Comments Thread For: Golovkin's Promoter Aims To Secure Jacobs Before Purse Bid

[MC Hammer]

The win over Quillin looks more and more irrelevant every day. If you are comparing CV , GGG over Quillin all day.

How is the win looking irrelevant when Quillen hasn't fought since? Its not like he's been losing afterward like most of the guys ggg has built his resume from. That one win is better than any of the guys ggg has beaten thus far. I'm not saying quillens resume was better than golovkin, but that win is better than any of golovkin's

[LetOutTheCage]

How is the win looking irrelevant when Quillen hasn't fought since? Its not like he's been losing afterward like most of the guys ggg has built his resume from. That one win is better than any of the guys ggg has beaten thus far. I'm not saying quillens resume was better than golovkin, but that win is better than any of golovkin's

Not so sure about that, Murray should have wins over Strum and Martinez. I heard he should have got the nod against Abraham as well. Quillen has what? a win over a washed up Rosado, a win over a well past it Winky Wright and a draw with Andy Lee. Is he really better than Murray?

[MC Hammer]

Holy smokes this delusion - if DJ beat GGG, someone with no professional losses, a 300 and something - 6 record in the amateurs, never knocked down professionally and never knocked out professionally, the MW considered the de facto lineal champion, 3 belt holder, a MW so terrifying he has been avoided by several boxers, including two future ATGs...How, how, tell me, is that not a career defining win?

Amateur records don't count in the pros. He's beaten a bunch of nobodys. No ATGs have ducked him, and the assumption that he has been avoided doesn't matter in the record books. Holds three belts in the weakest MW division in over 2 decades. His best win is a WW who had two months to gain 13lbs of muscle, leaving relatively little time to actually train.

I'm pretty sure he will not be talked about 5 years after retirement. He's a good fighter but doesn't rank enough to be a career defining win. Won't make Danny a name to casuals, and won't boost his pay grade. What Danny should do is go after Saunders and play hard ball with that one belt. ggg needs it and for him it is equal to the 3 he has.

[MC Hammer]

Not so sure about that, Murray should have wins over Strum and Martinez. I heard he should have got the nod against Abraham as well. Quillen has what? a win over a washed up Rosado, a win over a well past it Winky Wright and a draw with Andy Lee. Is he really better than Murray?

If he "should've had" them then he should've beaten them well enough that a robbery would be clear. Murray has been losing since including to a past it Groves. Quillen wins and was a former champ. He's better than Murray and any of ggg's other wins. Except maybe the WW, but the WW isn't made for 160

[Xoahr]

Amateur records don't count in the pros. He's beaten a bunch of nobodys. No ATGs have ducked him, and the assumption that he has been avoided doesn't matter in the record books. Holds three belts in the weakest MW division in over 2 decades. His best win is a WW who had two months to gain 13lbs of muscle, leaving relatively little time to actually train.

I'm pretty sure he will not be talked about 5 years after retirement. He's a good fighter but doesn't rank enough to be a career defining win. Won't make Danny a name to casuals, and won't boost his pay grade. What Danny should do is go after Saunders and play hard ball with that one belt. ggg needs it and for him it is equal to the 3 he has.

Sorry dude, but you're being objectively unfair. Canelo's ducked him, and Canelo will certainly become an ATG. He hasn't beaten the greatest competition, I'll agree with you on that, but it's the manner in which he's beaten them, rather than just having the names. It's a complete and brutal domination, of fighters which aren't elite, but are more established than veterans or gatekeepers. If Golovkin wasn't around, and Canelo had beaten them, there wouldn't be this much criticism of the names on his record. It's the complete and utter domination which marks Golovkin out as an elite fighter; it's not his fault that there's nobody at MW with either the cajones or ability to touch him.

Any fan of boxing, as a sport rather than fan of boxers (who always seem irrational, overtly subjective, and having this cult of personality), would want to see Jacobs, Saunders and Canelo v Golovkin (because it would cement him as the absolute best at MW without any criticism), and would then want to see Golovkin test himself further. You cannot blame Golovkin for wanting to cement his legacy at 160 without giving any room for criticism.

[MC Hammer]

Sorry dude, but you're being objectively unfair. Canelo's ducked him, and Canelo will certainly become an ATG. He hasn't beaten the greatest competition, I'll agree with you on that, but it's the manner in which he's beaten them, rather than just having the names. It's a complete and brutal domination, of fighters which aren't elite, but are more established than veterans or gatekeepers. If Golovkin wasn't around, and Canelo had beaten them, there wouldn't be this much criticism of the names on his record. It's the complete and utter domination which marks Golovkin out as an elite fighter; it's not his fault that there's nobody at MW with either the cajones or ability to touch him.

Any fan of boxing, as a sport rather than fan of boxers (who always seem irrational, overtly subjective, and having this cult of personality), would want to see Jacobs, Saunders and Canelo v Golovkin (because it would cement him as the absolute best at MW without any criticism), and would then want to see Golovkin test himself further. You cannot blame Golovkin for wanting to cement his legacy at 160 without giving any room for criticism.

I don't know how Canelo becomes an ATG when his best win is Cotto or Lara followed by Trout. He can't beat the best at 154 either.

ggg's resume would be trash no matter who else has those names. Especially at 34 he's beaten what 2 former or current champs? Dominating? Yes. But wasn't Broner doing the same 130? Dominating okay opposition doesn't do much for you.

As far as seeing the fights, yes we want to see them, but speaking on Jacobs end, there is no incentive to take less than what you're worth here. You do that for a De La Hoya, Pacquioa, Mayweather or Klitchko (before Fury). Beating them makes a star of you. beating ggg nets you some belts, but he is a payday fight. Like Canelo. I wouldn't advise anyone take less than they're worth for him either, and he is way more visible than ggg. He can stay at 160 all he wants, but if he wants real fights to cement himself, they better get a little more flexible in negotiations

[HeroBando]

I don't know how Canelo becomes an ATG when his best win is Cotto or Lara followed by Trout. He can't beat the best at 154 either.

ggg's resume would be trash no matter who else has those names. Especially at 34 he's beaten what 2 former or current champs? Dominating? Yes. But wasn't Broner doing the same 130? Dominating okay opposition doesn't do much for you.

As far as seeing the fights, yes we want to see them, but speaking on Jacobs end, there is no incentive to take less than what you're worth here. You do that for a De La Hoya, Pacquioa, Mayweather or Klitchko (before Fury). Beating them makes a star of you. beating ggg nets you some belts, but he is a payday fight. Like Canelo. I wouldn't advise anyone take less than they're worth for him either, and he is way more visible than ggg. He can stay at 160 all he wants, but if he wants real fights to cement himself, they better get a little more flexible in negotiations

What's Jacobs worth then?

[BattlingNelson]

Im only marginally interested in what K2 has to say. What I really want to know, is how Jacobs team looks at it.

[BattlingNelson]

I don't know how Canelo becomes an ATG when his best win is Cotto or Lara followed by Trout. He can't beat the best at 154 either.

ggg's resume would be trash no matter who else has those names. Especially at 34 he's beaten what 2 former or current champs? Dominating? Yes. But wasn't Broner doing the same 130? Dominating okay opposition doesn't do much for you.

As far as seeing the fights, yes we want to see them, but speaking on Jacobs end, there is no incentive to take less than what you're worth here. You do that for a De La Hoya, Pacquioa, Mayweather or Klitchko (before Fury). Beating them makes a star of you. beating ggg nets you some belts, but he is a payday fight. Like Canelo. I wouldn't advise anyone take less than they're worth for him either, and he is way more visible than ggg. He can stay at 160 all he wants, but if he wants real fights to cement himself, they better get a little more flexible in negotiations

Jacobs knew that a 75/25 split was stipulated in the wba rules when he fought for their trinket. If he wasnt happy about it, he wouldnt have pursued the GGG fight. That he is now *****ing is just lame.

[Eastcoast]

Jacobs knew that a 75/25 split was stipulated in the wba rules when he fought for their trinket. If he wasnt happy about it, he wouldnt have pursued the GGG fight. That he is now *****ing is just lame.

Yep. Jacobs could've dropped that interim belt a year ago and became the mandatory for BJS's WBO title that he wants so badly. But he was having too much fun calling himself a champion to risk falling short.