"Finessing" your way through the fight

[NaijaD]

So in your mind as long as a guy puts up better stats in a round must mean he won the round?

All im saying is show some heart and stand by what you scored during the fight. If you gave a guy the round while watching the fight live then stand by it. No need to look at the stats after to see if your scoring is right.

You scored the fight for Jacobs so in your mind he was the deserved winner not GGG.

A lot of the rounds were close, I thought Danny won and scored it for him but I just feel like there is more evidence supporting a Golovkin victory. That leads me to think that Golovkin was more deserving. Of course if we didn't have compubox then there wouldn't be as much doubt in my mind about my scorecard.

When the decision was announced I was sad for Danny but not an ounce of me thought "robbery"

[KillaMane26]

Man u can't expect everyone to get the W the same way....remember Casuals boxing is about strategy and tactics as much as landing punches.

SRL vs Hagler comes to mind.

Another thing....the double standard
I bet if Lomencheko moves up and finessed his way to a W. No problem

[boxinghead530]

A lot of the rounds were close, I thought Danny won and scored it for him but I just feel like there is more evidence supporting a Golovkin victory. That leads me to think that Golovkin was more deserving. Of course if we didn't have compubox then there wouldn't be as much doubt in my mind about my scorecard.

When the decision was announced I was sad for Danny but not an ounce of me thought "robbery"

Dang you are one conflicted dude. Just say you don't know who won. Again you say you thought Danny won and scored it for him. But you think GGG is more deserving of the win. lol lol lol lol.

Do yourself a favor and stop trying to score fights and just watch instead. You obviously don't know how to score a fight if you score a fight for one guy but think the other is more deserving of the win.

[NaijaD]

Dang you are one conflicted dude. Just say you don't know who won. Again you say you thought Danny won and scored it for him. But you think GGG is more deserving of the win. lol lol lol lol.

Do yourself a favor and stop trying to score fights and just watch instead. You obviously don't know how to score a fight if you score a fight for one guy but think the other is more deserving of the win.

Do yourself a favour and stop trying to earn a psychology degree online..... there were other posters that had a change of heart once they owned up to their biases, saw the punch stats and considered Jacobs overachieving performance. They scored it for Jacobs but upon further evidence they felt Golovkin won, Jozef and MDPopescu are examples of this. If I watched the fight again considering these things then I'd probably end up scoring it for Golovkin.

If you don't understand what I'm saying then move on and don't try to sound like some kind of expert. You're as qualified to score a fight as I am so sit your ass down somewhere. I'm not here for any of these bs troll arguments and you're the only one that can seem to understand what I've posted so maybe you're not as smart as you think. C- troll attempt.

[MDPopescu]

Do yourself a favour and stop trying to earn a psychology degree online..... there were other posters that had a change of heart once they owned up to their biases, saw the punch stats and considered Jacobs overachieving performance. They scored it for Jacobs but upon further evidence they felt Golovkin won, Jozef and MDPopescu are examples of this. If I watched the fight again considering these things then I'd probably end up scoring it for Golovkin.

If you don't understand what I'm saying then move on and don't try to sound like some kind of expert. You're as qualified to score a fight as I am so sit your ass down somewhere. I'm not here for any of these bs troll arguments and you're the only one that can seem to understand what I've posted so maybe you're not as smart as you think. C- troll attempt.

I don't pretend I'm an "expert", I didn't score the fight.
I only said that I had the impression that Jacobs strategically dominated and that he won... I didn't re-watched the fight either. The punch stats didn't make "feel" that Golovkin won.

[M Bison]

This is the new term you are going to become familiar with.

Thurman uses it a lot, when he describes how Floyd used to work his way through fights. Then, Thurman used it to describe his own performance against Garcia, particularly the second half of the fight.

And I heard Jacobs trainer use it to.

It sounds good, doesn't it? "Finessing". Kinda makes you think of something being done with supreme skill.

You wanna know what it really means? What is it a euphemism for?

It's when your game plan is cautious, when you try to play the system, when you circle the ring and be awkward and flurry out, especially in the last 30 seconds. It's when you don't want to take risks, but are hoping the judges will fall for what it is you do, which you seem to think works on a higher skill level to what your opponent (invariably a flat-flooted plodder) is doing.

Let's get REAL for a second.

Jacobs was tight, he was cautious, he was wild, he was off balance, he hung on in there, he was awkward but he got controlled by a smaller, older fighter who he clearly outweighed by a weight class. Golovkin was in control of that fight, Jacobs couldn't really break the defence of a guy who didn't need to run around the ring to avoid punches. Golovkin's jab was on point, his defence was on point, he had the added advantage of a KD, he hurt Jacobs other times too. I'm going to blow your mind - Golovkin OUT-BOXED Jacobs, who was graded on a curve because expectations of him were so low.

But as long as people keep being seduced by the idea that the fighter on the backfoot "finessing" his way through the fight is the more skillful, the more you are going to see fighters play the system, hoping to eke out tight decisions.

I see what you're saying and I agree with it.

I'd like to bring up Hagler Vs. Leonard as an example of why Jacobs clearly didn't deserve a win, you look at Leonard how he fought off the backfoot, Leonard was flashy and so active, Leonard often always outworked his opponents with throwing in barrages huge numbers and he made his opponents swing wildly and miss. Leonard is a true showman who can really put his stamp on fighting on the backfoot, Jacobs had none of what Leonard had.

That is what saw Leonard deserve a win over Hagler, albeit some dispute the result I don't.

When you're eating shots whilst on the backfoot and not landing the crisper, flashier shots then what gives you the right to say you deserved to be the victor?

I scored the fight whilst I agree it was competitive and a good fight to watch I don't agree with the judges having it as close as they did, in fact, I think Golovkin clearly won this, just imagine If It was Floyd Mayweather doing this to someone a lot of people would say this is a routine win, but because it is Golovkin he doesn't get the same treatment.

[NaijaD]

I don't pretend I'm an "expert", I didn't score the fight.
I only said that I had the impression that Jacobs strategically dominated and that he won... I didn't re-watched the fight either. The punch stats didn't make "feel" that Golovkin won.

My bad then, I know there were others that had a similar feeling to what I said.... but anyway I scored it for Jacobs but most of the evidence points to a victory for Golovkin.

[-PBP-]

This is the new term you are going to become familiar with.

Thurman uses it a lot, when he describes how Floyd used to work his way through fights. Then, Thurman used it to describe his own performance against Garcia, particularly the second half of the fight.

And I heard Jacobs trainer use it to.

It sounds good, doesn't it? "Finessing". Kinda makes you think of something being done with supreme skill.

You wanna know what it really means? What is it a euphemism for?

It's when your game plan is cautious, when you try to play the system, when you circle the ring and be awkward and flurry out, especially in the last 30 seconds. It's when you don't want to take risks, but are hoping the judges will fall for what it is you do, which you seem to think works on a higher skill level to what your opponent (invariably a flat-flooted plodder) is doing.

Let's get REAL for a second.

Jacobs was tight, he was cautious, he was wild, he was off balance, he hung on in there, he was awkward but he got controlled by a smaller, older fighter who he clearly outweighed by a weight class. Golovkin was in control of that fight, Jacobs couldn't really break the defence of a guy who didn't need to run around the ring to avoid punches. Golovkin's jab was on point, his defence was on point, he had the added advantage of a KD, he hurt Jacobs other times too. I'm going to blow your mind - Golovkin OUT-BOXED Jacobs, who was graded on a curve because expectations of him were so low.

But as long as people keep being seduced by the idea that the fighter on the backfoot "finessing" his way through the fight is the more skillful, the more you are going to see fighters play the system, hoping to eke out tight decisions.

Let's look at Hearns for example. He didn't come out try and use his reach and box Hagler. He slugged it out with him and paid the price. Granted, Hearns is a legend, looked at favorably by boxing fans and that fight is a classic that will be remembered even after we die.

But, would the boxing fanbase embrace a fighter today that went out like Hearns? Bradley went all out against Provodnikov and got booed after the decision. Paul Williams went hard after Sergio and his treat was a meme and a several pages of a similar "Broner be like Thread". Not to mention what a devastating loss would do for your potential earnings down the road.

Ultimately, a fighter needs to do what gives him the best chance to win and continue to make money in this sport. There's a negotiation between fighter and fan. A tug of war battle. "How much action am I willing to give you while not hurting myself in the long run?"

[M Bison]

I don't pretend I'm an "expert", I didn't score the fight.
I only said that I had the impression that Jacobs strategically dominated and that he won... I didn't re-watched the fight either. The punch stats didn't make "feel" that Golovkin won.

I did score the fight, and I saw it as a 8-4 or 9-3 type of fight with GGG winning.

1 to 5
Obvious Golovkin rounds, he controlled the distance and his jab would land at will, and in two of the rounds he really shook Jacobs up.

6-7
Jacobs finally ups his work-rate and starts getting the better of GGG.

8
I had this even, but realistically I think It could go either way... sure, but I scored it even to give Jacobs the benefit of the doubt because I felt like GGG just did better in that round landing his jab and the power shots he got in were better than Jacobs.

9
Golovkin takes it, sort of similar round to the 8th where Jacobs is doing some work but GGG is just doing the better stuff with landing very good uppercuts and working his jab in.

10
Jacobs takes it with his work-rate, almost seemed like GGG was taking a breather in this one due to him not really doing much at all in the 10th.

11-12 (champ rds)
Both to GGG, 11th rd Jacobs does literally nothing he just gets outworked and when he does try to go for GGG he is swinging wild and missing. 12th rd we see them both tee off on each other but GGG work is cleaner and overall better, GGG outworks him in both the championship rounds and outlands him in both of the championship rounds.

117-111

[Dr Rumack]

Jacobs used the exact same strategy as Martin Murray, which I always thought was a valiant effort. He just happens to be more skillful fighter than Martin Murray, a notch above him in athleticism, handspeed, and power too. But it was the same strategy. Circle, step in, flurry, and step out. Don't engage Golovkin at the edge of range, because his gauge of distance is too good. But take him on in the pocket, where the range doesn't seem to suit him.

As for Danny being graded on a curve, I'm not so sure. I need to rewatch it. Live I thought he landed cleaner shots in more rounds. But live you can count a lot of stuff that actually landed on the arms or gloves too.