Who do you think won the Jacobs GGG fight?
- Thread starter Steve-French
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2003
- Messages
- 2,245
- Reaction score
- 7
GGG won that fight.
Jacobs COULD win it, he certainly had the tools, was faster, better combos,...but decided to play safe and not engage fullt out. Sorry, not done enough.
Also funny how people who think Leonard lost to Hagler (lol) now give it to the Jakobs. Go figure...
Jacobs COULD win it, he certainly had the tools, was faster, better combos,...but decided to play safe and not engage fullt out. Sorry, not done enough.
Also funny how people who think Leonard lost to Hagler (lol) now give it to the Jakobs. Go figure...
It was a close and competitive fight. Based on Golovkin's aggression, the knockdown and cleaner punches I had him winning. Will need to watch the fight again, Jacobs did great but felt that Golovkin was more in control.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Messages
- 133,661
- Reaction score
- 32,528
I had Leonard beating Hagler.
Personally, I felt like Golovkin was the guy who wasn't doing enough but its not like either guy dominated.
The simple truth is that it was close enough that scoring style actually factored. There were a lot of rounds where if you like the boxer, you could have Jacobs edging it while the argument could be made that Golovkin was "pushing the pace."
For me, I felt like Danny Jacobs made it a Danny Jacobs fight in a lot of rounds. Golovkin looked frustrated, confused and was reduced to stealing rounds in the last 30 seconds of fights (sort of like Leonard, eh). I think lots of people were scoring some rounds based on who the bigger puncher was supposed to be too. Golovkin is the sort of fighter that fans wait to land one shot and then thats all they remember from the round.
On the other hand, there were a few times where I was really looking for Jacobs to let his hands go. To me, it didn't seem like GOlovkin had an answer when Jacobs was able to back him up. I was surprised at the lack of countering ability by Golovkin in that fight.
Anyway, for me, a rematch of this is the fight to be made at MW.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Messages
- 133,661
- Reaction score
- 32,528
And I think thats what it boils down to. Who you and I and everyone else thought was controlling the pace of that fight. For me, that was not a typical Golovkin performance.
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2014
- Messages
- 25,943
- Reaction score
- 6,957
It wasn't a typical Golovkin fight at all. But I've also never seen Danny Jacobs walk backwards for 80% of a fight. They both looked like they had the other doing something they don't typically do.
I would have liked to see both of them busier at times. They weren't letting their hands go the way I hoped. But when they did, it was fireworks. They both had more success when they let their hands go. They were landing at a fairly high percentage.
In some ways, I think they both had too much respect for each other in there. It was a very good fight, with stretches that were a little bit too cautious.
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2014
- Messages
- 25,943
- Reaction score
- 6,957
If Jacobs won by one round, that means you scored it 7-5. If you scored it 7-5, Jacobs still won even having been knocked down.
7-5 = 115-113
7-5 with a knockdown = 114-113
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2013
- Messages
- 17,252
- Reaction score
- 4,112
Edit: never mind, @The Can Opener already lived up to his namesake.
I scored it 115-112 to Jacobs.
I thought he landed more consistently in the majority of rounds, particularly to the body, which has seemed to go unnoticed. I've heard people say Jacobs wasn't landing and was shoe shining a bit, but you can never say that when the fighter is consistetly countering to the head and body, pushing his opponent across the ring in the process. The two don't commute, Jacobs was landing and either stopping Golovkin in his tracks when he did lead, or pushing Golovkin back across the ring with his counters. You can't do that if all your shots are deflecting off the gloves, not against a Golovkin.
GGG rallied in a lot of rounds, but ultimately he was outboxed and tended to come off worse in a lot of the big exchanges. When he got up close he did nothing, and showed that he struggles to work without proper leverage. Jacobs schooled him on the inside and was regularly hitting him to the head and body whilst GGG tried to hold or, lock up with his left and land a big inside right hand.
Jacobs was just more adaptable and the speed difference really mattered. Jacobs was able to chain body shots into his attack so effortlessly, and he was quick enough not to get punished for it. On the other hand, GGG who is known for his body work, was not able to work there at all, despite being up close for a lot of the fight. He likes to throw with specific form, and seems preprogrammed in that way, he's expertly conditioned on throwing power shots. This means he struggles to generate the same flow and power when he is having to trade up close and in the pocket, whereas Jacobs could lean and use upper body movement to fire off combinations as he's slipping and moving. He had that in his locker and it proved pivotal.
I did think that GGG looked heavy legged in the second half of the fight too, and his activity noticeably dropped over the 12 round distance. He appears set in his way when it comes to defense, he chooses to shell up when combinations come at him and is fine to ride them out without any head movement. He takes a lot on the gloves because of his and limits damage, but he's giving his opponents a few seconds to tee off on him. He has a pretty rigid style and I don't see that changing, but I do see more fighters looking to take advantage of that, especially as his legs slow.
I thought he landed more consistently in the majority of rounds, particularly to the body, which has seemed to go unnoticed. I've heard people say Jacobs wasn't landing and was shoe shining a bit, but you can never say that when the fighter is consistetly countering to the head and body, pushing his opponent across the ring in the process. The two don't commute, Jacobs was landing and either stopping Golovkin in his tracks when he did lead, or pushing Golovkin back across the ring with his counters. You can't do that if all your shots are deflecting off the gloves, not against a Golovkin.
GGG rallied in a lot of rounds, but ultimately he was outboxed and tended to come off worse in a lot of the big exchanges. When he got up close he did nothing, and showed that he struggles to work without proper leverage. Jacobs schooled him on the inside and was regularly hitting him to the head and body whilst GGG tried to hold or, lock up with his left and land a big inside right hand.
Jacobs was just more adaptable and the speed difference really mattered. Jacobs was able to chain body shots into his attack so effortlessly, and he was quick enough not to get punished for it. On the other hand, GGG who is known for his body work, was not able to work there at all, despite being up close for a lot of the fight. He likes to throw with specific form, and seems preprogrammed in that way, he's expertly conditioned on throwing power shots. This means he struggles to generate the same flow and power when he is having to trade up close and in the pocket, whereas Jacobs could lean and use upper body movement to fire off combinations as he's slipping and moving. He had that in his locker and it proved pivotal.
I did think that GGG looked heavy legged in the second half of the fight too, and his activity noticeably dropped over the 12 round distance. He appears set in his way when it comes to defense, he chooses to shell up when combinations come at him and is fine to ride them out without any head movement. He takes a lot on the gloves because of his and limits damage, but he's giving his opponents a few seconds to tee off on him. He has a pretty rigid style and I don't see that changing, but I do see more fighters looking to take advantage of that, especially as his legs slow.
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2016
- Messages
- 5,430
- Reaction score
- 77
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2017
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 0
I agree that Lemiuex doing it was wrong to but the fact of the matter is...like you said..no one gave a fuck. The problem wasn't necessarily that he came in big, because fighters do that all the time and playing with weight in combat sports is common. The real problem lies in the fact that the fight was a unification fight for all of the belts. So, Golovkin's team was HELD to a standard in order to unify a division that the other fighter was not and accomplished this in a sort of underhanded manner. Instead of admitting he wasn't after that belt, he used it as a tool to limit another fighters weight capacity. However, that is not to say that Golovkin may have decided to weigh in heavier for the fight had both teams agreed to some term. But there should have (or could have) been a rehydration clause, which I believe is Tom Loefflor's fault and the reason that Jacob's went this route. Can't necessarily blame Jacob's for looking for a competitive edge, but to deny that he did it in a manner that could be perceived as kind of janky is wrong. Golovkin was there to defend the belts he thought Jacobs was there to get and therefore was bound to the rules of the sanctioning body and at the last minute realized Jacobs was not bound to the same standards he was.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2017
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 0
Don't think he was saying they scored it as a whole. He was saying I believe that the knockdown was the deciding factor. I could be wrong, but I know it was on my score cards.
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2012
- Messages
- 21,831
- Reaction score
- 21,432
Is it me or are fans of Easter European fighters extremely biased? I've always liked GGG, but I'm getting the vibe that he has some pretty psycho fans.
That being said I'm not a fan of fighters I'm a fan of fighting. I like to watch combat sports to see who the best is, not to shake my pom-poms over some dude with his shirt off. It was a close fight, but I just don't see how GGG got the nod. Maybe I should rewatch it.
That being said I'm not a fan of fighters I'm a fan of fighting. I like to watch combat sports to see who the best is, not to shake my pom-poms over some dude with his shirt off. It was a close fight, but I just don't see how GGG got the nod. Maybe I should rewatch it.
- Joined
- May 8, 2005
- Messages
- 19,348
- Reaction score
- 7,771
you're probably right. i've just seen a bunch of posts from people saying golovkin deserved the victory because he knocked him down, which is kind of silly.
You are right but as you know the fight is scored round by round, what it really comes down to is who you think won more of those close rounds. The knockdown was one of the main factors in Golovkin winning.No way this was a robbery as some are suggesting, either could have won but I felt the judges got it right not just saying that because I'm a Golovkin fan. It reminds me of the Ward and Kovalev fight, there have been comparisons made by others. There has gotta be a rematch at some point.
they never had rehydration clauses in the past and there really is no basis to do it now. you weigh in 24 hours before a fight and if you can gain 20 pounds legally, and it becomes a distinct advantage for you, too bad for those that cant
the thought of having to weigh-in twice, specifically aimed at penalizing those that were blessed with a body that can rehydrate more than others, is just dumb
the thought of having to weigh-in twice, specifically aimed at penalizing those that were blessed with a body that can rehydrate more than others, is just dumb
