People need to make up their mind about jabs.

[OldTerry]

It's NOT a power shot.

A power shot is one of the following:

A Straight Right/Straight Left (which is NOT a jab)

Overhand Right/Overhand Left (which is NOT a jab)

Any body shot

Uppercut

Hook

Cross

That's all. A jab is a jab FFS!

You are still using semantics in an attempt to deny a Jab can be a KO punch or bone breaking punch.

[Combat Talk Radio]

I've never seen anyone say that on this board, but that's a pretty damn big stretch.

Wlad looked terrible that night. Actually, that was a below average performance by both guys. From what I remember, one of the lowest amount of punches thrown over 12 rounds in a title fight.

That was the narrative days after the fight, all over the place.

[Combat Talk Radio]

You are still using semantics in an attempt to deny a Jab can be a KO punch or bone breaking punch.

It doesn't matter. It lands, or it doesnt.

[OldTerry]

It doesn't matter. It lands, or it doesnt.

Of course it matters. Armature boxing you're right but in the pros it matters.

[Ochoa780]

You said:

"Landing a ton of jabs or a lack there of doesnt necessarily mean you're controlling the fight or not"

So answer the question. Since Briggs relied on his jab to nullify Foreman, going by your statement, Briggs lost. Right?

What I meant is that a jab doesnt necessarily mean you are controlling the fight, or arent controlling the fight. Each fight/jab is different this isnt a black and white argument.. jabs do count different because this isnt the amateurs, a solid sparse jab could control the fight more than 50 jabs a round that do nothing. Therefore being more valuable

[Combat Talk Radio]

Of course it matters. Armature boxing you're right but in the pros it matters.

What I meant is that a jab doesnt necessarily mean you are controlling the fight, or arent controlling the fight. Each fight/jab is different this isnt a black and white argument.. jabs do count different because this isnt the amateurs, a solid sparse jab could control the fight more than 50 jabs a round that do nothing. Therefore being more valuable

"At the end of the day" we need to be consistent.

Canelo/G 1 - the narrative was that "all Golovkin did was jab"

Canelo/G 2 - the narrative was "Golovkin's jab is like a power punch, that's why he won"

That's just ONE example, but it's the best one. We can't run around here dismissing the jab in one fight and then say it was the reason for winning in another. That's hypocrisy.

[OldTerry]

"At the end of the day" we need to be consistent.

Canelo/G 1 - the narrative was that "all Golovkin did was jab"

Canelo/G 2 - the narrative was "Golovkin's jab is like a power punch, that's why he won"

That's just ONE example, but it's the best one. We can't run around here dismissing the jab in one fight and then say it was the reason for winning in another. That's hypocrisy.

I do believe the first Canelo GGG fight was a win for GGG. I also believe Canelo won the second fight despite GGG's jab.

[KillaMane26]

It depends..... In the fight what are u comparing those jabs to?

GGG scored points with his jab in the second fight but Canelo landed the significant shots.

Since it's a Pro fight of course you gonna lean towards Canelo

But then with Floyd etc... His opponent ain't landing nothing ( if anything) good to compare to those points he racked up with his jab.

My 2cents

[Bain01D]

Lost the whole post when you used KSI v Paul as an example

[Ochoa780]

"At the end of the day" we need to be consistent.

Canelo/G 1 - the narrative was that "all Golovkin did was jab"

Canelo/G 2 - the narrative was "Golovkin's jab is like a power punch, that's why he won"

That's just ONE example, but it's the best one. We can't run around here dismissing the jab in one fight and then say it was the reason for winning in another. That's hypocrisy.

That's impossible lol we arent robots. People have their own opinions feelings and biases, just like in day to day life we are all gonna see things differently. That's the idea behind 3 judges to try to get a majority in case one judge sees things differently

I do believe the first Canelo GGG fight was a win for GGG. I also believe Canelo won the second fight despite GGG's jab.

I agree even though the first fight I scored much closer. The jab seemed to keep canelo timid the first time around in the second fight he refused to be pushed back by the jab and pressed the action more