**New Jacobs interview.. Very good. Call Golovkin Absurd. Says how he'll fight Canelo**

To make the argument that GGG was Undisputed, you would have to concede that he became Undisputed MW "King" by beating Kell Brook, a welterweight, which is hilarious. How do you become the Undisputed MW King by beating a fighter who wasn't even ranked in the division, who never even fought in the division before that you are supposedly conquering?

The circumstances surrounding the WBC, with how GGG acquired that belt, is suspect to say the least, and how that happened inherently created a dispute over who the True MW Champ was. To be the Man of a Division you need to Beat the Man, and being handed a title due to boxing politics or whatever the case may be doesn't make you the "Undisputed" King of a Division. You become Undisputed King of a Division by Beating all other Champions in a division, in the ring for all the Titles in that division.

 

i iddnt mention brook.

i am just saying undisputed enough is near enough in this day and age.


i just admitted to you that 3G only won one title, the others were given to him.

 

i am not one of Maby's people.

 

To address your point, Michael Buffer announced Tyson as the Undefeated Undisputed HW Champ, not only vs Spinks but also vs Tubbs Holmes and Biggs ever since he won the IBF vs Tucker after Spinks was stripped of the IBF.

It's one thing to be recognized as the Undisputed WBA, WBC and IBF Champ, but it's another to be the Undisputed King of a Division. You said yourself GGG wanted to be Undisputed King of 160. He never was because he wasn't able to beat Canelo who was Lineal and Ring Magazine Champ. Anotherwords there was a Dispute over who the Undisputed King of the division was, but not who was the title holder of the 3 major titles.

And to go back to your Tyson analogy, vs Spinks not only did Buffer announce Tyson as the Undefeated Undisputed Champ but he also announced the bout itself as for the Undisputed Heavyweight Championship of the World.

But for Tyson vs Tubbs for example, Buffer announced the bout itself as only for the Heavyweight Championship of the World, not for the Undisputed Heavyweight Championship. Ironically vs Biggs, Buffer did announce that bout as for the Undisputed Heavyweight Championship, so there's an inconsistency there. For Tyson vs Holmes, Buffer didn't specify whether it was for the Undisputed HW Championship or not, he just went directly to Holmes intro.

So in the two fights preceding Tyson Spinks, despite Buffer claiming that Tyson was the undisputed HW Champ, he did not claim that those bouts were for the Undisputed HW Championship, even though he did vs Biggs. So somewhere there Buffer made a mistake, it wouldn't be the first time lol. He probably just got carried away.

 

He wasn't called that way just by Buffer, he was called undisputed everywhere since beating Tucker.
https://www.nytimes.com/1987/08/02/sports/boxing-tyson-undisputed-and-unanimous-titlist.html

 

Well Tyson himself claimed He was "Undisputed HW Champ of the World". Like you said about Wilder and Joshua, some publications but not others may refer to that winner as Undisputed, but really I doubt many would especially considering how the vast majority thought Fury deserved to get the decision over Wilder. So this isn't as clear as you're trying to make it out to be, if it was clear then Buffer would have stated Tyson vs Tubbs was for the Undisputed HW Championship of the World. He didn't say that, he said it was only for the Heavyweight Championship of the World. So there was obviously still a debate over whether Tyson was truly Undisputed without facing Spinks, which was why Tyson Spinks was made similar to how GGG vs Canelo needed to happen to determine that.

 

Why? Pirog retired

 

Makes no difference that it was in his hometown, GGG was the A side, the hyped HBO golden boy perceived as a very bankable commodity by those running the game. Jacobs was disposable with a very small fanbase. No way were they gonna let him take GGGs 0. You don’t understand how this business works.

 

As if everything's pre-determined. Jacobs didnt do enough, and that's why he lost. He got knocked down and was out of gas in the 12th round. If he didn't get knocked down, and had more left in the 12th he could have won, but he came up short.

 

Obviously not everything’s pre-determined, but A-side fighters generally have the deck stacked in their favor. He got knocked down and ran out of gas so he lost? There are 12 rounds to score, I had Jacobs 8-4 he clearly landed the cleaner more effective punches. GGG relied on the jab too much and didn’t let it all hang out.

 

There’s no agenda, the fact is he didn’t win any of the fights regardless of what we think. Which I would easily give GGG the first. I’m sorry I go by facts and not hypotheticals.

 

Well there's an argument for that but that knockdown played a huge role in the scoring. There were a lot of close rounds, GGG was the undefeated fighter and perception going in was that he was this unstoppable knockout artist. I had no problem with GGG getting the victory but he was clearly Super Hyped. While Jacobs wasn't seen as really elite, he struggled with Sergio Mora, he got knocked down by Mora. GGG was the clear favorite so maybe that played a role in the scoring. But I still thought GGG won mainly due to the knockdown and Jacobs gassing in the 12th. But there is an argument that Jacobs won, I just didn't think he did quite enough but he came close in my personal opinion.