Is Danny Jacobs a real world champion who deserves better than 25/75 against GGG?

Here's the problem. No difference huh, lmfao. Stay out of the conversation.

 

Forgive me but post the link.

 

Last Dan Rafael chat (21 Oct) on ESPN site.

I realize not everyone believes him ...

 

As long as you heard it. We will take everything into account.

 

Fugg beltz... Jacobs is a better fight than Vs. Any of those other middleweights. (Because the fight sells itself). But pay the fuggin' dude man...

 

There is only one champion @ MW - that's Alvarez. Everyone else is a contender and that includes Bumlovkin..

 

I hear your mom likes both...

 

There is a difference you dumbass donkey degenerate.

 

I voted that Jacobs is a glorified #1 contender. I also don't count any of the defenses of that title as being legitimate.

What would be interesting to know are the posters who consider Jacobs a glorified #1 contender but yet count GGGs stint with the Regular WBA title as counting towards his record of title defenses.

It would be nice to see who else voted for glorified #1 contender.

 

IMO I think only after becoming lineal should defenses be counted towards records because in the past there weren't so many titles. I won't hold it against someone though if they count defenses of the main IBF, WBO, WBA, and WBC titles as long as its their main title in that weight division. As for the WBA regular title the only people who count those defenses towards a record are fanboys. It is a glorified #1 contender placeholder no matter who carries it.

It reminds me of the RJJ fans who swear up and down that he accomplished what Bob Fitzsimmons did. Imagine if Bob Fitzsimmons after winning the disputed HW title against Maher no longer competed at HW. Afterall RJJ only won a disputed version of the Hw title and avoided the lineal champion. Bob Fitsimmons didn't though and he knocked out Corbett for the lineal title.

Theres reality and a fanboys wet dream.

 

He had to fight a top 5 Ring ranked LHW within 18 months of winning it like every other Ring belt holder has to. Or at least have it scheduled inside that period and have it within a couple months. His highest ranked opponent to date after winning it was Fonfara at 10, which obviously doesn't cut it.
There have been instances in the past where the Ring allowed more time for some reason, but in Stevenson's case they didn't. Obviously because there's no legit reason why he doesn't fight top5 opponents, and with a very dominant 3 belt holder in the division that most rate over him.

 

If you got that out of my post, then there's not much of a point discussing this with you.

 

Have I ever called his defenses beyond discussion? What out of that post did you come to that conclusion?
What I pointed out is that there are differences between "regular" belt holders and some are actually more legit as the super ones.... take Broner's ridiculous situation for an instance. He while coming off a loss beat a fighter coming off a loss and a long layoff (all against the WBA's own rules) for a vacant belt, while there was an interim already in place, and got promoted out of the blue to Super the next month.
In that case the interim is even more legit as the super, because the last one was clearly manufactured.
Golovkin fought first for the interim (with a champion in place of course) which made him the #1 contender. And then the holder didn't want to fight him (where have we seen that before) instead of vacating they made the current holder super and Golovkin regular.
Jacobs won his vacant belt with an interim and super champion already in place against an Aussie gatekeeper.
But it does make him the #1 contender at this point. And if he wants the fight (probably not) Golovkin has to comply within the WBA's rules.