Yeah, I don't plan on rewatching it either. While I thought Jacobs did enough to get a draw, I probably gave more close rounds to him than I did Canelo. TBH I see it as more of a black mark on Canelo - and his awful stamina - that he wasn't able to (IMO) convincingly beat Jacobs. GGG too, although he has the past prime excuse to some degree. Although I don't buy that tbh. If that wasn't his prime, when was it?
Yeah Golovkin has shown that he cant dominate against the top fighters. Everytime he fought one, it was a close contentious decision
I think it's a combination of both - that Golovkin is both past his prime, and always overrated. I think his peak was circa 2013 smashing Macklin, Stevens, and Geale, but that's the point - his peak was spent smashing Macklin, Stevens, and Geale. And to think, fuckin Sly was saying in 2014 that Golov is 50-50 with prime Hagler.
That’s essentially what he did in his 24 rounds (or at least half of them) against Jermain Taylor, a far inferior boxer to Kalambay. All that rough housing, clinching, awkward stuff you guys count on Hopkins to pull out the fight with? They didn’t come much more difficult to deal with in those regards than Herol Graham. On top of being tall, rangy, slick, southpaw, and highly unorthodox. He was yet another top talent Kalambay defeated. I also had him winning against Kalule by two points, and you can add Robbie Sims to his victim list. Hopkins never faced anything like him. I don’t see what Hopkins had that Kalambay hadn’t already seen and bested, though.
It was Taylor's power that shook Hopkins and made him leery of coming forward, though. Taylor wasn't as skilled or polished as Kalambay, but he was a bigger puncher. I think Hopkins' fight with John David Jackson makes for a better stylistic comparison than Hopkins-Taylor.
It’s been a long time since I watched them, but as I recall Taylor basically swept the first half of both fights on workrate and athleticism. The jab was the primary factor in establishing that early control. This happened two fights in a row. Hopkins got the better of the action in the second half, but it was too little, too late. Taylor simply should not have been that difficult a puzzle to solve. Those losses look worse and worse as the years go by. Well, they would if anybody actually looked at them. Seems everyone just decided to give him a free pass on both. Understandable given what he went on to achieve. Still, if they’re relevant to a discussion, they shouldn’t be glossed over.
As for Jackson being a better comparison, I’m gonna have to go ahead and disagree with you there. He was shot by the Hopkins fight, first of all. He was also a small Middleweight and a southpaw. And honestly, even at his best he was a level below Kalambay as a technician, which I assume is where you see the similarities.
Hopkins was also 40 yo against Taylor. He no longer had the same intensity that he had a few years earlier and had turned into more of a boxer.
So, was he just not a very good boxer? Or did he simply excel more when allowed to play the role of counter puncher against a more aggressive opponent?
He was a good enough boxer, but he needed favorable style matchup to really shine. What he did a past 40 is really impressive but it was obvious that he had lost a few steps physically. I seriously doubt that Taylor see the last bell against a younger bhop, and if he does, the decision wouldn't be close. We also have to facor that bhop was probably weight drained for both fights. Theres a reson he never fought again at mw after that
The fact that Taylor ended his reign and then denied him in his chance to take the title back would seem a good enough reason for him to move on from the division.
If he had no problem making the weigh, I'm pretty sure the pavlik fight would have been at 160. Bit anyway, that's beside the point. Which is that the bhop that lost to Taylor was obviouly not the same guy that brutalised the mw division a few years earlier