golovkin's last 9 opponents campaigned below 160 in years before facing him.

Keep throwing new lies.

boxing_rocks wrote:Keep throwing new lies.

My previous statement was factually correct. Dismissing this easily verifiable factually-correct post as “lies” only serves to undermine your own credibility.

I really don’t mind your penchant to put a positive spin on things, by portraying the facts in a manner that is favourable to Golovkin, but it's unwise to call me a “liar” when the claims I’ve made are accurate.

Enlightened-One wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:Keep throwing new lies.

My previous statement was factually correct. Dismissing this easily verifiable factually-correct post as “lies” only serves to undermine your own credibility.

I really don’t mind your penchant to put a positive spin on things, by portraying the facts in a manner that is favourable to Golovkin, but it's unwise to call me a “liar” when the claims I’ve made are accurate.

No, your statement wasn't correct. Who of the last 9 of Golovkin's opponents was a "relative novice" at 160 ???

Bernard Hopkins' best wins at middleweight were over smaller men:

De La Hoya, who was a lightweight in his prime

Trinidad, who was a welterweight in his prime

boxing_rocks wrote:No, your statement wasn't correct. Who of the last 9 of Golovkin's opponents was a "relative novice" at 160 ???

My statement is factually-correct and can be verified by BoxRec.

You’ve resorted to using a straw man, by demanding that I comment on a stance that I’ve never held, because you cannot address my original claim.

You look pretty desperate when you have to call me a liar and play the straw man card, simply because you cannot undermine a fairly harmless but factually-correct statement!

Is this you?

Great fighter, needs a big name opponent to shut up the critics.

He is currently the #1 Middleweight right now by leaps and bounds. Not only does nobody currently at the weight beat him, I don't think anybody seriously gives him much of a challenge for now. But he's getting into his mid 30's so he may well start slowing down in the not too distant future.

Who is GGG?

Enlightened-One wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:No, your statement wasn't correct. Who of the last 9 of Golovkin's opponents was a "relative novice" at 160 ???

My statement is factually-correct and can be verified by BoxRec.

You’ve resorted to using a straw man, by demanding that I comment on a stance that I’ve never held, because you cannot address my original claim.

You look pretty desperate when you have to call me a liar and play the straw man card, simply because you cannot undermine a fairly harmless but factually-correct statement!

Your statement is a blatant lie if you look at the last 9 of Golovkin's opponents meaning that it is wrong in general.

boxing_rocks wrote:Your statement is a blatant lie if you look at the last 9 of Golovkin's opponents meaning that it is wrong in general.

I see no point in debating with someone who accuses me of being liar, whilst flatly-refusing to address my original claims.

Do you have any parents or carers that can help explain my posts to you word-for-word?

I'm not being derogatory when I say that either, because your behaviour truly worries me, as you're imagining situations that have never happened!

Enlightened-One wrote:

PredatorHayds wrote:Best middleweight since Hagler.

Technically-speaking, you’re absolutely correct.

By the 10th September, it intrigues me the vast majority of the men Golovkin would have fought in world title fights had competed in lower weight divisions (i.e. 13 of them have either fought as a welterweight or a light middleweight), whereas GGG has been 165lbs as an amateur and 160lbs as a pro in the last fourteen years.

Similarly, six of Hagler’s world title challengers were against guys that had competed in the lower weight divisions... and most were arguably his legacy defining bouts.

Enlightened-One wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:Hmm, and the point is? Golovkin also fought as low as a light welter when he was 19. People are moving up.

The point is… part of the reason why Golovkin and Hagler have steamrollered over their opponents is because of their “natural” size advantages over them.

Put it this way, by the 10th September, six of GGG’s world title victims would have been relative novices at 160lbs (i.e. 0, 1 or 2 fights at that weight class beforehand)… and it’s kind of telling that 13 of them had not campaigned in that division anywhere near as long as Gennady had.

I’m not proclaiming GGG a bully for picking on smaller men – instead I’m merely pointing out an intriguing fact.

Tom Loeffler, Abel Sanchez and the bigwigs at HBO are responsible for the men Golovkin faces.

Yes, what you have posted is factually correct, but it's also somewhat misleading. GGG finished his amateur career at 165lb, but that was with same-day weigh-ins. He body hasn't naturally grown since turning pro at age 24, which is why he's still at middleweight. Had he turned pro as young as Mayweather, he likely would have started his career at light welter.

I disagree that GGG has had a size advantage over many of his opponents. Yes, he has campaigned at middleweight for longer than many of them, but that just means he is more experienced at the weight, not that he is bigger. Curtis Stevens started his career at light heavy and has fought at cruiserweight - does that make him bigger than GGG?

Gabe Rosado had just come up from 154lb, but had an inch in both height and reach over GGG, and just months later was 175lb on fight night against Peter Quillin (not sure what he weighed in the ring against GGG). Was he really at a size disadvantage?

Keep in mind that at age 34, GGG is very comfortable at middleweight, he comes to camp at around 171lb and is typically about the same on fight night. He's 5'10.5 with a 70 inch reach. He's not a big middleweight.

Syntax Error wrote:

PredatorHayds wrote:Best middleweight since Hagler.

Better than Hopkins?

Golovkin would have had a hell of a fight on his hands against Bernard.

I love watching GGG but B-Hop he's a throw back to the great defencive fighter's of yester-year he would out box GGG out smart GGG out last GGG any day of the week when he [B-Hop] was in his prime.

ClivePatrickLyons wrote:

Syntax Error wrote:

PredatorHayds wrote:Best middleweight since Hagler.

Better than Hopkins?

Golovkin would have had a hell of a fight on his hands against Bernard.

I love watching GGG but B-Hop he's a throw back to the great defencive fighter's of yester-year he would out box GGG out smart GGG out last GGG any day of the week when he [B-Hop] was in his prime.

What is such confidence based on? Bernard in his prime lost twice to Taylor. Not sure what precludes a possibility of him losing to GGG.

GGG always crying about fighters avoiding him but he avoids Andre Ward.

Ya'll seem to forget James Toney and Gerald McClellan. I honestly don't feel GGG beats Hopkins, Toney or RJJ in their respective primes. McClellan would have been a Cracking fight though, still think I'd pick McClellan to lay him the fornicate out.