Question for those who scored any of first five rounds to Jacobs

I am not in denial seeing as I scored the fight for Golovkin. It was competitive and a great fight for boxing.

Round 1 featured Golovkin throwing and landing more along with moving forward.
Round 2 featured basically the same thing.
Round 3 featured basically the same thing.
Round 5 was clear as day for Golovkin. He threw 21 more punches and landed 8 more. I don't understand how someone could score this round for Jacobs.

I'm not saying Jacobs lost every round. What I'm saying is round 5 is not up for debate. It's just not. Rounds 1, 2, and 3 were so close I feel as if you scored all for Jacobs, you simply wanted him to win. Round 1 is either a 10-10 or a 10-9 for Golovkin. There really isn't an rationale for giving it to Jacobs.

 

Haha your back!!! You still supporting Povetkin??

 

GGG displayed good defense whenever Jacob had him backed up for a couple of moments and caught a lot of his punches on the gloves. Jacobs made GGG miss by using good upper body movement and getting out of range, not running.

Look at the fight this way and it is still clear as day Jacobs did not do enough to win many rounds. Making GGG miss doesn't mean you are schooling him or winning the round especially when you are not countering or firing back.

It was a good tactical fight. The only thing I noticed that made GGG look average is his speed. Jacobs was just too defensive for a lot of the fight and not attacking enough.

 

I actually gave Jacobs rounds 1-3 until Golovkin took the 4th. My reasoning was that Golovkin was missing a lot and just didn't do much, like he was giving rounds away. I score shots landed, how clean (clear, head snaps, power punchers aren't rewarded more unless they hurt their man), who's dictating, defense....

I don't score power or speed because if you have an advantage in one of those then you should score cleaner shots.

Edit: that said, in going to rewatch and re-score.

 

i have not really been following whats happened too him, anything new?

 

Well he's b-sample for the Ostarine came back positive too so he's now banned from the WBC rankings indefinitely. I know this is totally unrelated just wanted to see if your view is now because I know you said you were withholding judgement until the b-sample results were reported.

 

gave Jacobs 1 & 3, 2 was a swing round which I gave Golovkin but from the 6th round onwards Jacobs took over for me big time.

 

iKSAB ...what stupid C''''ing name is that...from now on you're called Derrick.
Now Derrick, you appear to be another pip squeak arm chair psychologist...you **** all about **** all...now **** off! twat

 

Theyre a bunch of biased pricks. Cant stand watching fights on BN. They hate GGG because theyre a bunch of hating Brits. How anyone had it 3-0 Jacobs is beyond me.

 

no i said i was withholding judgement until more facts come out, a b sample would almost always be positive.

doesn't make much sense for him to take that drug in the first place, nor do the wbc dealings make any sense, its a complete mess

 

It does make sense, to gain an advantage obvisouly, but anyway I can see your not convinced Povetkin has ever taken PEDs before. It's bizarre you still feel this way but I know some people can get so invested in their favourite athlete that they disregard anything which goes against said athlete.

 

Wow the GGGstan meltdown is in full swing

 

Round 1 Jacobs
Round 2 GGG
ROUND 3 GGG
ROUND 4 GGG
ROUND 5 GGG

reason I gave opening round to Jacobs was I thought he threw and land a touch more. But I could be wrong all 3 judges awarded the round to GGG.

Round 2 which ppl seem to to believe that Jacobs did better in than round one. I disagree. I thought GGG Jab really found the range and he clearly landed the more clean and effective punches. Jacobs was in retreat from the start of the round and threw jabs that routinely fell short. His flurries were weak as well and either fell short or touched mostly gloves. I see round 2 as a clear Golovkin round

 

but that drug wouldn't be a ped of choice for povetkin, there are way better ones if he wanted an advantage, also where the samples were tested was weird, they sent some back to los angeles while there are tons of top class labs in europe, some in truly neutral countries like Switzerland.

i don't even particularly like Povetkin, i only defended him because he got truly screwed over in the meldonium case which was a non issue from the word go yet he had he's title shot taken away and then had to face a stiverne who tested positive from drugs but no one cared. a US court also some how decided that povetkins team owes wilder money despite the fact he was cleared of any wrong doing, i mean what kind of kangaroo court makes a decision like that? they will never get that money anyway so it doesn't matter but the whole povetkin saga stinks of corruption what ever the outcome is