Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

25 posts / 0 new
Last post
Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

With Golovkin's close win over Derevyanchenko where he looked aged and very vulnerable, is Golovkin even a top ten pound for pound fighter anymore? At first, I thought obviously he isn't anymore, but it is difficult to find who else deserves to be in the top ten pound for pound. What do you think?

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

I definitely don't think he's top 10 pound for pound, certainly not when it comes to head to head, and in terms if resume, who's done what, I don't think he's top 10. I think Golovkin is top 3 at 160, but he won't be for much longer, it's a pity for him that he didn't get the big fights until he was 35, we never found out just how good Golovkin was at his best. I think a prime Golovkin was better than Canelo or Andrade, and was easily top 10 pound for pound for the same reason Crawford is, only difference between a prime Golovkin, and Crawford, is that Crawford was undisputed and a weight champion, still, Golovkin had 3 belts, was the man at 160 for a while, and I don't think his opponents were as bad as he made them look.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

Agreed.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

Who would you put in the top ten in place of him? There are some okay options but they rely heavily on eye test. In my opinion, the winner of Taylor vs. Prograis (or Gvozdyk vs. Beterbiev if there is a clear winner) would definitely have a claim over Golovkin but it is hard for me to replace Golovkin at the moment.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

1. Crawford
2. Loma
3. Canelo
4. Usyk
5. Estrada
6. Inoue
7. Gvozdyk/Beterbiev winner
8. Taylor/Prograis winner
9. J-Rock (9 & 10 interchangeable)
10. Spence (9 & 10 interchangeable)

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

J-Rock over GGG? Nah, I don't see how that could be argued. I'd put Charlo before J-Rock just because of the head to head, but I didn't rate Hurd like some did before the upset.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

Here is my list:

1. Crawford
2. Alvarez
3. Inoue
4. Lomachenko
5. Usyk
6. Spence
7. Garcia
8. Estrada
9. Pacquiao
10. Golovkin

I see the next group of guys being people like Davis, Prograis, Taylor, Gvozdyk, Bivol, Santa Cruz, Rungvisai, Narvarette, Smith, Nietes, Berchelt, J-Rock, Warrington, etc but none of them have good enough wins/eye test to get in on my list.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

J-Rock beat undefeated Hurd convincingly who had a couple good scalps and unified belts at 154. Danny Roman has beaten better scalps in McDonnell & Doheny etc and unified titles at 122 over Navarette who came out of nowhere as a mandatory and beat much over-hyped Dogboe, They both belong in the top 10 over Nararette or Davis.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

Good point about J Rock, but I want to see his next fights, I think Hurd was weight drained, we'll find out whe he defends the belts, whether he is as good as he looked in the Hurd fight.

What evidence is there for Dognoe being over hyped other than the Navarrete fights? Magdaleno is good, beat Donaire at 122 (not as good as he is at 118, but better than he was at 126 and 130), and Dogboe stopped him, proved himself at world level, his first defence was impressive, the only thing to suggest Dogboe was over hyped is Navarrete making it look that way. Roman is a unified champion, beat good fighters in McDonnell, Doheny, true, he lost, learned, has come a long way as a professional, but based on Doheny's last 2 fights before fighting Roman, and Dogboe's last 2 fights before fighting Navarrete, I don't think Doheny is better than the Dogboe Navarrete fought the first time, and if he's better now, it's because the risk of the immediate rematch backfired and Dogboe isn't the same, therefore, based on how much more dominant Navarrete was against Dogboe than Roman against Doheny, I think Navarrete is a level above Roman.

Davis's resume needs to be built before he can be put with Lomachenko and Crawford, but he is extremely dominant, has shown good skills as well as top level power, based on eye test, I think he will be a top 5 fighter in a few years, provided he has the dicipline, sticks at it, doesn't get into too much legal trouble.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

When you get down to the 9 or 10 spot is certainly arguable that GGG should still be there. But if the list had arrows I think GGG would have a down arrow for sure. Surprised at everyone having Bud at #1. I'm a fan and even I don't think he's above Spence and maybe not even above Pac Man. Hard to be #1 in my book if you don't fight any worthy opponents for over two years.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

Resume wise, what puts Lomachenko and a 2016 Golovkin above Crawford? His resume isn't great, but it's good enough that his fights are impressive, and although he doesn't have the great resume of a Canelo, Pacquiao, Usyk, doesn't have as good a resume as Spence, not Fury had he beat Wilder which he was a whisker away from doing, he is not a only a 3 weight world champion, but he cleaned out 140, that's always impressive, and I think even though there is a strong argument for him not being top of the list or even top 3 because of his unspectacular resume, by that logic, Lomachenko can't be top of the list either, and neither could Golovkin have been until he edged Jacobs and Derevyanchenko. I think sometimes it's too much about how good a fighters' wins are, when there is other evidence to suggest a fighter is that good, for example, both GGG vs Canelo fights were close, I think he'd have beaten him if he'd been just slightly younger, and for Crawford, the Postol, Indongo wins aren't as impressive as Canelo's wins over Golovkin, Lara, Cotto, Jacobs, but look at how easily he beat them both.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

Not sure what you mean by a 2016 Golovkin. But I would not put today's Golovkin above Crawford. Boxing lists are so subjective and none more than a P4P list. I like Loma above Crawford because: A) Crawford has not fought anyone with the skill of Rigondeaux or Linares B) Making 5 straight top-tier fighters quit (including Rigondeaux) - and maybe Marriaga was not quite top level - but still. C) The eye test: watching Loma do things I've never seen done in the ring before. All that said, I love Bud Crawford and am very frustrated with his relationship with Top Rank right now. Just at this point in time, I would put Loma above him on a P4P. Spence too. Spence because Brook, Garcia and Porter were all better opponents than the best Crawford opponent.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

What I mean is, at that point, like Crawford and Lomachenko, he was ranked top 5 by most, but didn't have a great resume, and the reason I say 2016 is because at that stage, he was a harder man than he is to beat now, but he didn't have the wins over Jacobs and Derevyanchenko. I know, it's so subjective, there often isn't a lot to discuss because there isn't much hard evidence for any argument, it's a stalemate.

Good point about Rigondeaux's skills, and I think Lomachenko deserves more credit not for beating an old, small Rigondeaux but for out thinking him and beating him to the punch in early rounds. I don't know if I agree Linares is more skilled than Gamboa, but there isn't a lot in it either way, and Crawford had a size advantage over Gamboa, Lomachenko was at a size disadvantage against Linares, and they both dealt with the most technically skilled opponents (Rigondeaux aside) of their careers similarly, both briefly hurt, both had some problems, especially Crawford, but both were able to get late stoppages, both proved to be adaptable.

I think Crawford's finishing is better than Lomachenko's, his KO over Indongo was phenomenal, and that right uppercut against Benavidez was timed perfectly, Lomachenko executed great KOs against Martinez and Crolla, but I think when he has an opponent hurt, Crawford capitalises better overall, Lomachenko's footwork is a lot better, he has great skills, but I don't think he does anything Mayweather didn't do, not technically anyway.

Good point, I said that recently, Mikey was very small at 147, but good enough that schooling him like that is impressive size advantage or not, Brook was coming back down after the Golovkin fight, had the eye issue and it mentally broke him, but that's still a great win, we don't know if Brook was badly weight drained or if Spence just beat it out of him, and Porter, no way of discounting that win. Thurman as well, who I think is a level below Crawford and wouldn't give him that tough a fight, has a better resume than Crawford, he beat Porter and Garcia, but that is more evidence that the fighter with the better resume isn't always the better fighter.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

He should be imo, officially it was a still a win and there aren't many who have accomplished more in the sport.

I mean...do we not rank Spence because he had a very tough fight with Porter where he only won a Split Decision? Idk man. Everyone had tough nights

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

That's true in the sense that he was champion for many years, beat Jacobs and Derevyanchenko.

Golovkin's recent win is a lot more disputed than Spence's even though it was unanimous, so his ranking will drop more.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

Yeah I guess but so was Canelo's win over Golovkin. Does he drop down with GGG in the rankings?

Feels weird to have Canelo at the top and GGG not in it at all...

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

Less so, but still disputed, not a clear win. The reason for that is because Golovkin was a heavier favourite over Derevyanchenko than Canelo was over Golovkin, if he was even a favourite, so Golovkin's reputation will suffer more from it being close against Derevyanchenko than Canelo's will from it being close against him.

Yes, but that shows how important timing is in boxing, Canelo has improved a lot over the last couple of years, and Golovkin has declined. I take it you agree a 2015-16 Golovkin would have beaten a prime Canelo?

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

Yeah, I mean i already think Golovkin beat Canelo twice so that's a no brainer for me. Especially with that in mind I can't have Canelo at the top of a p4p list and Golovkin not in it at all

Before this fight my p4p list looked like this:

1.Canelo
2.Lomachenko
3.Crawford
4.Usyk
5.Golovkin
6.Estrada
7.Inoue
8.Spence
9.Pacquiao
10.Kovalev

Now idk honestly. If Canelo beats Kov he will stay #1, if he doesn't I'll put Loma at #1.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

How about Inoue vs Navarrete for a future fight?

They are with different networks, different weights, not a realistic fight short term, but I think Inoue against Navarrete would be a great fight, if both keep winning, both keep improving, and they are at the same weight, I think that's a great. Might be an unrealistic fight even long term, because Navarrete must be natural featherweight or even super featherweight, might be too much of a size difference.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

Could be a much more realistic fight than you are making it out to be, it has been rumored for a while Inoue will sign a co-promotional deal with TR after the WBSS

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

I have NO idea how people put Tank, Nietes, Spence, Navarrate, above GGG.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

Same here.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

MINIMaxBOXING, with Tank, Navarrete, Spence to a degree, it's based on eye test, timing, how good they are now, it depends on the criteria, Nietes is different, he must be coming to the end of his career, he is the opposite to Tank, he is a 4 weight world champion, that's always some going, he has not lost a fight in over a decade. Based on Tank's dominant win over Pedraza and how impressive he's looked since then, there's an argument he is that good, if we are talking about resumes, Tank is well below Golovkin even if Golovkin doesn't have the best resume, but I believe pound for pound, he is a better fighter, now.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

I respect your opinion.

Re: Golovkin and the top ten pound for pound

1. Crawford
2. Lomachenko
3. Canelo
4. Usyk
5. Spence
6. Inoue
7. Fury
8. Davis
9. Bivol
10. Navarrete

Not sure about that list, very tough when it comes to ranking fighters pound for pound, because it's not easy to weigh up achievements from different weights. I could easily see Plant, Ramirez, Berchelt being top 10, and I agree with Matchroom on the winners of Prograis vs Taylor and Gvozdyk vs Beterbiev have good shots at being top 10 based on unifying against other highly regarded champions.