Best Chins in boxing?

39 posts / 0 new
Last post
Best Chins in boxing?

Golovkin
Canelo
Danny Garcia
Billy Joe Saunders
Joseph Parker
Chris Eubank Jr
Eleider Alvarez
Jermall Charlo
Kell Brook
Rungvisai
Estrada
Cristofer Rosales
Takeshi Inoue
Jamie Munguia
Broner

Agree...disagree ? Of course certain fighters chins on this list haven't been REALLY tested against very big punchers but Im strictly talking about punch resistance on the chin in this case. Brook has been pummeled but his chin hasn't failed him yet.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

If that is any particular order, I think Canelo is top for chins.

You seem to like Eubank Jr, he doesn't have that great a chin, seen him hurt a couple of times.

Tank Davis
Callum Smith
Hurd
Warrington
Prograis
Porter
Juan Carlos Ramirez
Gilberto Ramirez
Munguia
Broner

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Chris Eubank is not a great boxer...but his chin is outstanding. I've never seen him badly hurt and he has never been down right? I think his chin is very hard to crack. I agree with you on Hurd, Warrington and Broner. I've seen Munguia hurt before but I think his chin is solid. Porter was dropped by Broner, but he took shots from Thurman and Garcia well...his chin is solid, I just don't think it's one of the best. I've seen both Gilberto Ramirez and Jose Ramirez hurt and shaken up before. I don't think Gilberto Ramirez has a really great chin, I think he has an average one. Prograis looks to have a good chin, but I need to see him against some real big punchers to label him with the best Chins in boxing. Callum Smith also looks to have a good chin, but I'm not sure if he has one of the best Chins...need to see him get hit more on the chin to judge first. And for Tank Davis...what makes you say he has one of the best Chins in boxing ? I haven't seen him take any hard shots so I think that's still a big question mark.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

He isn't even a good boxer, would be great to see him lose to a past it DeGale. I am biased against Eubank Jr a bit like you are against Browne, but Eubank's chin is not outstanding, Groves can hit, but not as hard as he used to think he did, and Eubank got hurt in that fight, a couple of times, could have been counted I thought, and Saunders briefly hurt him, Eubank has a good chin, not a great chin. Broner is a killer for power, ask Chino Maidana, Rees was 'stunned' by Broner's power, not often a boxer says that, Spence has said he hits harder than Brook, Broner can punch, Porter soaked up Thurman's best punches. When you seen Jose Carlos hurt?, Gilberto was very briefly hurt against Hart, but apart from that never, I've seen him walk through great shots. Pedraza can punch, Davis made him look like a non-puncher, I think he has a granite chin.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Gilberto Ramirez was also badly stunned against Roamer Alexis Angulo and I've seen him bothered by punches before that but can't remember which fights. Jose Ramirez was knocked down by Johnny Garcia and I've seen him bothered by punches from Imam and Orozco. I wouldn't be surprised if Zepeda hurts him in their fight as well. But Jose Ramirez has a solid chin, I just don't think he has one of the best Chins in boxing

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Badly stunned? I don't remember that. He wasn't bothered by Imam or Orozco, he walked through them. Fair enough, but I disagree on that.

Check this out,

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.youtube...

Would you buy Adrien Broner vs Jim Gray on PPV?

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

GGG is above Canelo for chins tho bro

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Even though he's been knocked out, I think Jose Pedraza's chin is pretty strong.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

16/Los Angeles
Leo Santa Cruz vs Rafael Rivera
Omar Figueroa Jr vs John Molina Jr

23/London
James DeGale vs Chris Eubank Jr
Joe Joyce vs Bermane Stiverne

23/Minnesota
Anthony Dirrell vs Avni Yildirim

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

GGG
Wilder
Canelo
Munguia
Lebedev
Chilemba

Just some that popped in my mind

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Chilemba is a really underrated pick in my opinion. he's fought Bivol, Gvozdyk, Kovalev, Alvarez, and Bellew (twice) and has never actually been stopped.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Just as a general point, if someone hasn't had their chin tested due to the opposition they have faced, their style, etc they shouldn't be considered to have a great chin. Guys like Davis, Callum Smith, Warrington, Prograis, Juan Carlos Ramirez, Gilberto Ramirez, Mungia, etc. should not be in contention for those reasons. People like Canelo, Golovkin, Danny Garcia, and Broner who have faced big punchers, got hit, and haven't been stopped should be at the top of the list.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Agreed. Broner has an underrated chin. Not a good boxer, but he can take some massive punishment.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Callum Smith for the George Groves fight.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Smith didn't really get his chin tested in that fight, he was huge compared to Groves

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

You had a good month, came second.

1. Boxing Knowledge 31
2. Gold. 25
3. bacardibenny 23
4. Champion97, goosu. 20
5. Floyd tough competitor mayweather, NF82. 18
6. JML14. 17
7. mike25, SalTnutZ1, TheIceManJDog. 16
8. TheUndefeated. 15
9. Champion58, Cfcsonster. 13
10. TheAlterPlace. 7

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

True.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Out of the guys you din't mention: Provodnikov, Thurman, Wilder, Porter, Crawford, Pacquiao, Granados, Lomachenko (Outside of the Linares fight) Donaire etc.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Add Takeshi Inoue to that list wow!

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

I'd like to see him in versus a rising contender level guy, he has a very fan friendly style and a great chin.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Here's a curveball for you, how about Denis Lebedev? That guy has taken some incredible punishment. When I shut my eyes at night I still sometimes see the state of his face against Guillermo Jones.

Of the better known fighters, GGG and Canelo are super human, although Canelo is a drugs cheat so I'm not sure how much credit I'm giving him. Also agree on E Alvarez. Anyone that can take punishment like that from Kovalev for 18 rounds gets credit. I also think Ricky Burns deserves a mention. The guy will fight through a broken jaw against a big puncher without being bothered. Also went the distance with an albeit younger Crawford.

I'm very surprised at the Kell Brook suggestion. Danced against Carson Jones the first time, been hurt a lot, quit vs Spence etc.

p.s. just seen someone beat me to the punch with Lebedev.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Alvarez has the best chin in boxing in my opinion.

One thing I want to make note of is that Brook (and I'm not a big fan of his), did not quit vs Spence, he went into neutral, when a fighter is not 100% sure they want to continue, their mind lets them down, and the referee has no choice but to stop it. More improtantly, Brook would not have quit had the pain been much worse but not a worry about his sight, because he didn't quit because it was too tough, he took that knee and wasn't sure he wanted to continue, because he was worried it was likely he would be left permanently blind.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Ironically I am a big fan of his but disagree on this one mate. He took a knee and was asked if he wanted to continue, his response was to shake his head and say 'I can't see'. No referee at that point could let it continue. Other than saying 'no mas' or not coming out from the corner, that's as plain quitting as you can get.

Don't get me wrong, I think he did the right thing. By that point he was getting beat up and it was only a matter of time before he got seriously hurt. If you're told 'you could have gone blind' in your previous fight with the same injury, it was sensible. Still, it doesn't mean he didn't quit. Furthermore, the reason for quitting doesn't change the fact.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Exactly mate, he was worried abiut his sight. He didn't quit as far as I'm concerned, because he didn't say he didn't want to continue, I agree to the extent that he as good as quit in the sense that saying 'I can't see' instead of 'let me fight, rather go blind than quit!', is not giving the referee the message that you are 100% certain you want to continue.

I don't agree that he did the right thing in terms of getting beaten up and all that, because this is boxing, you go out on your shield. I agree on that, that's why you can't call him a quitter, and you cannot put him in the same category as fighters who actually have quit because it was getting too tough.

He didn't quit the general pain of the pain of the sport, that's simply not arguable, he did not quit because it was getting too tough, you have to understand that, whether you count not being 100% sure you want to continue as quitting, that's is arguable, ig is effectively quitting because the referee has to stop it, but it still isn't the sake as saying you defining want to quit.

The reason for quitting is the crucial point, is the most improtant aspect, there is a difference between fighting, knowing you couod go blind, die, but is highly unlikely, and fighting believing it is likely you will go blind, never see your family again, I think most fighters woukd take a knee and panic if they thought they were going to go blind.

Brook would not have quit if he was in much, much more pain than he was in, if it was much tougher, but he wasn't convinced he was losing his sight, that is why, if you even consider what he did quitting, you have to give him a pass because of the circumstances.

I am not a fan of Kell Brook, but he is no quitter, I believe Andre Dirrell is a quitter, there are quitters in boxing, but Brook is not one of them.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

The thing about Brook in that fight is we don't actually know why he quit. We know about the eye and it was a real danger, giving him the benefit of the doubt I'd like to think that's why he qui....I mean, didn't show the referee he 100% wanted to continue ;-)

Either way the fight was getting really tough for him. Maybe....just maybe it gave him the perfect excuse. (I don't actually believe that btw, I'm just being mischievous).

Going back to the OP, fair's fair, his chin didn't let him down in that fight, his eye unfortunately did.

What is it you don't like about him out of interest?

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Very few things are 100% certain, but I think it is extremely unlikely he quit for any reason other than being worried about his sight, was there any quitbin him against Carson Jones?, when he his nose was broken and he was getting a pummelling, Jones is not Spence?, no, but at the end of the day, he was close to being stopped in both fights, exhausted, getting a beating from a fighter who was strong in the late rounds, and sometimes, a fighter who hits harder can somewhat put you out of your misery, but here is my point, Brook did not quit vs Jones because he was tough enough to grit out the pain of boxing in the deep end, he 'quit' against Spence because he was worried he would be left permanently blind, like most fighters probably would.

You said it, you are being mischievous. Brook was the champion, had a belt to cling onto, in front of his fans, the motivation, and think what he was been through in camp, you don't put yourself through that to give it any less than 100% in the ring. To say he quit the absolute fight of his life because it was getting too tough for him is ridiculous.

I don't dislike him, just not a big fan of trash talk.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Some fair points. The difference between the Jones and Spence fights is that he knew against Jones he just had to make it to the bell to win whereas by the time the fight ended against Spence, he knew it was just a matter of time before he lost.

Re: the trash talk, I think he's just trying everything he can to get Khan into the ring (and has failed miserably). I think Khan v Brook happens next after Crawford KO's him, or maybe Khan will want a fella or two off the street to build his confidence back up. It will be a shadow of the fight it could have been, basically being like Floyd v Manny. Khan v Brook was the biggest fight I wanted to see for years, now I generally hope it doesn't happen.

I feel sorry for Brook in that respect. To think after a really good career, all he's really got to show for it is beating slugger porter in a close decision. The Khan fight would have been a career defining fight, unfortunately Khan has ducked him for years.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

That's a good point, but he had more to gain in the Spence fight, much more to lose, tyere was more at stake, he didn't know he was going to lose to Spence, when you watch the fight, you see the heart he showed, Spence called him a real fighter, has a lot of respect for him.

Pointless topic mate, there is no reason to discuss what I think of Brook as a persin, but for the record, nothing to do with Khan. Well here's the problem I have with that, Brook vs Khan is every bit the fight it was, once they are in the ring, because they are both past their prime, they would make it a better, more entertaining fight because they have less to lose and could exploit each other's vulnerabilities more easily. Do you understand?, what I'm saying is, there are 2 fighters in a fight, whether they are both in their prime, or both past it, it is a great match up, the only time it is a bad match up is if one is a fee years younger than the other, is fresh, unbeaten, and it is likely to be one sided. The fight, in terms of certain aspects such as the build up, future options, isn't what it would have been, but against each other, for entertainment value, the fight has lost nothing, and a good fight is not about one of them being a high calibre or a prime fighter, it is all about how the fighters are matched.

"slugger Porter", whilst "Mayweather runs like a pussy" is stupid, so is any other lack of appreciating for any other style in the ring, relentless pressure and output, great technical skill and counter punching, different styles, both a part of boxing, Porter is a 2-time world champion, just got a very good win by beating Garcia, beating Porter was impressive and he sealed his legacy as a good fighter. He has had his career defining win against Porter, and the thing is, if people are analytical enough to think about who does and doesn't have career defining wins, who hasn't gotten the wins to prove they are good or great, people are analytical enough to understand which fighters are great and just didn't get enough opportunities, for example "Canelo is great, GGG is a hype job, never beat anyone and lost to Canelo", GGG was 36, against a 28 year old fighter, won 5 rounds, lost a very close MD, if Canelo is great, so is he, or if Golovkin isn't great, Canelo must be absolute bottom of the barrell great, which he isn't.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

On the two main points...

I get what you're saying about Khan and Brook but tbh I don't care who's the best now, what I cared about was who was best in their prime. I don't think either will get the credit they deserve for getting the victory now because whoever loses will probably look terrible on the night. I don't think that would have been the case 3/4 years ago. Same as Floyd vs Manny. I did watch that fight but I didn't have a massive interest in it. In exactly the same way, I don't think Floyd proved anything by beating Manny past his prime. If he had taken the fight 5/6 years earlier, it would have been so much bigger.

Regarding 'slugger porter' I wasn't trying to diminish the achievement of beating him, it was a great win for Brook and he won the fight on my card. But for me, Porter will never be a star of the sport because his style doesn't allow us to see true boxing. Head butting, rough house tactics, boring in and clinching. Yes, it's all part of boxing but not what I call boxing, it's brawling. Every time I've watched Porter I've just wanted to turn off before his fights are awful to watch.

As for the Canelo/GGG debate, I think GGG can consider himself extremely unfortunate to come away with a draw and a loss.

The first fight, I honestly can't make a case for Canelo winning it. A draw wasn't outrageous in a round by round 10 point must scoring system but if anyone won the fight it had to be GGG. The second fight was very tough to score and could have gone either way. Personally I had GGG edging it but I don't think it's one that you can say was a bad decision.

Canelo's definitely had some luck when it comes to cards. Not that it made any difference in the end but that 114-114 vs Mayweather is one of the worst I've ever seen.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

I get that, in 2014-16, they were in their primes, but at the end of the day, the, not making the most of their primes is not particularly to do with them not fighting, Brook fighting Mayweather, Khan fighting Pacquiao, would have shown us a lot, it was likely to be a close fight, but at the end of the day, whenever two prime fighters fight, there is so much at stake, the fight is tentative, we find out who is better, but the fans aren't happy, they prefer the uncertainty if it means they getbto see a great fight, and in terms of entertainment value, the fight has lost nothing, because in their early thirties, past prime but not shot, they can do in the gym, 95% of what they could have done before, the only time their age is a problem is if they fight a prime fighter who is good as them, but they are both past prime, against each other, they would still fight like they are in their primes.

I very, very strongly disagree with that, whilst damage, miles, is important, so is age, it is easy, when you learn about something, and your knowledge is advanced, to forget the basics, and Mayweather is older than Pacquiao, and put it like this, Pacquiao had looked great in 2014, looked better than Mayweather, Mayweather is retired, Pacquiao isn't, Pacquiao has aged better, Pacquiao is incredible, look what he can still do at 40 years old, and after seeing his last 2 fights, it is obvious that beating him 4 years ago was a great achievement, Pacquiao was 36, Mayweather was 38, both were past prime, Mayweather beat him by a solid 8-4, that was very impressive. The miles, damage on Pacquiao's clock hadn't caught up to him, he was coming off 3 great performances, and many, many people said Pacquiao would beat Mayweather, with the same knowledge of the Marquez KO, Pacquiao looked great for his age against Rios, Algieri, before Mayweather looks great at 40 as well, he lost to Mayweather because Mayweather is too good, had they fought when they were younger, same result.

Star of the sport?, you mean a great fighter?, I agree, Porter is not great, but he is very good, he is not top 10, but he is top 30. It depends what you are holding Brook to, you have a point, if you are saying Brook never proved he was great with the Porter win, but he did prove he was a very good world level fighter. Porter has a great jab, his style is unorthodox, but pure boxing, gritty, high tempo tactics, what does it matter?, Mayweather didn't bring us a lot of positive fighting. That's part of his style, but he doesn't win fights with dirty fighting, it is his pace, physical strength, that gets him the wins. That's only about what's pleasing to your eyes, not about what is actually being achieved in the ring. Porter is a good fighter.

100% agree on GGG vs Alvarez.

I agree, terrible, Alvarez said, 'that wasn't a draw', she stood by it, but once the fighter says he didn't win or he lost, you just have to give up, to be fair to her, she did, but that scorecard was terrible. I can see how people can be fooled by the verh narrow missing, but judges need to see when shots don't land, that's one of the things that made it a wasteful performance from Mayweather, making Alvarez miss by almost nothing, so he is still in range to land his counters.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Porter is an 'effective fighter'. He wins fights for all the reasons you've stated but I also think his constant fouling plays a part. Is that just part of his style? Maybe. I think a lot of it's intentional. You're thinking 'why does it matter?' right? He still gets it done in the ring right? Well, it's hard to argue with that but it's an entertainment business don't forget. People buy PPV's for different reasons. I can't ever imagine thinking 'wow porter is fighting, I'm gonna buy that fight'. I think that's what I meant by not being a star of the sport. Each to their own, you may appreciate his style more than me and buy the PPV. I haven't been the numbers so I can't back this up either way, I'd be interested to see his PPV numbers if you have a link.

Going back to the Brook/Porter thing, I think Porter's style makes it hard for anyone to look truly great against him, short of knocking him out. Brook looked as good as he could have done. Back to my comment about that being the only thing to show for Brook's career. For that to be his biggest win - yeah that's why I think Brook's been a bit unlucky in his career not to have had bigger fights in his weight division when he was champ (and not getting a shot sooner perhaps). The Spence fight was the big one for him. I honestly thought he was damaged goods going into that fight though. Having to get down from Middle back to welter when he already struggled with the weight. Having the first eye injury against GGG. The mental side of losing his undefeated record etc.

On Manny, he's a true legend of the sport but I wish he'd retire. He's not been in with an elite fighter since Tim Bradley and I just feel he's been matched with guys that have made him look better than where he's at currently in his last 4 fights. I don't want to take anything away from what he's done recently but if he were to go up against someone like Spence or Crawford, I think he gets hurt badly.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Strongly disagree, I haven't seen Porter gaining from dirty fighting, I've seen no malicious fighting from him, he cuts himself every bit as much as he cuts his opponent, Mayweather, Hopkins, Cotto, less ugly sort or dirty fighting, but more inent behind it, fighters who know how to fight dirty and get away with it. I know, and a lot of people like watching Porter fight, Thurman vs Porter, was that not a good candidate for FOTY in 2016? Porter has an all action style, can take shots well. Ok, but a lot of fighters are like that to a degree, that is only the same criticism most people give Mayweather. Porter is a two-time world champion, he gets the results, some people like his style, some don't, like Mayweather.

Exactly. But what I'm saying is, if we agree Brook would not have been a top 10 fighter, then what more would he have achieved than the Porter win? It was a tough cut, that's for sure, but what we have to consider is that Brook had already proven himself, the result depended more on Spence than Brook, we didn't know how good Spence was. Brook isn't great, he wouldn't have beaten Spence, it's that simple, if we agree on that, then we are going round in circles.

I don't think so, Matthysse, Broner, look how well he did in these fights at 40 years old. I agree he loses, because they are great as well, I think ne would get knocked out. What I'm saying is, he is still declining, however slowly, he wasn't at his best in 2015, neither way Mayweather, that win was possibly the best if his career, very impressive.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

The Brook v Spence one is an interesting debate. I thought Brook was winning that fight at the half way stage. I might even go as far as saying he was outboxing him. Spence's athleticism, strength and superior stamina then took over. It's entirely plausible that happens anyway, as you say. What we don't know is how the factors I mentioned above affected Brook in the 2nd half of the fight. I'd have loved to see Brook v Spence before the GGG fight. The fact is for all Brook's solid career he's only fought 2 world class fighters at welter, which I think is a shame for him. Obviously he would have fought more had he beaten Spence, I'm not denying that. I really thought the GGG fight was a pay day sell out fight for him.

I haven't quite understood your last paragraph there, Manny did the job against a past it Matthysse and one of the most overrated fighters in history in Broner. Sure, you can only beat what's in front of you but Manny is no longer elite imo. What I'm saying here is it's best to retire when you're on top in good health. He's got nothing else to prove. Fighting on against the best is only going to end up in tears. He's amazing for 40, I'm not disputing that.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

I agree, it was experience I think, more so than anything else. Would he have beaten Spence in 2016? Is Spence great?, is Brook great?, because if Brook is just good, he beat Porter, fought GGG, fought Spence, not a bad career, not the best, not the worst.

Broner isn't overrated in my opinion, not saying he is top 50, but he wasn't the favourite to beat Pacquiao, people haven't been talking about him as a top fighter for a while. You are missing the point, I'll try to explain it better, Pacquiao beat Matthysse way better than Garcia and Postol did, he beat Broner more or less as well as Mikey did (Broner is not as good at 147 as he is at 140, but still, for 40, to beat Broner wide, very impressive).

I'm not actually talking about where Manny goes from here, for the record, he should have retired years ago, no boxing career should last over 20 years in my opinion, but realistically, he won't retire just yet. As I said, he loses wide or even by stoppage to Crawford, Spence imo.

My point was Mayweather's win over Pacquiao being a great win, look how good Pacquiao still is at 40, so 4 years ago, he definitely wasn't as far past it as people say, if he isn't as far past it now as you would expect, in his few fights either side of Mayweather, he did very well, Mayweather was 38, Mayweather beat Pacquiao because he is better, not because Pacquiao was washed up and he wasn't, they were both past prime in 2015.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

Manny was all wrong for Broner imo. If Broner is allowed to fight at his own pace and get into a rhythm he can be dangerous but Manny would never allow that. Broner is lazy and defensive imo. He's so worried about getting knocked out he doesn't want to attack. I honestly don't think he's recovered from the Maidana fight mentally. Anyone with an active style and a bit of power that's half decent beats broner imo.

As for Mayweather's win, let's agree on this; it was a great win but nowhere near as great as it would have been if it had been made when it should have.

I honestly don't think that win did anything for Mayweather's legacy other than to say he picks his opponents well towards the latter stages of his career. He actually did the same with Canelo in reverse. I remember when that fight was made everyone was lauding him for taking on this young buck who was expected to be the next big thing. What I thought was 'you're a very clever man for taking this lad out before he's gained the experience to stand a better chance'. It was at least 2 years too early for Canelo and Mayweather knew it. If Mayweather had waited for Canelo to become the beast that he has been in the past few years and then beat him - THAT would have been a legacy fight imo. Instead of withering out against who....Andre Berto. Christ. Beating Hatton in his prime was a much more impressive win for him because he fought him when he was at the top.

For the record, I still think Mayweather would have beaten Canelo is 2015/16 and I still think he's one of the best ever. Having said that, cherry picking opponents was his downfall as far as the TBE argument goes, in my humble opinion. He won't care of course, conquered the sport and all the money that goes with it.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

I'm not a believer in 'style is wrong for him', am I believer in the saying make fights'?, of course, the way the styles clash is what makes the tempo, positivity or negativity of the fight, styles absolutely do make the fight, but, if two guys are on the same level and the same age, although the tempo of the fight depends on their styles, the outcome doesn't. I think fighters beat opponents because they are better on the night, not because their style is wrong for them. That's a good point, but if Manny was no better or worse than he is, but more like Mayweather, the outcome would have been the same I think, same margin, the tempo, etc, of the fight, would be very different, because of their styles, but whether a fighter with Pacquiao's style thoroughly out works Broner, plays to his own strengths, or a fighter with Mayweather's style doesn't do that, has less output than Pacquiao, but more beats Broner at his own game, it doesn't matter, because the result is a wide loss for Broner either way, see what I mean?

I agree he's lazy, his output is very frustrating, and a lot of it is mental, I don't think it's that he's afraid to get knocked out, he has never been knocked out before, the only time he has been really beaten up for several rounds was against Chino. I think that's an exaggeration, a lot of it is weight related, he was always going to be a small welterweight, but he really has not adapted to the weight well, when he's at 140, he is much better, he is fast, sharp, dangerous, has good skills.

I don't agree it was nowhere near as good as when Pacquiao sabotaged the negotions by denying the drug tests. Mayweather schooled Pacquiao at 38 years of age.

What it did for Mayweather's legacy was prove he's better than Pacquiao, his whole career has been 'fight Pacquiao, he'd beat you, look what he did to De La Hoya and Hatton', well he beat Pacquiao, in the build up, people were talking about how much better Pacquiao looked than Mayweather in 2014, how Pacquiao was going to beat Mayweather, he had taken more damage, he was also younger than Mayweather. And the whole "Mayweather picks his opponents and Pacquiao fights prime fighters", is wrong, Hatton, De La Hoya, Mosley, who fought these guys when they were better?

Alvarez was inexperienced, good point, but at the end of the day, not as inexperienced as you would expect from a 23 year old, if Alvarez had been the fighter he was today, Mayweather would still have fought him I believe. Let's also remember that Mayweather is a natural lightweight, he moved up to light middleweight to fight Alvarez, and at 36, although he looked great in that fight, was better than he was against Cotto and Guerrero I think, he was still past his best which is part of the reason why it was so impressive. At the end of the day, had he not fought Alvarez in 2013, would people be saying 'credit to Floyd for waiting until Alvarez is in his prime'? Mayweather vs Pacquiao was close I believe in 2009, definitely around that time, and it was Pacquiao not agreeing to the drug tests which was the problem.

At the end of the day, more things are hypothetical in boxing than not, Mayweather schooled Alvarez, people can have different theories, but Mayweather schooled Alvarez, when Alvarez had just beat the guy who beat Cotto, he wasn't in his prime, nowhere near, he had a lot to learn, but it was still a good win because of how talented Alvarez had already proven he was, no fighter can fight a prime opponent every time, Mayweather fought De La Hoya, as the B-side, fought Hatton in his prime, Castillo as well, Maidana at his best, but realistically, champions can't fight everyone at their best, but Canelo and Pacquiao are better than any of those guys?, how many fighters are there at that elite level?, it is not uncommon for time to negatively affect a fight. I think Canelo is as good as Pacquiao, it is a good point, that Canelo, against Mayweather, was overwhelmed, inexperienced, and that's why I think Mayweather's win over Pacquiao was great, better than the Canelo win. If Mayweather was the Cherry picker people think, he would have retired a lit earlier than he did, he would have nowhere near Canelo at that age, of he can school even an inexperienced Canelo, at 36, what if he'd been 28?, that would have been even more one sided, Mayweather was 38 when he beat Pacquiao.

Well I very much disagree. Yes, but I wish he would apply his intelligence to being a promoter, trainer, manager, whatever, he is done, he retired in 2015, fighting non-boxers, all about money, bad for boxing.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

I had GGG winning both fights 115-113 how about you guys ? Seems like the A-side always gets the benefit of the doubt in close fights even when 90% of the Fans and Media feel otherwise.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

I had the same score the first time, second time, Alvarez edged it by the same margin in my opinion, was well ahead after 8 rounds, but Golovkin rallied well in the late rounds, and had he been younger, I think he would have won.

Re: Best Chins in boxing?

david allen