Jip wrote:canelo would get brutalized by either one, the small guy would have no chance against those big power hitters.
I’m far less confident now about this being true than I was yesterday.
Jip wrote:one of the best fights i have ever seen.
The only thing remarkable about last night’s fight was the fact that Golovkin was being pushed to his limits, otherwise it was an overly cautious affair, where the work-rate was lacklustre and the skill-set on display wasn’t particularly refined.
For sure, seeing something unusual, a rare occurrence, is always intriguing, but would you feel the same if you watched precisely the same fight between two anonymous names (instead of Jacobs and Golovkin)?
Jip wrote:the knock down wasnt a knock down, danny went down because his legs werent placed well, but not of ggg's punch.
According to the rule book, it was technically a knockdown, but I see your point and in some way, I also endorse it.
Jip wrote:i predicted it wrong having ggg as the winner, jacobs won

but it was close
I technically predicted the “official” outcome and I also correctly predicted that GGG would be far more cautious and defensively-responsible against Jacobs than he was against Brook. That being said, I expected Golovkin to dominate on the scorecards, but this was wrong, since it clearly didn’t happen… and a decent argument can be made to claim that Jacobs deserved to gain the nod. The decision was no robbery though.
Jip wrote:i want rematch, a triology of jacobs and ggg, this was great boxing!!
I want a rematch, just to clear-up any doubts. It wasn’t “great boxing” though.
My fear is that GGG faces Saunders, Canelo and makes an interim mandatory defence of his belts before facing Jacobs (possibly next year)… and if he’s a year older, he may struggle to repeat his victory if "father time" is catching up with him.