Gennady Golovkin title defenses question
There seems to be some debate over how many major title defenses he has. Many that the people that say 19 title defenses are the WBA regular title. (Some count him winning it as a defense making 20, I can’t begin to grasp how winning a title is defending a title) That is not the major belt, that is the WBA super title.
But that is clear, the numbers are fudged. The questions I have are about if it’s really 9, 8, or 7 major title defenses. I would say 9.
But it raises questions, was he elevated to WBA super champion before the Geale fight and it was a defense or was he fighting Geale to gain a vacated super championship? I assume he was elevated before and it was his first major title defense
Then some want to drop it because he didn’t defend the WBA super(his highest number of defenses) against Brook. I would think that doesn’t matter because he defends other major titles in that fight so Brook should count towards major title defenses. It’s major title defenses not a single major title defenses
Then, the draw, it seems some don’t count that. But he didn’t lose his title so in my eyes he defended it. So that should count too.
Making 9 major title defenses
Am I seeing this wrong?
Re: Gennady Golovkin title defenses question
I think he was elevated before that defense and therefore that would not count as a title defense. However I do count the draw since the draw goes to the champion. However I really do think if I was in my twenties and in really good shape that I can whip golovkin's ass
Re: Gennady Golovkin title defenses question
I think once you get into trying to play along in making sense of the mangled mess that are wba minor-major trinkets you set yourself up for a straight jacket. They see Vanes as #19 and honestly I don't think it should be counted after all 3 first refused to sanction and then granted special stipulations as last resort. IBF says he must fight Derevyanchenko and all it takes is a cut to screw him within 90 days. By the WBA this should be his 20th defense as on one hand they allow Vanes..who has never fought at middle..but disallowed Brook defense because he never fought at middle ???. It's the WBA well it's close enough rule.
Re: Gennady Golovkin title defenses question
But the defense record is about “major title defenses” the WBA regular title isn’t the major title. That is the WBA super title, which he didn’t defend until Geale. I get your point though that even this one is hypocritical because it shouldn’t be on the line by what they said before. I’m just trying to get at the real number of major title defenses.
We agree a draw counts?
We agree it doesn’t matter which major title is on the line, just that a major title is on the line?
And we agree winning a title is not defending a title?
Re: Gennady Golovkin title defenses question
Just saying I don't get stuck on the wba sub-major categories so not much help ;D. Gives the whole mess and trinket gimmick credence and also fills their pockets with sanctioning fees which seems it's only intention. I mean 'regular..major..super' are we ordering coffee here or what? They may be the oldest but you're talking about an organization who continued to rank a dead fighter once. Hopkins defended a single belt at 160 if that's the record were talking about. Joe Louis?
On draws yes they should count as fight was concluded. Initial win should definitely not count as a defense.
Re: Gennady Golovkin title defenses question
In my opinion
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
But it raises questions, was he elevated to WBA super champion before the Geale fight and it was a defense or was he fighting Geale to gain a vacated super championship? I assume he was elevated before and it was his first major title defense
If you are fighting for a vacant title then it isn't a defense, you can't be elevated to it before you have won it
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
Then some want to drop it because he didn’t defend the WBA super(his highest number of defenses) against Brook. I would think that doesn’t matter because he defends other major titles in that fight so Brook should count towards major title defenses. It’s major title defenses not a single major title defenses
If you are defending one belt or 4 belts it is still a defense, it counts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
Then, the draw, it seems some don’t count that. But he didn’t lose his title so in my eyes he defended it. So that should count too.
You walk away with the belt, the belt is still yours, you have defended it, if you were defending a castle and a truce was called after 6 days and everyone walked away with no one being the victor, the castle is still yours, you don't give half of it away, the belt was still GGG's, it counts...plus he didn't draw, he won the fight.
The only time I wouldn't say it counted as a defense is if for whatever reason it was declared a no contest
Re: Gennady Golovkin title defenses question
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
Just saying I don't get stuck on the wba sub-major categories so not much help ;D. Gives the whole mess and trinket gimmick credence and also fills their pockets with sanctioning fees which seems it's only intention. I mean 'regular..major..super' are we ordering coffee here or what? They may be the oldest but you're talking about an organization who continued to rank a dead fighter once. Hopkins defended a single belt at 160 if that's the record were talking about. Joe Louis?
On draws yes they should count as fight was concluded. Initial win should definitely not count as a defense.
But that's sort of my point. They have all these sub categories And we should ignore them. The super champ if they have one at the time is the only champ.
Re: Gennady Golovkin title defenses question
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Batman
In my opinion
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
But it raises questions, was he elevated to WBA super champion before the Geale fight and it was a defense or was he fighting Geale to gain a vacated super championship? I assume he was elevated before and it was his first major title defense
If you are fighting for a vacant title then it isn't a defense, you can't be elevated to it before you have won it
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
Then some want to drop it because he didn’t defend the WBA super(his highest number of defenses) against Brook. I would think that doesn’t matter because he defends other major titles in that fight so Brook should count towards major title defenses. It’s major title defenses not a single major title defenses
If you are defending one belt or 4 belts it is still a defense, it counts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
Then, the draw, it seems some don’t count that. But he didn’t lose his title so in my eyes he defended it. So that should count too.
You walk away with the belt, the belt is still yours, you have defended it, if you were defending a castle and a truce was called after 6 days and everyone walked away with no one being the victor, the castle is still yours, you don't give half of it away, the belt was still GGG's, it counts...plus he didn't draw, he won the fight.
The only time I wouldn't say it counted as a defense is if for whatever reason it was declared a no contest
About super vs regular. Thanks. I wasn't sure if a person has to fight to be the super champ or if it was political BS. So the correct answer is he has 8 defenses of major titles.
Re: Gennady Golovkin title defenses question
The WBA have vacant super titles as well as elevate regular champions so there is a distinction, which means Golovkins fight with Geale should count as a defence, as he was the elevated party.
Now obviously multi-titles per weightclass is nothing but a greedy cash grab, however, ducked guys like Golovkin would never even get a shot at the titles if they weren't split, as he became regular champ when the super title was held by Sturm, who refused to face him.
