Floyd haters keep saying he ducked GGG

[Ron Swanson]

@Ron Swanson

How many fights did I pick Floyd to lose? None. Although I slightly favoured the more experienced Corrales in the battle of the outstanding unbeaten talents back in the day.

Good show. Was curious because often those that are so sure Floyd would lose this matchup or that are the ones that have regularly been wrong about him before.

Anyone on either side saying they are sure of an outcome is foolish in my view. Both have extreme advantages and both have extreme disadvantages. And both would be in situations completely foreign to them. Floyd hasn't fought anyone with the power of GGG and GGG would think Floyd was a frickin ghost. Anyone looking only to size must also consider Floyd would have a 2" reach ADVANTAGE. Floyd would be up against it for sure. But he also isn't afraid to stink up a joint.

If there was a way to make each 32 and get Floyd to 155 pounds to make a 160 fight I'd love to see it.

[frozensolid-702]

A Prime Mayweather would have absolutely toyed with GGG, Golovkin would have been chasing shadows for 12 rounds.
Way too fast and clever which is why he never lost.

Not at middleweight he wouldn't. Too small. GGG rips him a new one.

Golovkin wouldn't have laid a glove on him and Floyd would easily boxed his head off because GGG is a sitting duck who never moves his head, the size wouldn't have made a difference

Easy nights work for Mayweather, shame we never got to see it though.

To be fair, Prime Floyd was super featherweight through super lightweight. Floyd doesn't beat GGG at middleweight just like GGG has zero chance against Ward at light heavyweight.

That being said, Floyd at 154 actually beats Golovkin at 160 in a similar fashion that he beat Alvarez at 154.

The clinic that Alvarez is about to put on GGG will validate my statements

[Master]

If you base Floyd beating Golovkin on the Jacobs fight - a 6'1 quick middleweight with a reach advantage that fights nothing like Floyd - then equally you have to consider Floyd "losing" to Castilo.

So based on how easily a 5'7, "slow" lightweight was able to pressure Floyd then a 5'11 middleweight with a longer reach, fantastic jab, bone crunching power and a granite strong bonce would absolutely kill him.

Yeah.. I wonder why Floyd never attempted winning a middleweight title.

Jacobs ain't 6ft 1 and GGG is not 5ft 11. I don't care what the "Stats" say, we know they're bollocks.
Jacobs is about 6 foot and I know that's a lot taller than Floyd, but Floyd makes up for that with his defensive skills , reactions and counter punching.
GGG is about 5ft 9 I would say. No doubt Floyd wouldn't have felt the power anything like GGG possessed , but I do believe he could avoid that for 12 rounds.

Regardless of an inch here or there, Jacobs is much bigger than Floyd (height and weight), I don't see how anything can be taken from him in comparison with Floyd. Apart from all the physical/style differences Jacobs had the power to make Golovkin wary of being countered, something little Floyd certainly doesn't have the benefit of.

Contrary to what some people here believe, Golovkin isn't some thick face first brawler that mindlessly chases bods around the ring all night. He's an absolute master at cutting the ring off and trapping fighters. He works off a constant jab.

Good luck to Floyd when he's trapped on the ropes, as many a weaker lesser talent frequently does to him, and his unable to wrestle the far bigger stronger man off as he's getting holes blasted all over his arms and torso.

I suppose maybe he could survive 12 rounds, he certainly ain't winning anything.

Curious. How many fights did you pick Floyd to lose?

It does not matter, Floyd is not winning this one. It is the equivalent of saying Floyd could beat a prime Hagler.

No it is not. Hagler is far better. You keep changing the situation to make yourself appear right. If you had any confidence in your argument you wouldn't need to use intellectual dishonesty.

I am trying to discribe how absurd it is in many ways as possible that Floyd could not beat GGG.

I do not think Hagler was far better than GGG.

[Primo Carnera]

If you base Floyd beating Golovkin on the Jacobs fight - a 6'1 quick middleweight with a reach advantage that fights nothing like Floyd - then equally you have to consider Floyd "losing" to Castilo.

So based on how easily a 5'7, "slow" lightweight was able to pressure Floyd then a 5'11 middleweight with a longer reach, fantastic jab, bone crunching power and a granite strong bonce would absolutely kill him.

Yeah.. I wonder why Floyd never attempted winning a middleweight title.

Jacobs ain't 6ft 1 and GGG is not 5ft 11. I don't care what the "Stats" say, we know they're bollocks.
Jacobs is about 6 foot and I know that's a lot taller than Floyd, but Floyd makes up for that with his defensive skills , reactions and counter punching.
GGG is about 5ft 9 I would say. No doubt Floyd wouldn't have felt the power anything like GGG possessed , but I do believe he could avoid that for 12 rounds.

Regardless of an inch here or there, Jacobs is much bigger than Floyd (height and weight), I don't see how anything can be taken from him in comparison with Floyd. Apart from all the physical/style differences Jacobs had the power to make Golovkin wary of being countered, something little Floyd certainly doesn't have the benefit of.

Contrary to what some people here believe, Golovkin isn't some thick face first brawler that mindlessly chases bods around the ring all night. He's an absolute master at cutting the ring off and trapping fighters. He works off a constant jab.

Good luck to Floyd when he's trapped on the ropes, as many a weaker lesser talent frequently does to him, and his unable to wrestle the far bigger stronger man off as he's getting holes blasted all over his arms and torso.

I suppose maybe he could survive 12 rounds, he certainly ain't winning anything.

Curious. How many fights did you pick Floyd to lose?

It does not matter, Floyd is not winning this one. It is the equivalent of saying Floyd could beat a prime Hagler.

No it is not. Hagler is far better. You keep changing the situation to make yourself appear right. If you had any confidence in your argument you wouldn't need to use intellectual dishonesty.

I am trying to discribe how absurd it is in many ways as possible that Floyd could not beat GGG.

I do not think Hagler was far better than GGG.

Like I've said before, I'm a fan of GGG, but the first MW of any sort of quality that he had to fight , and he struggled. Some (including me I have to say) thought Jacobs won.
This isn't a criticism of GGG , he still closes the ring down well and he still has awesome power, but it puts a bit of perspective as to the level he is at.
To be fair, he is 35 now and maybe, just maybe slowly on the slide.
Put that against Hagler's career and it doesn't stand up to be honest.

[Ron Swanson]

If you base Floyd beating Golovkin on the Jacobs fight - a 6'1 quick middleweight with a reach advantage that fights nothing like Floyd - then equally you have to consider Floyd "losing" to Castilo.

So based on how easily a 5'7, "slow" lightweight was able to pressure Floyd then a 5'11 middleweight with a longer reach, fantastic jab, bone crunching power and a granite strong bonce would absolutely kill him.

Yeah.. I wonder why Floyd never attempted winning a middleweight title.

Jacobs ain't 6ft 1 and GGG is not 5ft 11. I don't care what the "Stats" say, we know they're bollocks.
Jacobs is about 6 foot and I know that's a lot taller than Floyd, but Floyd makes up for that with his defensive skills , reactions and counter punching.
GGG is about 5ft 9 I would say. No doubt Floyd wouldn't have felt the power anything like GGG possessed , but I do believe he could avoid that for 12 rounds.

Regardless of an inch here or there, Jacobs is much bigger than Floyd (height and weight), I don't see how anything can be taken from him in comparison with Floyd. Apart from all the physical/style differences Jacobs had the power to make Golovkin wary of being countered, something little Floyd certainly doesn't have the benefit of.

Contrary to what some people here believe, Golovkin isn't some thick face first brawler that mindlessly chases bods around the ring all night. He's an absolute master at cutting the ring off and trapping fighters. He works off a constant jab.

Good luck to Floyd when he's trapped on the ropes, as many a weaker lesser talent frequently does to him, and his unable to wrestle the far bigger stronger man off as he's getting holes blasted all over his arms and torso.

I suppose maybe he could survive 12 rounds, he certainly ain't winning anything.

Curious. How many fights did you pick Floyd to lose?

It does not matter, Floyd is not winning this one. It is the equivalent of saying Floyd could beat a prime Hagler.

No it is not. Hagler is far better. You keep changing the situation to make yourself appear right. If you had any confidence in your argument you wouldn't need to use intellectual dishonesty.

I am trying to discribe how absurd it is in many ways as possible that Floyd could not beat GGG.

I do not think Hagler was far better than GGG.

Like I've said before, I'm a fan of GGG, but the first MW of any sort of quality that he had to fight , and he struggled. Some (including me I have to say) thought Jacobs won.
This isn't a criticism of GGG , he still closes the ring down well and he still has awesome power, but it puts a bit of perspective as to the level he is at.
To be fair, he is 35 now and maybe, just maybe slowly on the slide.
Put that against Hagler's career and it doesn't stand up to be honest.

Forget putting it career to career, just watch them fight. Hagler was better and anyone who doesn't see that, because it's quite clear, is either a fanboy or not good at judging talent. GGG is a hell of a fighter. But Hagler is an all time great fighter.

[Primo Carnera]

If you base Floyd beating Golovkin on the Jacobs fight - a 6'1 quick middleweight with a reach advantage that fights nothing like Floyd - then equally you have to consider Floyd "losing" to Castilo.

So based on how easily a 5'7, "slow" lightweight was able to pressure Floyd then a 5'11 middleweight with a longer reach, fantastic jab, bone crunching power and a granite strong bonce would absolutely kill him.

Yeah.. I wonder why Floyd never attempted winning a middleweight title.

Jacobs ain't 6ft 1 and GGG is not 5ft 11. I don't care what the "Stats" say, we know they're bollocks.
Jacobs is about 6 foot and I know that's a lot taller than Floyd, but Floyd makes up for that with his defensive skills , reactions and counter punching.
GGG is about 5ft 9 I would say. No doubt Floyd wouldn't have felt the power anything like GGG possessed , but I do believe he could avoid that for 12 rounds.

Regardless of an inch here or there, Jacobs is much bigger than Floyd (height and weight), I don't see how anything can be taken from him in comparison with Floyd. Apart from all the physical/style differences Jacobs had the power to make Golovkin wary of being countered, something little Floyd certainly doesn't have the benefit of.

Contrary to what some people here believe, Golovkin isn't some thick face first brawler that mindlessly chases bods around the ring all night. He's an absolute master at cutting the ring off and trapping fighters. He works off a constant jab.

Good luck to Floyd when he's trapped on the ropes, as many a weaker lesser talent frequently does to him, and his unable to wrestle the far bigger stronger man off as he's getting holes blasted all over his arms and torso.

I suppose maybe he could survive 12 rounds, he certainly ain't winning anything.

Curious. How many fights did you pick Floyd to lose?

It does not matter, Floyd is not winning this one. It is the equivalent of saying Floyd could beat a prime Hagler.

No it is not. Hagler is far better. You keep changing the situation to make yourself appear right. If you had any confidence in your argument you wouldn't need to use intellectual dishonesty.

I am trying to discribe how absurd it is in many ways as possible that Floyd could not beat GGG.

I do not think Hagler was far better than GGG.

Like I've said before, I'm a fan of GGG, but the first MW of any sort of quality that he had to fight , and he struggled. Some (including me I have to say) thought Jacobs won.
This isn't a criticism of GGG , he still closes the ring down well and he still has awesome power, but it puts a bit of perspective as to the level he is at.
To be fair, he is 35 now and maybe, just maybe slowly on the slide.
Put that against Hagler's career and it doesn't stand up to be honest.

Forget putting it career to career, just watch them fight. Hagler was better and anyone who doesn't see that, because it's quite clear, is either a fanboy or not good at judging talent. GGG is a hell of a fighter. But Hagler is an all time great fighter.

So there you have it @Master, you are officially a plum!!

[TitoFan]

I thought people would tire of this "small man vs big man" circus after bumblebee Khan got obliterated by the rhino Canelo.

[Master]

If you base Floyd beating Golovkin on the Jacobs fight - a 6'1 quick middleweight with a reach advantage that fights nothing like Floyd - then equally you have to consider Floyd "losing" to Castilo.

So based on how easily a 5'7, "slow" lightweight was able to pressure Floyd then a 5'11 middleweight with a longer reach, fantastic jab, bone crunching power and a granite strong bonce would absolutely kill him.

Yeah.. I wonder why Floyd never attempted winning a middleweight title.

Jacobs ain't 6ft 1 and GGG is not 5ft 11. I don't care what the "Stats" say, we know they're bollocks.
Jacobs is about 6 foot and I know that's a lot taller than Floyd, but Floyd makes up for that with his defensive skills , reactions and counter punching.
GGG is about 5ft 9 I would say. No doubt Floyd wouldn't have felt the power anything like GGG possessed , but I do believe he could avoid that for 12 rounds.

Regardless of an inch here or there, Jacobs is much bigger than Floyd (height and weight), I don't see how anything can be taken from him in comparison with Floyd. Apart from all the physical/style differences Jacobs had the power to make Golovkin wary of being countered, something little Floyd certainly doesn't have the benefit of.

Contrary to what some people here believe, Golovkin isn't some thick face first brawler that mindlessly chases bods around the ring all night. He's an absolute master at cutting the ring off and trapping fighters. He works off a constant jab.

Good luck to Floyd when he's trapped on the ropes, as many a weaker lesser talent frequently does to him, and his unable to wrestle the far bigger stronger man off as he's getting holes blasted all over his arms and torso.

I suppose maybe he could survive 12 rounds, he certainly ain't winning anything.

Curious. How many fights did you pick Floyd to lose?

It does not matter, Floyd is not winning this one. It is the equivalent of saying Floyd could beat a prime Hagler.

No it is not. Hagler is far better. You keep changing the situation to make yourself appear right. If you had any confidence in your argument you wouldn't need to use intellectual dishonesty.

I am trying to discribe how absurd it is in many ways as possible that Floyd could not beat GGG.

I do not think Hagler was far better than GGG.

Like I've said before, I'm a fan of GGG, but the first MW of any sort of quality that he had to fight , and he struggled. Some (including me I have to say) thought Jacobs won.
This isn't a criticism of GGG , he still closes the ring down well and he still has awesome power, but it puts a bit of perspective as to the level he is at.
To be fair, he is 35 now and maybe, just maybe slowly on the slide.
Put that against Hagler's career and it doesn't stand up to be honest.

Forget putting it career to career, just watch them fight. Hagler was better and anyone who doesn't see that, because it's quite clear, is either a fanboy or not good at judging talent. GGG is a hell of a fighter. But Hagler is an all time great fighter.

So there you have it @Master, you are officially a plum!!

Why because Ron says? Yes because he is the fountain of all knowledge and not just a miserable twat.

[Primo Carnera]

I knew that would get you going! 😂😂

[RedLeatherMafia]

I was on here for a good solid 12-14yrs. I want to say maybe 2004 if I reckon or close to it. Had a stroke and lost my parents and couldn't remember my handle or anything just glad to be back. Had to make a new account which I hope is ok because I can't remember my old email. I still think today at 154 Floyd beats GGG on points but I've never seen such a fan boy fan base. I was not impressed with GGG's win against Jacobs. And I'm not a hater. But this place has always made it so easy to see who the haters are. Everyone hates Floyd. I find it funny. After Canelo beats GGG what will the fan boys say? Am I the only one who thinks GGG is slow like a turtle and Canelo will toy with him. Now I'm not a Canelo fan I'm an unbiased fan.

[RedLeatherMafia]

A Prime Mayweather would have absolutely toyed with GGG, Golovkin would have been chasing shadows for 12 rounds.
Way too fast and clever which is why he never lost.

Not at middleweight he wouldn't. Too small. GGG rips him a new one.

Golovkin wouldn't have laid a glove on him and Floyd would easily boxed his head off because GGG is a sitting duck who never moves his head, the size wouldn't have made a difference

Easy nights work for Mayweather, shame we never got to see it though.

To be fair, Prime Floyd was super featherweight through super lightweight. Floyd doesn't beat GGG at middleweight just like GGG has zero chance against Ward at light heavyweight.

That being said, Floyd at 154 actually beats Golovkin at 160 in a similar fashion that he beat Alvarez at 154.

The clinic that Alvarez is about to put on GGG will validate my statements

👍🏼

[Master]

If Canelo beats GGG I would be shocked but credit to you frozensolid and redleather for making the bold prediction.

[Fenster]

It'll be credit to Canelo pickers if they're proved wrong and admit they're wrong.

All the Golovkin haters (not calling all Canelo pickers haters) will say Canelo is shit if he gets whopped - Floyd's leftovers. Catchweight king. Protected by Oscar. Blah, blah, blah...

[Fenster]

And by the way the bookies don't even make Golovkin a big favourite. The odds are virtually identical to Brook-Spence, which just about everyone accepts is 50-50.

[Memphis]

Floyd doesn't beat GGG at middleweight just like GGG has zero chance against Ward at light heavyweight.

That being said, Floyd at 154 actually beats Golovkin at 160 in a similar fashion that he beat Alvarez at 154.

The clinic that Alvarez is about to put on GGG will validate my statements

So Floyd doesnt beat GGG at middleweight, but he beats a 160lb GGG whilst weighing 154lb? Sounds like one and the same thing no? Unless you're meaning a hypothetical where Floyd is forced to weigh in at 160lb? Forcing a fighter to weigh something he is not comfortable with is a ridiculous idea that will never catch on. Floyd never beat Canelo at 154lbs.

Whichever way you slice this, your statements suck balls.

It never ceases to amaze that you have to either be a hater or a fanboy in some peoples eyes. There's an awful lot of agro here for a seemingly innocuous 'Leave Britney Floyd alone' thread.

Ive said it before and I'll say it again. Floyd is great, there aint one of us here who wont in 20 years time be getting into it with some snot faced prick who thinks the big deal at the time is the best thing since sliced bread. That said, on an even playing field, at a time when this conceivably could happen, I only see one winner and it aint Floyd. Yes little men have moved up to beat big men since time and memorial and history proves this. History also proves that no matter how great they are, their path to championships at higher weight classes are generally very carefully cultivated. If Floyd went after a middle weight title, aint no way he takes aim at GGG.

If we're talking pound for pound. I got no problem with Floyd beating anyone at any time in any weight class.