Where would GGG rank in terms of Canelo's opponents?

[Breakfast Bar]

If Canelo fights GGG right now, how does GGG's accomplishments match up with his previous opponents? I've ranked Canelo's opponents, at the time he fought them, in my own biased order. What number would GGG take on this list?

1. Floyd Mayweather (p4p #1 fighter and top fighter of his era)
2. Miguel Cotto (multi-division champ, HOF fighter, lineal MW champ)
3. Austin Trout (undefeated JMW champ coming off win over Cotto)
4. Erislandy Lara (top JMW contender with several controversial losses, but recognized as highly skilled)
5. Amir Khan (held paper titles in two weight classes and very fast but never fought as heavy as he did for Canelo)

 

[Cheese]

3rd. Behind Cotto but ahead of Trout.

 

[1mic]

@ #2
#1 would be Floyd.

Would be Canelo's 2nd loss. And first time fighting someone his size.

 

[JayElectra]

Behind Mayweather and maybe behind Cotto (I'd lean towards putting him ahead of Cotto considering the relative size difference and Cotto's age). Again, it is still tough to gauge just how special Golovkin is as a fighter until we see him in against better competition.

I'd also add that for all of Khan's shortcomings, his belts at JWW were fairly legitimate as ABC belts go.

 

[JayElectra]

@ #2
#1 would be Floyd.

Would be Canelo's 2nd loss. And first time fighting someone his size.

Trout, Lara, Angulo, and Kirkland were all right around Canelo's size when he fought them. Not that any of them are Golovkin's equal, but Canelo isn't the only at JMW who cuts a fair amount.

 

[Shoemaker]

Behind Mayweather and maybe behind Cotto (I'd lean towards putting him ahead of Cotto considering the relative size difference and Cotto's age). Again, it is still tough to gauge just how special Golovkin is as a fighter until we see him in against better competition.

I'd also add that for all of Khan's shortcomings, his belts at JWW were fairly legitimate as ABC belts go.

This is my take as well. Cotto no doubt is more accomplished, but given his age and size that night, I'd say him and Golovkin rank pretty equally as wins. Golovkin might be a bit better.

 

[Seano]

This is my take as well. Cotto no doubt is more accomplished, but given his age and size that night, I'd say him and Golovkin rank pretty equally as wins. Golovkin might be a bit better.

Cotto is like 1 year older than Golovkin. He'll be older than Cotto was when he fought Canelo by the time the fight gets made.

 

[cuban23]

It absolutely baffles me why anyone would want to bring up Floyd Mayweather as an indication of Canelo's resume...

Canelo has nothing to be proud of mentioning Floyd. He got utterly embarrassed, humiliated, exposed and really shut out by a fighter that was 13 years older than him and clearly on the downside of his physical prime. That's not a performance anyone should be proud of. So I don't see why it needs to be brought.

The only fights that matter on a resume are the ones he won.

Forget the Lara fight (I won't go into that one), what you're really comparing here is whether a victory of Golovkin is superior to a victory of Miguel Cotto, who I believe is Canelo's biggest victory.

Is beating Golovkin superior to beating Miguel Cotto? I would say absolutely.

 

[Seano]

It absolutely baffles me why anyone would want to bring up Floyd Mayweather as an indication of Canelo's resume...

Canelo has nothing to be proud of mentioning Floyd. He got utterly embarrassed, humiliated, exposed and really shut out by a fighter that was 13 years older than him and clearly on the downside of his physical prime. That's not a performance anyone should be proud of. So I don't see why it needs to be brought.

The only fights that matter on a resume are the ones he won.

Forget the Lara fight (I won't go into that one), what you're really comparing here is whether a victory of Golovkin is superior to a victory of Miguel Cotto, who I believe is Canelo's biggest victory.

Is beating Golovkin superior to beating Miguel Cotto? I would say absolutely.

The thread is about Canelo's quality of opposition, not his best performances.

 

[Shoemaker]

Cotto is like 1 year older than Golovkin. He'll be older than Cotto was when he fought Canelo by the time the fight gets made.

True, but Cottos been through the ringer more times than Golovkin.

 

[cuban23]

The thread is about Canelo's quality of opposition, not his best performances.

Yes, and I'm saying that beating Golovkin would rank no.1 on Canelo's resume. Currently the number one spot belongs to Cotto. If he beats Golovkin, then that's his biggest win and that's the win he's going to be known for.

 

[Seano]

Yes, and I'm saying that beating Golovkin would rank no.1 on Canelo's resume. Currently the number one spot belongs to Cotto. If he beats Golovkin, then that's his biggest win and that's the win he's going to be known for.

Sure but that's not really what the thread is about. Mayweather is more accomplished than Golovkin, without question. If Canelo beat Golovkin, it'd be his best win, but it wouldn't be his best opponent.

 

[JayElectra]

Cotto is like 1 year older than Golovkin. He'll be older than Cotto was when he fought Canelo by the time the fight gets made.

One is far more shopworn than the other.

 

[Seano]

One is far more shopworn than the other.

Maybe. Look at how Cotto looked vs Geale though. Every bit the destroyer Golovkin looked vs the same guy. When Golovkin fights someone on the level of prime Manny Pacquiao, then we can talk.

 

[Shael]

Behind Mayweather and maybe behind Cotto (I'd lean towards putting him ahead of Cotto considering the relative size difference and Cotto's age). Again, it is still tough to gauge just how special Golovkin is as a fighter until we see him in against better competition.

I'd also add that for all of Khan's shortcomings, his belts at JWW were fairly legitimate as ABC belts go.

Well said. All things considered I'd put him ahead of Cotto.

 

[JayElectra]

Maybe. Look at how Cotto looked vs Geale though. Every bit the destroyer Golovkin looked vs the same guy. When Golovkin fights someone on the level of prime Manny Pacquiao, then we can talk.

I didn't mean to suggest Cotto was well past it or anything, but this wasn't prime Cotto at his absolute peak weight (well, I guess there is a bit of an argument there as some would suggest he looked his best at around 154), either (and Cotto is clearly a naturally smaller man than Canelo).

 

[nac386]

Golovkin is clearly the better middleweight fighter between him and Cotto. There is a reason why Canelo was the favorite against Miguel but the underdog against GGG.

 

[Seano]

Golovkin is clearly the better middleweight fighter between him and Cotto. There is a reason why Canelo was the favorite against Miguel but the underdog against GGG.

Well, again, the thread isn't about that. Its not asking who Canelo's best middleweight win would be.

Cotto accomplished a lot more than Golovkin has.

 

[Shoemaker]

If we aren't taking the context of the fights into account, then Cottos resume is undeniably better than Golovkins.

Otherwise, I'd stand by saying that Cotto has been through more grueling fights and TKOs than Golovkin - and was fighting above his ideal weight - and I can't discount that it had an effect when he faced the biggest guy he had his entire career.

 

[nac386]

Well, again, the thread isn't about that. Its not asking who Canelo's best middleweight win would be.

Cotto accomplished a lot more than Golovkin has.

Of course he has. If we are ranking Canelo's opponents based on their all-time status then Miguel is only second to Floyd.

But if we are ranking Canelo's opponents based on how meaningful the victory would be, beating GGG would mean more. Canelo was supposed to beat Cotto.