Would Daniel Jacobs at age 30 give all time greats at 35 trouble?

Another vote for your statement.

I think he would. He was mobile, hard hitting, busy, and showed a very good stamina. Moreover he was MASSIVE at 160. He seriously looked like 175 to 180 at the fight. I think old versions of even SRL, Hagler etc would have had their hands full with him.

 

It was only a matter of time

 

I'll take a totally random and unbiased selection of middleweights as hypotheticals.

Bob Fitzsimmons. He was winning the title they ear before against Corbett. So probably not.

Ray Robinson. He had enough left for Fullmer and Basilio and had just beaten Castellani. Ray has it.

Carlos Monzon. Held off Valdez. No problem.

Bernard Hopkins. Tore Trinidad apart. He's got this.

 

They may win, but they won't win easy

To throw another spanner in the works, greater modern weight drain means a serious weight advantage at 160 over the golden oldies.

 

He is being overrated

 

Why specifiy the age 35? Are all boxers at the same stage of their career at 35?

SRR reached a 132-1 record in the same period Golovkin got to his 37-0. Are you trying to insinuate that the wear and tear between them was similar?

Boxers, and generally athletes can extend their careers by an insane amount today, being 35 today and 50 years ago is not the same.

Bottom line is Golovkin is in his prime, or at the very least, still close to it.

How would prime Hagler, Monzon, SRR etc. do against Jacobs?

 

I'd assume so, he's big and atheltic and hard hitting.

I honestly though Golovkin would cut right through him but the way he stood up to his power makes me think he can stand up to anyone's.

I must admit, i haven't actually seen this fight yet so haven't scored it and thus don't wanna get involved in the whole controversial nature of the scoring, but if you can survive 12 and trouble Golovkin you can probably trouble anyone.

 

GGG had a notable am career though.

 

GGG does seem to fade bad in the later rounds, he gets away with it because his opponents are usually battered by that point so can't exploit anything.

 

Yes he is....and in a big way. Part of it is because of the anti-GGG fever that's been building up on all the forums. Personally, I believe that Golovkin will stop Jacobs in a rematch. Just because GGG had to go the distance in a title defense for the first time, he's being written off by so many modern day, short attention span fans....who would have dug a hole and buried Joe Louis after being stopped by Schmeling, or Manny Pacquiao after one or two of his earlier career stoppages...or Eusabio Pedroza after Alfonso Zamora embalmed him...a few years before he became featherweight champion. I think the anti-Golovkin crowd is getting a bit carried away....with the so called demise of GGG as well as the unrealistically high ranking of Jacobs.

 

True, but maybe, just maybe, this has been noted already by GGG's people and because of the reversal of form exhibited in this bout, steps will be taken to remedy this lack of late rounds fire.

 

Time will tell, I don't think he liked not being the boss at the end of the bout. I don't think he has the mentality of a Marvin Hagler.

 

Maybe so...but maybe also that can be fixed.