Gennady Golovkin vs. Carl Froch @ 168.

Seems Jr has inherited Sr's granite mandible then. Groves might very well be in trouble if he can't discourage Jr from walking him down.

 

I think Groves has the power and movement to stay out of harms way for the first six rounds, after that, well, he's getting knocked out.

 

GGG will crack hair lines onto Froch's chin and flattened his nose.

 

More or less what I think. I'm not convinced that Golovkin can't go to war with Froch, but, then, I'm not convinced that he can, either. Brawling is what Froch does. But Golovkin has a plan B in case slugging in the trenches doesn't work, and that plan is to take him to pieces with his jab like in the Lemieux fight.

 

Yeah, I see what you're saying. And I think in that respect I would see he's a little more dynamic than some give him credit for (to a certain degree), though ultimately I think his career will be looked back on historically as a slight 'what if' in regards to having some of the bigger fights earlier in his career. I know you're having dialogue with someone about his prime etc now and I see both sides of the coin. I don't think he's THAT on the slide but without doubt I think he has slowed up a bit, and perhaps being at the tail end of his career some of his in-ring decision making may reflect that, if you see what I mean. I'm just going to try to enjoy him whilst he lasts.

 

I'm a big fan of GGG but he struggled with Jacobs and drew with canelo; the only 2 top fighters he has faced.

Froch would have murdered Jacobs and is way too big for canelo.

Froch would without a doubt be undefeated if he fought Golovkins resume, but I don't think you can say the same the other way around.

 

Dude, I do not abide.

 

Shut the Fcuk up Donny!

 

Why are people comparing Jacobs to Froch in this thread? Jacobs is about 100x more athletic than Froch. Froch wouldn't fight GGG anything like Jacobs did because he simply can't.

 

Yes, that would be most unfair.











On Jacobs.

 

Froch lost to a similar fighter in Andre Dirrell. If you want to compare fighters, compare Dirrell (who lost to GGG in the AM BTW) to Jacobs. A Froch fight with GGG would look nothing like Golovkin's fight with Jacobs.

 

Jacobs moves, but he's not a mover in Dirrell 2009's infamously contrary, exchange-shy vein, nor is he as rangy. They don't really fight that much alike at all, tbh.

Nobody cited Jacobs-GGG as the blueprint for how Froch would beat GGG. They were only being compared in terms of overall levels. For my part, I already outlined how I think Froch wins.

 

You're implying Jacobs ran a marathon around the ring like Dirrell did with Froch. Thats false.

Jacobs stood right in front of GGG and held his ground for large swathes of the fight. Went toe-to-toe with him on numerous occasions and never once looked as ridiculous as Direll did against Froch.

The fight is here courtesy of HBO. Froch against GGG wouldn't look all that dissimilar apart from Froch being more harder , tougher, bigger , stronger and harder hitting.

This content is protected

 

I've seen the fight. It is a bit of hyperbole to say Jacob's "held his ground for large swathes of the fight". He mostly fought off his backfoot but yes, Jacobs came forward in spots and landed on Golovkin. You are right though, Jacobs didn't run as much as Dirrell. But my point is they have similar styles, fast hands/feet, good movement, tall, etc; I think Jacobs has more power than Dirrell though. Also, the Dirrell-Froch fight was closer than the Jacobs-GGG fight. Dirrell arguably beat Froch, you can't say that about Jacobs. He clearly lost against GGG.

 

Dirrell spent a night alternately pawing at and cringing away from Curtis Stevens. Can you imagine how little interest he would've had in engaging with Golovkin? That would be the puglistic track meet of all time. Jacobs engaged Golovkin. Not constantly, but frequently. His movement was economical and purposeful when compared to the exaggerated flight of Dirrell.