This has every scoring point in the entire fight. Plus, the entire fight is available. The trolls are so fed up they try bashing a GREAT win
Mother****er you saw the posts every damn day leading up to the fight. Foh with your lunacy. I knew Jacobs would give him a good fight. I said I would give GG his props. Foh lmao...
Floyd escalated it to another level. Leonard ducked the **** out of hearns after pulling it out of the bag in the 1st.then fought him when he thought hearns was shot and lost. Dempsey did it back in the stone age when race could be used as an excuse. Money talks. When theres a hype machine and money to be made,the money men dont want the cash cow in any kind of risk. But floyd 100% has paved the way for this new era of fans applauding good business sense over fights that should be made
Fighting today is so much different than it was back then. Fighters fought often, pretty much traveling around the country (or the world) to put food on the table. Today fighters are carefully groomed. Opponents are carefully selected to stack everything in favor of the star or future star. Also, it was not uncommon to have great smaller champions step up and fight bigger champions. They went where the money was because it was much harder to come by. It really isn't fair to compare fighters from different eras. The greats then would be greats today, and vice versa.
Greatness should be measured,by in essence what greatness is.its not fighting fight after fight that your expected to win,its pushing yourself to the limit,testing yourself in the fights that you might lose. 99.9% of fighters limit is in their own weight class and they will be lucky to get near top spot.but the likes of floyd,pac,duran,leonard,hearns,arguello are the cream of the crop. The annoying thing is,floyd didnt go to his limit hence limited his greatness,the others did,overcame odds,even with a loss or 2 along the way but cemented it. As for old fighters fighting every week almost,yes agreed its unfair to compare,but fighters of today whi fight primed fighters every fight get less credit than fighters of years ago who won 3 times as many fights but fought hugely inferior competition most of the time.plus the fact they had far better training conditions and wealth than almost everyone they fought
Leonard didn't wait for Hearns. They fought at their peak and unified the division and Hearns was very successful after that fight (example v Duran). Fans wanted Leonard v Hagler but Leonard delayed whether due to injuries, addiction or whatever and after 6 years or so fought Hagler in Haglers last fight. So if Leonard made anyone wait it was Hagler not Hearns. and I guess Pryor which never happened
I don't even think it was close. His own dominant hype has over inflated Jacobs effort.. If it was say a Crawford or a Canelo it would be a fairly routine (competitive yes) but still a fairly standard win. Because it's GGG & he lost rounds it's not! 115-112 GGG. Clear as day if you know how boxing is enacted & you drop the emotional or racial bias!
WTF has David Lemieux ever done in his career to warrant a comparison to an ATG fighter like Manny Pacquiao? Lemieux has done *nothing* in the whole of his career besides lose to and get KO'ed by journeymen...
By your logic we can discredit Pacquiao too solely because he lost to some low level fighters early in his career. Because you had nothing else to discredit Lemieux but that. You didn't present any other meaningful arguments.
I didn't compare him to Pacquiao, I just said that by your logic we can discredit a lot of fighters just because they didn't pad their records until they were 30-0 or something. Lemieux in the last years seems like a decent fighter. It was a good win.