BoxRec

crusader wrote:Funny, because I remember before the fight was signed how certain posters were going on about Jacobs being Golovkin's highest rated opponent (citing things like Ring Magazine ratings, which have Jacobs at 2, a position Smith has never reached). Apparently, on the basis of his lofty position within the division, Danny certainly deserved more than what was apparently being offered!

Now he's just another Liam Smith, a guy whose best win is over John Thompson (and Smith wasn't even winning at the time of the stoppage)

For attention and/or provocation. The betting odds are now utilised to undermine the quality of Golovkins opponent.

lazboy wrote:

crusader wrote:Funny, because I remember before the fight was signed how certain posters were going on about Jacobs being Golovkin's highest rated opponent (citing things like Ring Magazine ratings, which have Jacobs at 2, a position Smith has never reached). Apparently, on the basis of his lofty position within the division, Danny certainly deserved more than what was apparently being offered!

Now he's just another Liam Smith, a guy whose best win is over John Thompson (and Smith wasn't even winning at the time of the stoppage)

For attention and/or provocation. The betting odds are now utilised to undermine the quality of Golovkins opponent.

The betting odds are what they are. Stop crying about them. It's not as if you or I have any influence over them.

Did you bîtch and moan when I quoted the betting odds for lots of other fights or are you only doing it now because you don't like the numbers?

Ask yourself two simple questions: is it out of character for me to quote the betting odds for fights? And have you bothered to read my thoughts about this fight I've posted in other threads?

When you've researched the answer to both of those questions, get back to me with an apology.

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:

crusader wrote:Funny, because I remember before the fight was signed how certain posters were going on about Jacobs being Golovkin's highest rated opponent (citing things like Ring Magazine ratings, which have Jacobs at 2, a position Smith has never reached). Apparently, on the basis of his lofty position within the division, Danny certainly deserved more than what was apparently being offered!

Now he's just another Liam Smith, a guy whose best win is over John Thompson (and Smith wasn't even winning at the time of the stoppage)

For attention and/or provocation. The betting odds are now utilised to undermine the quality of Golovkins opponent.

The betting odds are what they are. Stop crying about them. It's not as if you or I have any influence over them.

Given there Is no acclaim in facing Jacobs and/or being victorious (according to you as per your Canelo Smith example). Who would you have Golovkin fight?

lazboy wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:
For attention and/or provocation. The betting odds are now utilised to undermine the quality of Golovkins opponent.

The betting odds are what they are. Stop crying about them. It's not as if you or I have any influence over them.

Given there Is no acclaim in facing Jacobs and/or being victorious (according to you as per your Canelo Smith example). Who would you have Golovkin fight?

The betting odds simply reflect the sentiments of the general public. And the general public, with their high expectations of Golovkin, aren't going to give him as much praise for beating Jacobs are you hope, since he's the overwhelming betting favourite that is expected to win with ease (based on the numbers being quoted).

The betting odds don't reflect my personal opinion and you wouldn't have criticised me or asked me this question if you'd made an effort to research my thoughts on this matter.

Instead, you chose to be lazy and criticise me without possessing any knowledge about my thoughts on the matter.

Enlightened-One wrote:
Did anyone award Canelo any kudos for defeating such a huge underdog like Liam Smith? If so, then Golovkin will also deserve to receive some praise for defeating Jacobs. If Alvarez wasn’t applauded for his victory over the Brit, then GGG should not receive any praise for defeating the American.

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: The betting odds are what they are. Stop crying about them. It's not as if you or I have any influence over them.

Given there Is no acclaim in facing Jacobs and/or being victorious (according to you as per your Canelo Smith example). Who would you have Golovkin fight?

The betting odds simply reflect the sentiments of the general public. And the general public, with their high expectations of Golovkin, aren't going to give him as much praise for beating Jacobs are you hope, since he's the overwhelming betting favourite that is expected to win with ease (based on the numbers being quoted).

The betting odds don't reflect my personal opinion and you wouldn't have criticised me or asked me this question if you'd made an effort to research my thoughts on this matter.

Instead, you chose to be lazy and criticise me without possessing any knowledge about my thoughts on the matter.

Is the first paragraph quote not a personal opinion? Great job deflecting the question. Who would you have Golovkin fight in place of Jacobs? Please note I'm not trying to criticize you, I am merely curious.

lazboy wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:
Did anyone award Canelo any kudos for defeating such a huge underdog like Liam Smith? If so, then Golovkin will also deserve to receive some praise for defeating Jacobs. If Alvarez wasn’t applauded for his victory over the Brit, then GGG should not receive any praise for defeating the American.

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:
Given there Is no acclaim in facing Jacobs and/or being victorious (according to you as per your Canelo Smith example). Who would you have Golovkin fight?

The betting odds simply reflect the sentiments of the general public. And the general public, with their high expectations of Golovkin, aren't going to give him as much praise for beating Jacobs are you hope, since he's the overwhelming betting favourite that is expected to win with ease (based on the numbers being quoted).

The betting odds don't reflect my personal opinion and you wouldn't have criticised me or asked me this question if you'd made an effort to research my thoughts on this matter.

Instead, you chose to be lazy and criticise me without possessing any knowledge about my thoughts on the matter.

Is the first paragraph quote not a personal opinion? Great job deflecting the question. Who would you have Golovkin fight in place of Jacobs? Please note I'm not trying to criticize you, I am merely curious.

Those words were intended to be in context with the preceding paragraph.

I have since elaborated on my explanation when I clearly stated that the betting odds represented the sentiments of the general public.

In a separate thread, I articulated my personal opinion of this fight which is not in line with the betting odds.

I have supplied you with two explanations now and I cannot make myself and clearer than that.

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:
Did anyone award Canelo any kudos for defeating such a huge underdog like Liam Smith? If so, then Golovkin will also deserve to receive some praise for defeating Jacobs. If Alvarez wasn’t applauded for his victory over the Brit, then GGG should not receive any praise for defeating the American.

Enlightened-One wrote: The betting odds simply reflect the sentiments of the general public. And the general public, with their high expectations of Golovkin, aren't going to give him as much praise for beating Jacobs are you hope, since he's the overwhelming betting favourite that is expected to win with ease (based on the numbers being quoted).

The betting odds don't reflect my personal opinion and you wouldn't have criticised me or asked me this question if you'd made an effort to research my thoughts on this matter.

Instead, you chose to be lazy and criticise me without possessing any knowledge about my thoughts on the matter.

Is the first paragraph quote not a personal opinion? Great job deflecting the question. Who would you have Golovkin fight in place of Jacobs? Please note I'm not trying to criticize you, I am merely curious.

Those words were intended to be in context with the preceding paragraph.

I have since elaborated on my explanation when I clearly stated that the betting odds represented the sentiments of the general public.

In a separate thread, I articulated my personal opinion of this fight which is not in line with the betting odds.

I have supplied you with two explanations now and I cannot make myself and clearer than that.

When did the general public come into it? Are you not the one criticising Golovkin for facing an opponent who is tipped to loose? How do you interpret the odds? Is Jacobs a lesser fighter than his ranking suggests? Who would you have Golovkin face in place of Jacobs?

Freedom2013 wrote:Yes or no?

Jacobs is a dangerous puncher and very good middleweight.

Some people won't, they'll just start saying Jacobs was no good.

I think that at some point GGG will get his due but it won't be with a knockout of Jacobs. People will point to Jacobs one loss and Mora knockdown and call him soft and glass chin.

I think that another good question is what will people think of Jacobs if he gets KO'd by GGG. I don't think that i've ever seen one boxing match have such a heavy blow on how a boxer will be viewed, valued and paid. Because in my opinion, Jacobs is all done if he loses and most people will chalk him up to a Cancer Survivor/Great Story that was matched up lightly on his way to win a World Title after beating cancer. But if he defeats GGG? He could be THE top attraction type fighter and an all time great fighter.

There is a third scenario. Jacobs takes GGG 12 rounds and loses a tough decision. I think that his stock would go up as a result of that. He wouldn't be an the ATG catagory but he'd get the respect he's due for that.

lazboy wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:

Is the first paragraph quote not a personal opinion? Great job deflecting the question. Who would you have Golovkin fight in place of Jacobs? Please note I'm not trying to criticize you, I am merely curious.

Those words were intended to be in context with the preceding paragraph.

I have since elaborated on my explanation when I clearly stated that the betting odds represented the sentiments of the general public.

In a separate thread, I articulated my personal opinion of this fight which is not in line with the betting odds.

I have supplied you with two explanations now and I cannot make myself and clearer than that.

When did the general public come into it? Are you not the one criticising Golovkin for facing an opponent who is tipped to loose? How do you interpret the odds? Is Jacobs a lesser fighter than his ranking suggests? Who would you have Golovkin face in place of Jacobs?

I've answered these questions already... and you've even quoted many of the answers.

Are you OK? Are you feeling alright?

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: Those words were intended to be in context with the preceding paragraph.

I have since elaborated on my explanation when I clearly stated that the betting odds represented the sentiments of the general public.

In a separate thread, I articulated my personal opinion of this fight which is not in line with the betting odds.

I have supplied you with two explanations now and I cannot make myself and clearer than that.

When did the general public come into it? Are you not the one criticising Golovkin for facing an opponent who is tipped to loose? How do you interpret the odds? Is Jacobs a lesser fighter than his ranking suggests? Who would you have Golovkin face in place of Jacobs?

I've answered these questions already... and you've even quoted many of the answers.

Are you OK? Are you feeling alright?

You have avoided my simple question numerous times. Are you ok? Are you feeling alright?

ian curtis wrote:Yes, it's a boring and annoying question. Golovkin will (at least should) KO Jacobs. There is no reason he should not be able to repeat what Pirog did.

It's boxing. That's the beauty of it. Upsets happen all the time. I expect Golovkin to win, but there are so many variables that it's never a foregone conclusion.

To answer the original question, of course! Jacobs is number 2 in the division.

lazboy wrote: You have avoided my simple question numerous times. Are you ok? Are you feeling alright?

You touched sh!t and suffered consequences. I keep forgetting what an annoying cиnt EO is myself sometimes and regret every time.

boxing_rocks wrote:

lazboy wrote: You have avoided my simple question numerous times. Are you ok? Are you feeling alright?

You touched sh!t and suffered consequences. I keep forgetting what an annoying cиnt EO is myself sometimes and regret every time.

Yea ill need a shower, his poo is very dense, not sure what their feeding him at the ward.

lazboy wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:

lazboy wrote: You have avoided my simple question numerous times. Are you ok? Are you feeling alright?

You touched sh!t and suffered consequences. I keep forgetting what an annoying cиnt EO is myself sometimes and regret every time.

Yea ill need a shower, his poo is very dense, not sure what their feeding him at the ward.

I honestly don’t know what I’ve written that has traumatised you so much, to the point that you seem incredibly emotional.

All I did was quote the betting odds and speculate what this could mean in terms of the mainstream recognition that Golovkin would likely receive from the "casual" masses if he successfully defends his world titles against the massive betting underdog Daniel Jacobs.

I clearly articulated my thoughts about the Golovkin Jacobs bout late last year, but for some reason, you guys seem to prefer to criticise me based on “guessing my opinion” instead of actually reading my words, which is an incredibly stupid thing to do!

For the record, click on the hyperlink if you want to read my opinion of this fight, instead of continuing to act like trolls!

Just to place some context on the betting odds for the Golovkin-Jacobs fight…

If you placed a £10 bet with William Hill on Golovkin to defeat Jacobs, you’d only make £1 profit. Place precisely the same bet on GGG’s opponent and you’d potentially profit by £55.

That should tell you how much the mainstream casual fight fans rate Danny Jacobs’ chances of defeating Gennady Golovkin!

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:
You touched sh!t and suffered consequences. I keep forgetting what an annoying cиnt EO is myself sometimes and regret every time.

Yea ill need a shower, his poo is very dense, not sure what their feeding him at the ward.

I honestly don’t know what I’ve written that has traumatised you so much, to the point that you seem incredibly emotional.

All I did was quote the betting odds and speculate what this could mean in terms of the mainstream recognition that Golovkin would likely receive from the "casual" masses if he successfully defends his world titles against the massive betting underdog Daniel Jacobs.

I clearly articulated my thoughts about the Golovkin Jacobs bout late last year, but for some reason, you guys seem to prefer to criticise me based on “guessing my opinion” instead of actually reading my words, which is an incredibly stupid thing to do!

For the record, click on the hyperlink if you want to read my opinion of this fight, instead of continuing to act like trolls!

Ok Enlightened One, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Lets say the post you originally wrote in this thread wasn't your personal opinion. The title of the thread is, Will You (emphasise on You) Give Golovkin Credit if he Kos Jacobs and your first quote is written without reference to the general public. So I'll take your word that you meant, "the general public will not give Golovkin credit If he is victorious because of the betting odds".

In my opinion, that's a big assumption. The majority of this poll says they will give Golovkin credit for the win (a small sample), I amoung them regardless of the betting odds. Although end of the day, you may be correct, I would tend to disagree at this stage. I'm sure it comes down to a lot of factors, was Golovkin outboxed for the majority of the fight, was Jacobs taken out in the first round and so on.

I'm going to ask you a simple question. when I first read your original parapgraph it sounded like you were trying to undermine Jacobs with the use of betting odds. Now do you (emphasis on You) give Golovkin and Jacobs credit for facing each other? If not, who would you have Golovkin face in place of Jacobs?

I read your link, its not relevant to the question. You say Jacobs is Golovkins best opponent to date. That can be spun any which way. For example, Jacobs had no chance of beating Golovkin and was no good, look at the betting odds prior to the fight but he was still Golovkins best opponent.

I will show you some respect and apologise about discussing your feces if you are respectful enough to answer the question which I have now asked 4 times.

lazboy wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:
Yea ill need a shower, his poo is very dense, not sure what their feeding him at the ward.

I honestly don’t know what I’ve written that has traumatised you so much, to the point that you seem incredibly emotional.

All I did was quote the betting odds and speculate what this could mean in terms of the mainstream recognition that Golovkin would likely receive from the "casual" masses if he successfully defends his world titles against the massive betting underdog Daniel Jacobs.

I clearly articulated my thoughts about the Golovkin Jacobs bout late last year, but for some reason, you guys seem to prefer to criticise me based on “guessing my opinion” instead of actually reading my words, which is an incredibly stupid thing to do!

For the record, click on the hyperlink if you want to read my opinion of this fight, instead of continuing to act like trolls!

Ok Enlightened One, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Lets say the post you originally wrote in this thread wasn't your personal opinion. The title of the thread is, Will You (emphasise on You) Give Golovkin Credit if he Kos Jacobs and your first quote is written without reference to the general public. So I'll take your word that you meant, "the general public will not give Golovkin credit If he is victorious because of the betting odds".

In my opinion, that's a big assumption. The majority of this poll says they will give Golovkin credit for the win (a small sample), I amoung them regardless of the betting odds. Although end of the day, you may be correct, I would tend to disagree at this stage. I'm sure it comes down to a lot of factors, was Golovkin outboxed for the majority of the fight, was Jacobs taken out in the first round and so on.

I'm going to ask you a simple question. when I first read your original parapgraph it sounded like you were trying to undermine Jacobs with the use of betting odds. Now do you (emphasis on You) give Golovkin and Jacobs credit for facing each other? If not, who would you have Golovkin face in place of Jacobs?

I read your link, its not relevant to the question. You say Jacobs is Golovkins best opponent to date. That can be spun any which way. For example, Jacobs had no chance of beating Golovkin and was no good, look at the betting odds prior to the fight but he was still Golovkins best opponent.

I will show you some respect and apologise about discussing your feces if you are respectful enough to answer the question which I have now asked 4 times.

I’m happy about Golovkin facing Jacobs. I did say this earlier.

Would I prefer to see him face the likes of Canelo, DeGale, Kovalev or Ward?

Well of course, the answer is “YES”, but I can’t really complain about Jacobs being Golovkin’s next opponent. It’ll be a decent win for the Kazakh, but it almost certainly cannot be considered a “signature” victory.

In terms of me mentioning the betting odds… I do this for a lot of fights. I didn’t have an agenda when I posted this information and I only quoted facts.

If you question the significance of the betting odds in the context of the thread title... well it makes me believe that GGG will only receive praise from the hard-core fans of the sport (aka "the minority"), since the casual mainstream masses don’t believe that Jacobs poses any threat whatsoever.

I also believe that overwhelming betting favourites rarely receive any praise (from casuals) for their successes, whenever they defeat massive underdog’s, since the outcome is expected

Doing something that the “majority” of fans believe should be “easy” is not a feat that they would be motivated to applaud. And the betting odds suggest that a Golovkin victory over Jacobs should be pretty much the only likely outcome.

That’s my opinion and I have exhausted the subject matter.

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: I honestly don’t know what I’ve written that has traumatised you so much, to the point that you seem incredibly emotional.

All I did was quote the betting odds and speculate what this could mean in terms of the mainstream recognition that Golovkin would likely receive from the "casual" masses if he successfully defends his world titles against the massive betting underdog Daniel Jacobs.

I clearly articulated my thoughts about the Golovkin Jacobs bout late last year, but for some reason, you guys seem to prefer to criticise me based on “guessing my opinion” instead of actually reading my words, which is an incredibly stupid thing to do!

For the record, click on the hyperlink if you want to read my opinion of this fight, instead of continuing to act like trolls!

Ok Enlightened One, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Lets say the post you originally wrote in this thread wasn't your personal opinion. The title of the thread is, Will You (emphasise on You) Give Golovkin Credit if he Kos Jacobs and your first quote is written without reference to the general public. So I'll take your word that you meant, "the general public will not give Golovkin credit If he is victorious because of the betting odds".

In my opinion, that's a big assumption. The majority of this poll says they will give Golovkin credit for the win (a small sample), I amoung them regardless of the betting odds. Although end of the day, you may be correct, I would tend to disagree at this stage. I'm sure it comes down to a lot of factors, was Golovkin outboxed for the majority of the fight, was Jacobs taken out in the first round and so on.

I'm going to ask you a simple question. when I first read your original parapgraph it sounded like you were trying to undermine Jacobs with the use of betting odds. Now do you (emphasis on You) give Golovkin and Jacobs credit for facing each other? If not, who would you have Golovkin face in place of Jacobs?

I read your link, its not relevant to the question. You say Jacobs is Golovkins best opponent to date. That can be spun any which way. For example, Jacobs had no chance of beating Golovkin and was no good, look at the betting odds prior to the fight but he was still Golovkins best opponent.

I will show you some respect and apologise about discussing your feces if you are respectful enough to answer the question which I have now asked 4 times.

I’m happy about Golovkin facing Jacobs. I did say this earlier.

Would I prefer to see him face the likes of Canelo, DeGale, Kovalev or Ward?

Well of course, the answer is “YES”, but I can’t really complain about Jacobs being Golovkin’s next opponent.

In terms of me mentioning the betting odds… I do this for a lot of fights. I didn’t have an agenda when I posted this information and I only quoted facts.

If you question the significance of the betting odds in the context of the thread title... well it makes me believe that GGG will only receive praise from the hard-core fans of the sport (aka "the minority"), since the casual mainstream masses don’t believe that Jacobs poses any threat whatsoever.

I also believe that overwhelming betting favourites rarely receive any praise (from casuals) for their successes, whenever they defeat massive underdog’s, since the outcome is expected

Doing something that the “majority” of fans believe should be “easy” is not a feat that they would be motivated to applaud. And the betting odds suggest that a Golovkin victory over Jacobs should be pretty much the only likely outcome.

That’s my opinion and I have exhausted the subject matter.

I appreciate the answer and apologies for discussing your bowel movements, obviously just joking about that.