# Was a draw reasonable? (Poll)



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Vote!


----------



## nuclear (Jun 15, 2015)

i mean i guess. i thought it was close but clear for ggg but whenever its close i guess a draw isnt out of the question


----------



## Medicine (Jun 4, 2013)

GGG clearly won. Total robbery.


----------



## ShinyDiscoBall (Apr 10, 2015)

I had it for canelo 7-5...so a draw is reasonable


----------



## Medicine (Jun 4, 2013)

ShinyDiscoBall said:


> I had it for canelo 7-5...so a draw is reasonable


Oh never would have expected that from you SMH, you suck pal.


----------



## 941jeremy (Jun 12, 2013)

Somewhat, I had it a draw under the mindset that Canelo would win every possible round that wasn't clearly a GGG round.


----------



## ShinyDiscoBall (Apr 10, 2015)

Medicine said:


> Oh never would have expected that from you SMH, you suck pal.


Maybe next time pay attention to the fuckin fight and don't listen to the HBO commentary with your drunk ass


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

I guess? I'd be hard pressed to find 6 rounds for Canelo though.


----------



## 941jeremy (Jun 12, 2013)

Can't really vote because it isn't that simple. However, a draw was reasonable for the house fighter.


----------



## stevebhoy87 (Jun 4, 2013)

I thought there was 6 clear Golovkin rounds on how I scored it.

On that basis if you give Canelo every benefit of the doubt in all the others then yeah I can see a draw.

I disagree though, I had it for GGG but if you give everything that's close to Canelo then you can get there.


----------



## Medicine (Jun 4, 2013)

ShinyDiscoBall said:


> Maybe next time pay attention to the fuckin fight and don't listen to the HBO commentary with your drunk ass


HBO commentary was riding Canelos dick all night...You talked a whole bunch of shit on GGG and put your foot in your mouth, hell your the same clown who almost scored the fight for Broner against Mikey. Fuck off.


----------



## ShinyDiscoBall (Apr 10, 2015)

I would like to know what exactly GGG was doing to win all these rounds as y'all see it....was it his constant missing n getting countered? His ineffective stalking, his gassing and getting sloppy and open to counters as the fight wore on?


----------



## ElKiller (Jun 14, 2014)

turbotime said:


> I guess? I'd be hard pressed to find 6 rounds for Canelo though.


Same here. My final score was 7-5 for 3G but there were some rounds that could have gone either way. I gave the first round to GGG, although I thought it could have have easily gone to Canelo, only because I hate 10-10 rounds.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

ElKiller said:


> Same here. My final score was 7-5 for 3G but there were some rounds that could have gone either way. I gave the first round to GGG, although I thought it could have have easily gone to Canelo, only because I hate 10-10 rounds.


I actually think 10-10 rounds need to be used more


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Medicine said:


> *HBO commentary was riding Canelos dick all night*...You talked a whole bunch of shit on GGG and put your foot in your mouth, hell your the same clown who almost scored the fight for Broner against Mikey. Fuck off.


Bullshit. They were definitely Pro Golovkin


----------



## ShinyDiscoBall (Apr 10, 2015)

stevebhoy87 said:


> I thought there was 6 clear Golovkin rounds on how I scored it.
> 
> On that basis if you give Canelo every benefit of the doubt in all the others then yeah I can see a draw.
> 
> I disagree though, I had it for GGG but if you give everything that's close to Canelo then you can get there.


Which 6? I gave canelo Rds 1,2,6,8, and the last 3


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

ShinyDiscoBall said:


> I would like to know what exactly GGG was doing to win all these rounds as y'all see it....was it his constant missing n getting countered? His ineffective stalking, his gassing and getting sloppy and open to counters as the fight wore on?


Yeah I think so... Canelo made him swing at the air all night, landed the harder counters and had him gassing from the 6th until the end...

It was close in the sense that GGG kept coming forward and canelo chilling on the ropes maked it appear as if GGG was imposing his will.


----------



## ShinyDiscoBall (Apr 10, 2015)

turbotime said:


> [QUBOTE="Medicine, post: 3161045, member: 2119"]*HBO commentary was riding Canelos dick all night*...You talked a whole bunch of shit on GGG and put your foot in your mouth, hell your the same clown who almost scored the fight for Broner against Mikey. Fuck off.


Bullshit. They were definitely Pro Golovkin[/QUOTE]
Exactly!!... that what I heard


----------



## ISPEAKUMTROOTH (Jun 10, 2014)

Not for me.
No way Canelo took 6 rounds in that and its telling that pre fight the cards were a concern and for me it sucks.


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

Medicine said:


> GGG clearly won. Total robbery.


I watched it with a beer. Not a score pad and, as much as I was barracking for GGG, I wouldn't have been surprised if Canelo got the nod.

I don't see anything outrageous with a draw.


----------



## ShinyDiscoBall (Apr 10, 2015)

Doc said:


> Yeah I think so... Canelo made him swing at the air all night, landed the harder counters and had him gassing from the 6th until the end...
> 
> It was close in the sense that GGG kept coming forward and canelo chilling on the ropes maked it appear as if GGG was imposing his will.


Yes, I know how it LOOKED!.... I'm talking REALITY here though...GGG followed canelo around and got countered. repeatedly!... having a guy against the ropes don't score points.... LANDING them does.


----------



## Setanta (May 24, 2013)

turbotime said:


> I actually think 10-10 rounds need to be used more


Precisely !

You should only score clear-cut rounds.

It would greatly improve the sport.


----------



## Drunkenboat (Jul 29, 2012)

ShinyDiscoBall said:


> Yes, I know how it LOOKED!.... I'm talking REALITY here though...GGG followed canelo around and got countered. repeatedly!... having a guy against the ropes don't score points.... LANDING them does.


You dont count ggg punching the shit out of him?


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Setanta said:


> Precisely !
> 
> You should only score clear-cut rounds.
> 
> It would greatly improve the sport.


It shouldnt be shied away from. If neither guy has an advantage really it shouldn't be a snap decision.


----------



## Uncle Rico (May 24, 2013)

If you're being very generous to Canelo, then at an absolutely push you can find 6 rounds to give to him. 

But that's the thing, though. You're not supposed to be generous to one fighter over the other. You're supposed to be fair and objective. And on that basis..... no, I don't think a draw is a fair result. Especially not when one of those judges was blatantly ordered to scored the fight for Canelo no matter what.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

I think you can make a stronger argument for 8-4 than 6-6 but I was still very,very impressed by Canelo.
7-5 definitely,8-4 debateable but not a draw.
One of the better losing performances I've seen though.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Uncle Rico said:


> If you're being very generous to Canelo, then at an absolutely push you can find 6 rounds to give to him.
> 
> But that's the thing, though. You're not supposed to be generous to one fighter over the other. You're supposed to be fair and objective. And on that basis..... no, I don't think a draw is a fair result. Especially not when one of those judges was blatantly ordered to scored the fight for Canelo no matter what.


Good points mate.
He's always going to get favoured in Vegas but people have to realise that shit like the card Byrd pulled out of her arse hurts him and will only blight his reputation.


----------



## Strike (Jun 4, 2012)

Absolutely. I felt GGG won at the end of the 12 rounds, but my scorecard showed 6-6. Now, I could easily have switched a couple of those rounds to GGG, but on a couple went with clean, accurate power shots over higher number of shots landed. There is subjectivity involved...US judges tend to favour aggression more than say UK judges...some people will go with the guy backing someone up and landing more, whereas others will prefer flush counters that are lesser in number, but harder and more eye catching.

It was close. Canelo clearly won the last round and most people had him winning rounds 2 and 3, with a good number thinking he took 1 and 4 too. Overall...GGG probably deserved to win, but that's not how round by round scoring works.

GGG definitely looks slower in the past year than previously, but he has also fought the two best opponents of his life in his past 2 bouts, and they both have faster hands than any version of him. He needed to go to the body and not telegraph his overhand right so much.


----------



## ShinyDiscoBall (Apr 10, 2015)

Lol,..
Ok, y'all tell which 6 or 8 rounds GGG won decisively...am waiting


----------



## ElKiller (Jun 14, 2014)

PityTheFool said:


> Good points mate.
> He's always going to get favoured in Vegas but people have to realise that shit like the card Byrd pulled out of her arse hurts him and will only blight his reputation.


Good point.

The irony here is that it was supposed to be Moretti who everyone was worried about and he scored the fight for GGG.


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

Golovkin probably should of won the fight on sheer aggression and pressure 

But a draw is no robbery 

Canelo threw most of the punches you remember and made ggg look crude and more a brawler than a boxer 

If canelo sorts his cardio he pisses the rematch 

Most the exchanges I remember canelo come out on top


----------



## ShinyDiscoBall (Apr 10, 2015)

Strike said:


> Absolutely. I felt GGG won at the end of the 12 rounds, but my scorecard showed 6-6. Now, I could easily have switched a couple of those rounds to GGG, but on a couple went with clean, accurate power shots over higher number of shots landed. There is subjectivity involved...US judges tend to favour aggression more than say UK judges...some people will go with the guy backing someone up and landing more, whereas others will prefer flush counters that are lesser in number, but harder and more eye catching.
> 
> It was close. Canelo clearly won the last round and most people had him winning rounds 2 and 3, with a good number thinking he took 1 and 4 too. Overall...GGG probably deserved to win, but that's not how round by round scoring works.
> 
> GGG definitely looks slower in the past year than previously, but he has also fought the two best opponents of his life in his past 2 bouts, and they both have faster hands than any version of him. He needed to go to the body and not telegraph his overhand right so much.


only reasonably intelligent pro-ggg post so far this thread... boxing is scored on a 10 point must system...by those rules I have it 7-5 canelo....a draw is also reasonable


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

I can see 115-113 either way so a draw is perfect for me.

The Byrd scorecard obviously makes this a shit fest, but to those saying it was a robbery?! I mean, I love Triple G and really wanted him to win but Canelo was superb in this fight. Lots of swing rounds.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

ElKiller said:


> Good point.
> 
> The irony here is that it was supposed to be Moretti who everyone was worried about and he scored the fight for GGG.


Just like 30 years ago mate.She's brought a great fight into question now and taken the shine right off two excellent performances.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

ShinyDiscoBall said:


> only reasonably intelligent pro-ggg post so far this thread... boxing is scored on a 10 point must system...by those rules I have it 7-5 canelo....a draw is also reasonable


I had it 7-5 for GGG but thought Canelo was excellent.
However the story is Byrd's card now,and that is not good at all.


----------



## Uncle Rico (May 24, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> Good points mate.
> He's always going to get favoured in Vegas but people have to realise that shit like the card Byrd pulled out of her arse hurts him and will only blight his reputation.


Yeah, I agree.

I think Canelo would have been applauded for his efforts, had he lost. But getting another atrocious scorecard in his favour only reinforces the perception that he's a protected fighter that needs corruption to aid him in results.

Fans are very unforgiving. It's unfortunate that Canelo has to recieve shit for this (since he isn't responsible for the scoring).....but somebody has to.


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

Strike said:


> Absolutely. I felt GGG won at the end of the 12 rounds, but my scorecard showed 6-6. Now, I could easily have switched a couple of those rounds to GGG, but on a couple went with clean, accurate power shots over higher number of shots landed. There is subjectivity involved...US judges tend to favour aggression more than say UK judges...some people will go with the guy backing someone up and landing more, whereas others will prefer flush counters that are lesser in number, but harder and more eye catching.
> 
> It was close. Canelo clearly won the last round and most people had him winning rounds 2 and 3, with a good number thinking he took 1 and 4 too. Overall...GGG probably deserved to win, but that's not how round by round scoring works.
> 
> GGG definitely looks slower in the past year than previously, but he has also fought the two best opponents of his life in his past 2 bouts, and they both have faster hands than any version of him. He needed to go to the body and not telegraph his overhand right so much.


Fair and reasonable assessment.

I was looking for that signature left rip from GGG the entire fight, but Canelo had his right elbow stapled to his ribs most of the time.


----------



## Mexi-Box (Jun 4, 2013)

Uncle Rico said:


> If you're being very generous to Canelo, then at an absolutely push you can find 6 rounds to give to him.
> 
> But that's the thing, though. You're not supposed to be generous to one fighter over the other. You're supposed to be fair and objective. And on that basis..... no, I don't think a draw is a fair result. Especially not when one of those judges was blatantly ordered to scored the fight for Canelo no matter what.


I'm right there. I can't see this being a draw. Canelo just wasn't active enough, and I think people were scoring punches that were landing on 3G's gloves but have Canelo winning big because they were eye-catching.


----------



## The Kraken (Apr 19, 2014)

The MMA fans who said McGregor was gonna kill boxing and were left crying are now saying THIS has killed boxing, they will grasp at anything

honestly, I could see what Canelo was doing well, and Harold Lederman was fucking blind as usual but no, Golovkin won close yet clear, I did say to those I was watching with that it was close enough for them to give the decision to Canelo on a Goldenboy card, and he was making Golovkin miss/ countering well (Golovkins lack of feint and telegraphed right hands were playing into Canelos hands) but he was being hit a lot more down the stretch and Golovkin was really wearing him down, I think Golovkin let Canelo escape too much but in ost of the rounds when he did land his blows were clearly more telling, Canelo looked absolutely fucked at times in the mid to late rounds, and while I think Golovkin didn't take advantage well enough of how tired Canelo was getting, he was doing the better work.

Golovkin won, even the casuals I was watching it with who picked Canelo thought so by the end


----------



## Tko6 (May 19, 2013)

Very happy with the draw. I called the draw around round 10 in skype, if it went to the cards (nb when I saw Adelaide Byrd was scoring I also said her card would be awful). GGG didn't deserve to lose his titles and Canelo didn't deserve a career-stalling loss. It was an enjoyable fight and we may get another one or two fights from it. That said, if I didn't know either fighter then I would have given the nod to GGG, but boxing isn't a simple sport and GGG, at 35 years old, isn't the future of it. 

A draw was the right decision for the sport imo.


----------



## KOTF (Jun 3, 2013)

turbotime said:


> I actually think 10-10 rounds need to be used more


David Haye scored this bout 120-120


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

Judge Adalaide Byrd, who scored it 118-110 for Canelo, must have had more to drink than I did.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

God! I hate when it gets to these arguments about whether or not it was a robbery.
I think GGG won,but it wasn't emphatic and although I've said you could make an argument for 8-4,you can make a strong argument against it.
I'd say he was denied a victory rather than robbed.Saying it was a robbery puts it in the same bracket as Roy Jones'Olympic debacle.


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> God! I hate when it gets to these arguments about whether or not it was a robbery.
> I think GGG won,but it wasn't emphatic and although I've said you could make an argument for 8-4,you can make a strong argument against it.
> I'd say he was denied a victory rather than robbed.Saying it was a robbery puts it in the same bracket as Roy Jones'Olympic debacle.


It is hard to see a draw, in a close fight, a robbery. I was barracking for GGG and would not have been surprised if Canelo got the nod.

Thing is GGG keeps his belts and he was of sound enough mind after the fight to express that.


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

DB Cooper said:


> Fair and reasonable assessment.
> 
> I was looking for that signature left rip from GGG the entire fight, but Canelo had his right elbow stapled to his ribs most of the time.


Canelos defence was pure class


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> Canelos defence was pure class


It was better than I expected it would be.


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

DB Cooper said:


> It was better than I expected it would be.


I've always thought ggg was made for canelo

I still believe it, he just needs to sort his cardio and he beats him handily imo


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> I've always thought ggg was made for canelo
> 
> I still believe it, he just needs to sort his cardio and he beats him handily imo


That's not as small a step as you are presenting it as.


----------



## Mexi-Box (Jun 4, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> I've always thought ggg was made for canelo
> 
> I still believe it, he just needs to sort his cardio and he beats him handily imo


Funny enough, people have been thinking Canelo's stamina has improved since the Cotto fight, IIRC. I've never really thought his stamina has ever improved, and I still feel this is his downfall.

I think GGG has Canelo's number, stamina or not. That elite jab, pressure, and ring generalship is too much.


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

DB Cooper said:


> That's not as small a step as you are presenting it as.


Obviously, but canelo was pretty comfortable until he started blowing out his arse


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

kevcefc said:


> Obviously, but canelo was pretty comfortable until he started blowing out his arse


By round 4?


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

Mexi-Box said:


> Funny enough, people have been thinking Canelo's stamina has improved since the Cotto fight, IIRC. I've never really thought his stamina has ever improved, and I still feel this is his downfall.
> 
> I think GGG has Canelo's number, stamina or not. That elite jab, pressure, and ring generalship is too much.


All that extra muscle he put on was always going to drain the tank faster


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> By round 4?


Yep, he put on a massive amount of muscle, especially around his torso, it was always gunna drain him faster than normal


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> Obviously, but canelo was pretty comfortable until he started blowing out his arse


If that was easy to correct they would have.

Canelo went in well muscled because they thought that gave him his best chance of winning. The downside was always going to be that the additional muscle would require addition oxygen and his cardio would suffer as a result.


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Mexi-Box said:


> Funny enough, people have been thinking Canelo's stamina has improved since the Cotto fight, IIRC. I've never really thought his stamina has ever improved, and I still feel this is his downfall.
> 
> I think GGG has Canelo's number, stamina or not. That elite jab, pressure, and ring generalship is too much.


He didn't have Canelo's number today.

That pressure only amounted to out jabbing canelo since he couldn't land much else. Missing all his power shots the entire night, too slow to catch canelo with anything significant whereas Canelo landed on GGG all night and has a highlight reel of shots to be proud of.

Second fight I hope GGG/Canelo bring to another level it so we get a clear result.


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

DB Cooper said:


> If that was easy to correct they would have.
> 
> Canelo went in well muscled because they thought that gave him his best chance of winning. The downside was always going to be that the additional muscle would require addition oxygen and his cardio would suffer as a result.


No he went in bigger that usual because he he was fighting at a higher weight, canelo made ggg look crude and more a brawler than a boxer at the start of the fight


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> No he went in bigger that usual because he he was fighting at a higher weight, canelo made ggg look crude and more a brawler than a boxer at the start of the fight


The extra muscle was always going to require additional oxygen and Canelo's cardio was always going to suffer as a result.


----------



## Medicine (Jun 4, 2013)

ShinyDiscoBall said:


> Bullshit. They were definitely Pro Golovkin


Fuck off troll


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

DB Cooper said:


> The extra muscle was always going to require additional oxygen and his cardio was always going to suffer as a result.


I know that, that's what happens when you move up in weight, you actually gain weight, crazy


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> I know that, that's what happens when you move up in weight, you actually gain weight, crazy


And crazy to think that a simple adjustment will magically provide Canelo with additional cardio when carrying that extra muscle.


----------



## The Kraken (Apr 19, 2014)

kevcefc said:


> Obviously, but canelo was pretty comfortable until he started blowing out his arse


He started to look tired pretty early despite not getting hit much in the early rounds, that was due to being forced to box in a style that didn't really suit him, even though he was rolling with shots well he was getting caught enough and being made to work that his own punches slowed dramatically and he never at any point was able to ppush Golovkin back effectively., even though he did land good counters because of Golovkin telegraphing his shots Jacobs is an aggressive power hitter too and he had to box on the backfoot all night against Golovkin, the mental pressure from Golovkin just moving forward is real


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

DB Cooper said:


> And crazy to think that a simple adjustment will magically provide Canelo with additional cardio when carrying that extra muscle.


A couple of warmup fights would help, rather than just diving in with number 1 fighter in the division


----------



## The Kraken (Apr 19, 2014)

Golovkin didn't cut the ring off at all, if he did and committed to the body more this fight would have been a lot easier, he headhunted and barely feinted at all, but he still did enough IMO


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

The Kraken said:


> He started to look tired pretty early despite not getting hit much in the early rounds, that was due to being forced to box in a style that didn't really suit him, even though he was rolling with shots well he was getting caught enough and being made to work that his own punches slowed dramatically and he never at any point was able to ppush Golovkin back effectively. Jacobs is an aggressive power hitter too and he had to box on the backfoot all night against Golovkin, the mental pressure from Golovkin just moving forward is real


Canelo's tank definitely caused this fight to be closer then it had to be.

I was impressed with GGG's gas tank, he was visibly out of wind the second half of the fight but he clearly dug deep in order to push forward.... having said that the lack of tank did prevent him from really imposing himself and not only landing more jabs but to be able to land hard power shots and end the fight in true GGG style. He just couldn't cope with Canelo's defense to land meaningful shots other than jabs.


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> A couple of warmup fights would help, rather than just diving in with number 1 fighter in the division


Canelo has had what, 2, 3 years for that?


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

The Kraken said:


> He started to look tired pretty early despite not getting hit much in the early rounds, that was due to being forced to box in a style that didn't really suit him, even though he was rolling with shots well he was getting caught enough and being made to work that his own punches slowed dramatically and he never at any point was able to ppush Golovkin back effectively., even though he did land good counters because of Golovkin telegraphing his shots Jacobs is an aggressive power hitter too and he had to box on the backfoot all night against Golovkin, the mental pressure from Golovkin just moving forward is real


The pressure golovkin puts you under is ridiculous, constantly stalking

When canelo hit him that bomb in the 9th and it just bounced off his head like nothing must be fucking horrendous


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

DB Cooper said:


> Canelo has had what, 2, 3 years for that?


You do understand he was in a different weight class don't you


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

ElKiller said:


> Same here. My final score was 7-5 for 3G but there were some rounds that could have gone either way. I gave the first round to GGG, although I thought it could have have easily gone to Canelo, only because I hate 10-10 rounds.


That's what ultimately might have made it a draw for me, that first round was very close. As was the last.


----------



## The Kraken (Apr 19, 2014)

kevcefc said:


> The pressure golovkin puts you under is ridiculous, constantly stalking
> 
> When canelo hit him that bomb in the 9th and it just bounced off his head like nothing must be fucking horrendous


Indeed, and I don't think that pressure alone should win fights and there were times were Golovkins shots were rediculously telegraphed with no feints and Canelo rolled them really well but the shots Golovkin did land were obviously taking a much bigger toll than vice versa


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

The Kraken said:


> Indeed, and I don't think that pressure alone should win fights and there were times were Golovkins shots were rediculously telegraphed with no feints and Canelo rolled them really well but the shots Golovkin did land were obviously taking a much bigger toll than vice versa


I've no doubt the golovkin of 3 years ago doesn't let canelo of the hook


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> You do understand he was in a different weight class don't you


Exactly, and the point I'm making is we all knew Canelo-GGG was inevitable. Yet Canelo continued to toy around with 160 pounds instead of having a few fights at it prior to fighting GGG.


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> I've no doubt the golovkin of 3 years ago doesn't let canelo of the hook


GGG of even 2 years ago would have won without much fuss.


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

DB Cooper said:


> Exactly, and the point I'm making is we all knew Canelo-GGG was inevitable. Yet Canelo continued to toy around with 160 pounds instead of having a few fights at it prior to fighting GGG.


He was world champion, milk it

Ggg always wants fighters to move up to fight him, but he weren't prepared to do the same for ward


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> He was world champion, milk it
> 
> Ggg always wants fighters to move up to fight him, but he weren't prepared to do the same for ward


GGG is the 160 pound king. If you want what's his come and get it. But not preparing yourself as a 160 pound fighter isn't going to enhance your chances. Canelo knows that now.


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

Teddy's off and running again >>>

http://www.mmaweekly.com/canelo-vs-golovkin-ends-in-a-draw-teddy-atlas-cites-boxings-corruption


----------



## kevcefc (Jun 7, 2013)

DB Cooper said:


> GGG is the 160 pound king. If you want what's his come and get it. But not preparing yourself as a 160 pound fighter isn't going to enhance your chances. Canelo knows that now.


It's weird the way a gassed after 4 rounds canelo still got a draw in a new weight class against the "king" of the middleweight division


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> It's weird the way a gassed after 4 rounds canelo still got a draw in a new weight class against the "king" of the middleweight division


Canelo won the last two rounds by my reckoning. But I didn't watch the fight with an agenda, only a beer in my hand. Have fun. Time I put my feet up.


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> It's weird the way a gassed after 4 rounds canelo still got a draw in a new weight class against the "king" of the middleweight division


Let's not kid ourselves here, both were gassed throughout the fight, GGG threw everything he had and missed a bunch which caused his gas tank to be depleted as well and got steamrolled in round 12 - a round in which most thought GGG would come out swinging but the roles got reversed... who was really gassed at that point?


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Another stunningly measured and impartial take from Doc. 

'Steamrolled' was Golovkin.


----------



## MEXAMELAC (Apr 14, 2014)

I was rooting for Canelo to win because I supported him before he became "famous" and he's where we're from (Guadalajara), but I have always liked GGG as well. I personally had GGG winning 7-5 but I felt like most people felt that it was a close fight and I can understand a draw, even though I thought GGG deserved the win. Byrd COMPLETELY ruined the fucking fight with her BS scorecard because now people will think it was fixed and will make Canelo look bad even though I don't think it's his fault and even Oscar said Byrd had a horrible scorecard. But that's why there's always controversy in close fights and this is not the first time this bitch has had some bogus scorecards. Boxing is subjective scoring but she killed this shit. I would have been cool with her thinking 115-113 Canelo but not that wide. That was a joke!

Personally I thought Canelo could have won the fight but like I've always said, (years back) his fucking stamina will be his downfall. He just can't keep the same pace and sharpness for 12 rounds and he's not a "BIG" MW like some retards think because of his weight. His body type is no ideal for a boxer. He has abilities to do more but his physical always fails him. He needs to find a better balance between his offense and defense and still hasn't found it, which is why he always leaves me wanting more in his fights. He was too defensive and even though he did some good stuff and made GGG miss over 500 punches, he didn't do enough offensively in my book. GGG did enough to win IMO but the rematch is fair and it should happen next. I expect Canelo to do the right thing with the rematch and I respect that he stepped up to fight GGG as the underdog. It was a great fight overall, and I expect the second fight to be just as good. Canelo has the abilities to do more in terms of skill but physically his limited with his stamina. IN the rematch, he needs to me more offensive and risk more to win the fight clearly. Overall I respect both fighters because they made the fight happen when it still mattered and relevant and that's always the best for boxing! The fight was GREAT!


----------



## 941jeremy (Jun 12, 2013)

DB Cooper said:


> Teddy's off and running again >>>
> 
> http://www.mmaweekly.com/canelo-vs-golovkin-ends-in-a-draw-teddy-atlas-cites-boxings-corruption


Teddy is intolerable


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> Another stunningly measured and impartial take from Doc.
> 
> 'Steamrolled' was Golovkin.


I added that word just for you...

Canelo came out swinging that round like a true champ and had GGG eating hard shots... 12 was an easy round for Canelo.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Doc

What should be done about Byrd?


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> Doc
> 
> What should be done about Byrd?


Fined easily and judging license revoked, she stealing the show from these 2 great warriors...

Giving our sport a black eye as always.. if we got some Mayweather Mcgregor casual fan left overs then I hope they come back.

More fans = more fights


----------



## Muff (Jun 6, 2013)

Doc is officially dumb. Seriously. stop posting.


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Muff said:


> Doc is officially dumb. Seriously. stop posting.


:merchant


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Muff said:


> Doc is officially dumb. Seriously. stop posting.


He's not always this dumb. He just can't show any objectivity when his favourite fighter is involved. I used to be the same when I was 17.


----------



## DynamicMoves (Apr 13, 2014)

Canelo has a history of having the judges. Lets throw out the obviously shit card, and we're left with 114-114 and 115-113 for GGG.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

I think the people saying a draw wasn't reasonable need to specify the 7 inarguable rounds Golovkin won.


----------



## DynamicMoves (Apr 13, 2014)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/909267298778701824

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/909267343762747397


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I think the people saying a draw wasn't reasonable need to specify the 7 inarguable rounds Golovkin won.


That's a hard one... and good ask to see what rounds GGG fans are looking at.

The 2 sane judges had 1, 2, 10, 11, 12 all for Canelo = *5 Rounds
*
That means GGG fans must have 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 = *7 Rounds

Now Canelo definitely took 3, and there is a lot of debate that can be made for a lot of those mid rounds.

What we have in our hands is a true toss em up decision, where a rematch is clearly needed to decide winner, not just gravitate toward the style you prefer.*


----------



## MEXAMELAC (Apr 14, 2014)




----------



## VinoVeritas (Nov 14, 2015)

Bogotazo said:


> I think the people saying a draw wasn't reasonable need to specify the 7 inarguable rounds Golovkin won.


I can see why some thought it was close or in Canelo's favour, but had GGG winning 3,4,5,6,7,8 and 9 clearly. Off memory 11 as well. I missed the 1st round but that was unanimously Canelo's by the sound of it.


----------



## Kampioni (May 16, 2013)

I had Canelo up by a round or two. Canelo rounds 1,2,3,4,5,11,12 all Canelo rounds. But you can make the argument that GGG won also, depends how you viewed the fight. I felt GGG did a tremendous job as usual in cutting off the ring and being relentless in his approach but Canelo landed the more meaningful punches and boxed well imo. Can't wait for the rematch, every round I was on the edge of my seat, fuck !!


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

I can't justify 118-110 so this draw was unreasonable and most likely corrupt.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Kurushi said:


> I can't justify 118-110 so this draw was unreasonable and most likely corrupt.


I think that's a different issue. I don't think anyone would defend that card.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I think that's a different issue. I don't think anyone would defend that card.


No, it's the same issue. The floor is open for anyone wanting to justify the result of this fight. Doing so includes having to justify that card.


----------



## poorface (Jun 14, 2013)

From my initial viewing, think you can get to a draw by extending as much charity as possible to Alvarez. I think that precludes this from being considered a robbery in the strictest sense of the term but I'm not sure that it necessarily makes for a reasonable card.

That being said, enough people whose scoring I respect have been defending a draw or 7-5 Alvarez win, so I need to rewatch.


----------



## Deadendgeneration (Mar 24, 2015)

Justifying the 114-114 card is easy enough to do. It gives the benefit to Canelo in all of the close rounds which is what I expected to happen anyway. Canelo landed slightly more eye catching shots but I'd say GGG landed comfortably more big shots upstairs as well as outworking him with the jab.


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

CuckoCuckitas said:


> I can see why some thought it was close or in Canelo's favour, but had GGG winning 3,4,5,6,7,8 and 9 clearly. Off memory 11 as well. I missed the 1st round but that was unanimously Canelo's by the sound of it.


FYI - Golovkins trainer after the 3rd round and leading into the 4th tells GGG "we gave that one away"

3rd round was a clear canelo round.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

This is definitely NOT a Whitaker-Chavez type of robbery, I know that much.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Doc said:


> FYI - Golovkins trainer after the 3rd round and leading into the 4th tells GGG "we gave that one away"
> 
> 3rd round was a clear canelo round.


It was not a clear Canelo round.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

ShinyDiscoBall said:


> I would like to know what exactly GGG was doing to win all these rounds as y'all see it....was it his constant missing n getting countered? His ineffective stalking, his gassing and getting sloppy and open to counters as the fight wore on?


Called a jab


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> It was not a clear Canelo round.


It definitely was, Canelo landed more shots in that rounds was the aggressor for the majority of the round and when GGG decided to come forward in the last 30 seconds all he found was air.

I'll trust his own trainer saying he gave that round away.


----------



## VinoVeritas (Nov 14, 2015)

Doc said:


> FYI - Golovkins trainer after the 3rd round and leading into the 4th tells GGG "we gave that one away"
> 
> 3rd round was a clear canelo round.


Sanchez might've been saying that to get GGG to ramp it up. How did the judges see the 3rd?


----------



## Boxalot (Jun 5, 2013)

Of course a draw is reasonable. Canelo won the first two and the last two clearly imo. It's entirely possible he won 2/3 of the rounds inbetween.

No way is this a robbery, not even close. The real cause for outrage is the 118-110 card which is ridiculous.


----------



## Hookjaw (Mar 31, 2017)

At the end of this fight, Canelo knew he'd lost and Golvkin knew he'd won. Any hint of doubt was removed by the hundreds of Mexican fans booing their own man throughout the post match interviews. This was complete bullshit, pure and simple. It's the one thing that puts me off the sport overall. How does all that effort and talent get held to ransom by historically inept and corrupt officials? The brazeness of it truly takes your breath away.


----------



## ElKiller (Jun 14, 2014)

Bogotazo said:


> That's what ultimately might have made it a draw for me, that first round was very close. As was the last.


The last round, IMO, was a more convincing round for Canelo.


----------



## Felix (Mar 13, 2013)

Uncle Rico said:


> Yeah, I agree.
> 
> I think Canelo would have been applauded for his efforts, had he lost. But getting another atrocious scorecard in his favour only reinforces the perception that he's a protected fighter that needs corruption to aid him in results.
> 
> Fans are very unforgiving. It's unfortunate that Canelo has to recieve shit for this (since he isn't responsible for the scoring).....but somebody has to.


The disingenuous ginger cunt doesn't help himself when he comes out with post-fight shit like "I think I won at least 7 or 8 rounds". The latter half of the fight he was on his bike looking for a breather while firing off sporadic explosive combinations while being backed-up. Yeah, people will say that's his style; his tactic etc but at very few points during that did he back Golovkin up or look "in control".


----------



## Felix (Mar 13, 2013)

Mexi-Box said:


> think people were scoring punches that were landing on 3G's gloves but have Canelo winning big because they were eye-catching.


Definitely. There were big crowd reactions at several of those moments.


----------



## godsavethequeen (Jun 12, 2013)

Thanks to a real nice chap ( you know who you are ) giving me a stream, I got to watch the fight with boxnation comentary. They were pretty neutral.
So here is my view of it all, Carnelo impressed me with his defence and rope work, and yes it did make GGG miss a lot that was very noticeable. But Canelo was not throwing enough back at the same time, the first 4 rounds were very close then GGG landed his Jab regularly but never managed to land combinations, Canelo got some power shots in but lots were brushed off arms and gloves, yet GGG was struggling to land his. I have no issue with the Draw as Canelo impressed but I had GGG the winner by 2 rounds and they could be any of the first 4 close rounds. Great event ruined by shit scoring by the one judge


----------



## Football Bat (Dec 2, 2016)

As has been said a zillion times already, I had GGG winning but I could see a draw.


----------



## DOM5153 (May 16, 2013)

DB Cooper said:


> GGG of even 2 years ago would have won without much fuss.


Unfortunately I think you are right, I say unfortunately in the sense of the fight should have happened long ago. It's not ideal that Golovkin has only now received his biggest fight and it's a testament to the guys skill and grit as an athlete that he managed to put on as good as a performance that he managed last night. I think this was evident in the 11th and 12th when Golovkin visibly slowed down and also how slow some of his shots were. He proved a lot of people wrong last night with his performance I'm sure.


----------



## KERRIGAN (Jul 25, 2012)

This farce of a scoring doesn't really hurt GGG that much.

He still holds all his belts and now he will have a wave of sympathy from the general public that he got ripped off.

It sets things up well for a rematch next year, with GGG hopefully fighting Billy Joe Saunders in Dec or Jan, to get all the belts.


----------



## Floyd_g.o.a.t (Jun 11, 2013)

Are people seriously labelling this as a robbery? After a draw was the final outcome?


----------



## KERRIGAN (Jul 25, 2012)

Floyd_g.o.a.t said:


> Are people seriously labelling this as a robbery? After a draw was the final outcome?


I think all the outrage is simply over the Adelaide Byrd score card.


----------



## ChampionsForever (Jun 5, 2013)

KERRIGAN said:


> I think all the outrage is simply over the Adelaide Byrd score card.


 yep


----------



## ISPEAKUMTROOTH (Jun 10, 2014)

Flea Man said:


> It was not a clear Canelo round.


Far from it,and maybe because it was a huge fight its a bit disappointing not to have a winner but i thought it was relatively clear to GGG.
I think the jab is being criminally under rated in fights nowadays and for me his was a superb tool this morning.

Not taking anything away from Saul,he fought fire with fire,footwork improved and a granite chin.


----------



## Floyd_g.o.a.t (Jun 11, 2013)

There were many swing rounds. For example, round 6. Canelo was looking great and sharpe, I gave it to him but the judges awarded it to GGG. 

It was that type of fight.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> This is definitely NOT a Whitaker-Chavez type of robbery, I know that much.


I think the draw was generous, like a Foreman-Briggs type of decision.

Not an outright robbery but I'm hard-pressed to really support the result.


----------



## nvs (May 16, 2013)

I had it 115-113 for GGG.


----------



## DOM5153 (May 16, 2013)

It's flat out not a robbery, I'm gutted for Golovkin though, I felt he had done enough.


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

DOM5153 said:


> It's flat out not a robbery, I'm gutted for Golovkin though, I felt he had done enough.


He got to keep the belts.


----------



## nvs (May 16, 2013)

http://www.secondsout.com/columns/thomas-hauser/conflicts-of-interest1

Thomas Hauser wrote a brilliant piece about this:

Where big fights are concerned, referees and judges receive huge officiating fees and generous travel allowances that flow directly or indirectly from the promoter. They've also been known to get other gratuities from promoters, including ringside tickets for family members and friends. Their assignments might come through world sanctioning organizations and state athletic commissions. But the true source of their perks is the promoter, who usually has a vested interest in the outcome of the fight.

As Lou DiBella notes, "When a judge or referee asks a promoter for another first-class ticket so he can fly to a fight with his girlfriend or wife, there's an implied quid pro quo. Anyone who refuses to admit that is lying."

When someone who is supposed to be a neutral official understands that he (or she) can receive something of value by ruling a particular way, it undermines the integrity of the process. Yet in some jurisdictions, major promoters even have the power to blackball referees and judges.

Also, referees and judges know which fighter is favored by a particular sanctioning body. And the practice of certain judges and referees aligning themselves with one or more sanctioning organizations further undermines the neutrality that state athletic commissions should be seeking to ensure.

Boxing seriously is a cesspool of corruption. There's no other way to put it.

The solution to this issue is as simple as can (be as described here), but somehow, this disgusting status quo remains.

But as long as the promoters are responsible for the travel, expenses and fees of the judges, the judges are going to return the favor.

And as long as sanctioning bodies are allowed to "keep" judges, it is only natural that those judges will protect that organization's favored champions.

So what is the solution? Simple.

Take the responsibility for hiring judges and referees out of the hands of the promoters and put it where it belongs, in the hands of the state commissions.

The commission would pay the fees and expenses from a portion of the sanctioning fees scooped from the fighters by the organizations.

And those commissions - provided they are run by competent and honest people, a big "if" - must not license any judge or referee who continues to be affiliated with one of the alphabets.

No judge should ever feel an allegiance to a particular fighter because of whose title he holds, nor to any organization because it is his or her only source of work.

And no money should ever pass directly from a promoter to an official. Ever.

The way things are done now, Lennox Lewis not only got screwed, he paid for the screwing.

And left behind not a single shred of evidence.


----------



## DOM5153 (May 16, 2013)

DB Cooper said:


> He got to keep the belts.


Yeh I guess, I think this meant more to Golovkin than belts, this was his legacy after 12 years of searching for that career defining win, I favour Canelo in a rematch, I feel as if that was Golovkins last stand.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

People can try and detoxify the blatant fix if they want. They can be apologists for corruption. It's obvious that at least one judge was bought off. Orchestrating a lucrative rematch was clearly one of the aims.


----------



## DB Cooper (May 17, 2013)

DOM5153 said:


> Yeh I guess, I think this meant more to Golovkin than belts, this was his legacy after 12 years of searching for that career defining win, I favour Canelo in a rematch, I feel as if that was Golovkins last stand.


I'm sure Golovkin would have preferred they'd raised his hand. But he appeared fairly philosophical about things and mentioned more than once he would be taking his belts home.


----------



## DOM5153 (May 16, 2013)

DB Cooper said:


> I'm sure Golovkin would have preferred they'd raised his hand. But he appeared fairly philosophical about things and mentioned more than once he would be taking his belts home.


He has a positive attitude which is great, in this fight I feel as if the win was more important than the belts. Especially with many focusing on Golovkins lack of competition up to this point. He's 35 almost 36, his style doesn't have a long shelf life.


----------



## uraharakisuke (May 16, 2013)

Rewatched it and it's a clear win for GGG. His jab and ring generalship, pressure, work rate and Byrd is a cunt, edged even the close rounds. Quite a few of Canelo's shots were partially blocked but the crowd and commentators made you think otherwise. 

There's no point giving the benefit of the doubt to Canelo on close rounds just to justify a draw. Doesn't work like that, not reasonable. He took too much time off n the rounds, which he tends to historically do. Whereas GGG was relentless, his jab was key.
Should do a round by round analysis at some point.


----------



## DirtyDan (May 25, 2013)

Tbh, no bias aside, a draw was the fairest outcome, no complaints from me.


----------



## Thomas Crewz (Jul 23, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> The pressure golovkin puts you under is ridiculous, constantly stalking
> 
> When canelo hit him that bomb in the 9th and it just bounced off his head like nothing must be fucking horrendous


Yeah im fine with a draw but Canelo is going to be having nightmares about GG's pressure.

Its unreal. The man is made of iron.


----------



## Thomas Crewz (Jul 23, 2013)

I think on balance GG should feel more unlucky with the result though

Mookie Alexander (Bloody Elbow) --------> 117-111 GGG
Brian Campbell (CBS) ---------------------> 117-111 GGG
Jack Rathborn (Mirror UK) ----------------> 117-111 GGG
Harold Lederman (HBO) ------------------> 116-112 GGG
Bryan Graham (Guardian UK) ------------> 116-112 GGG
Dan Rafael (ESPN) ------------------------> 116-112 GGG
Bob Velin (USA Today) --------------------> 116-112 GGG
Kevin McRae (Bleacher Report) -----------> 116-112 GGG
Shaun Al-Shatti (MMA Fighting) ----------> 116-112 GGG
Ryan Frederick (Wrestling Observer) ----> 116-112 GGG
Patrick Stumberg (MMA Mania) ----------> 116-112 GGG
Kevin Mitchell (Guardian UK) ------------> 116-113 GGG
Jordan Breen (Sherdog) ------------------> 115-112 GGG
Kevin Iole (Yahoo) ------------------------> 115-113 GGG
Will Esco (Bad Left Hook) -----------------> 115-113 GGG
Phil Murphy (ESPN) -----------------------> 115-113 GGG
Mike Harris (SI) ---------------------------> 115-113 GGG
Paul Fontaine (Wrestling Observer) ------> 115-113 GGG
MMA Brazil ---------------------------------> 115-113 GGG
Sean Sheehan (Severe MMA) -------------> 115-113 GGG
Rob Tatum (Combat Press) ----------------> 115-113 GGG
Patrick Wyman (Bleacher Report) ---------> 115-113 GGG
Steven Muehlhausen (Sporting News) ----> 114-114 Draw
Gilbert Manzano (Denver Post) -----------> 114-114 Draw
Boxing Clever (Seen) ---------------------> 114-114 Draw
Associated Press --------------------------> 114-114 Draw
Lance Pugmire (LA Times) ----------------> 114-114 Draw
Chris Mannix (Yahoo) ---------------------> 114-114 Draw
De La Hoya --------------------------------> 115-113 Canelo
Gareth Davies (UK Telegraph) -----------> 116-112 Canelo

Plus most of the people i follow on twitter seemed to think Golovkin won, though you cant be sure if they were actually scoring if they didnt post their scorecard


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Thomas Crewz said:


> I think on balance GG should feel more unlucky with the result though
> 
> Mookie Alexander (Bloody Elbow) --------> 117-111 GGG
> Brian Campbell (CBS) ---------------------> 117-111 GGG
> ...


Scott Christ (Bad Left Hook) 116-112 GGG

Kyle McLachlan (Bad Left Hook) 115-113 GGG

Connor Ruebusch (Bloody Elbow) 115-113 Canelo


----------



## McKay (Jun 6, 2012)

Had it 115-113 GGG but a draw isn't too bad of a decision. Realistically I don't think anything between 116-112 GGG through to 114-114 is unreasonable. Don't see how Canelo could be given the win though.


----------



## Drunkenboat (Jul 29, 2012)

I had it 115-113 fr GGG and I was pretty sure he won. A draw is taking in the fact its Vegas/Gldn boy/Canelo


----------



## KERRIGAN (Jul 25, 2012)

Thomas Crewz said:


> De La Hoya --------------------------------> 115-113 Canelo


:lol: :rofl :lol: :rofl :lol: :rofl :lol:


----------



## OneTime (Nov 10, 2014)

I'm happy with the draw. Neither fighter truly won it.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Did someone just post ODLH's scorecard?

That's brilliant.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/909276637329489923


----------



## ThatBoxingGuy2022 (Aug 28, 2014)

Kurushi said:


> People can try and detoxify the blatant fix if they want. They can be apologists for corruption. It's obvious that at least one judge was bought off. Orchestrating a lucrative rematch was clearly one of the aims.


Yeah definitely that judge was bought off, the problem is this has been happening for years and years its too late to cry about it now, its up to GGG to say no to a rematch because of the corruption and fight someone else, Canelo got a draw in one of the cards against Mayweather lol you have to KO him


----------



## poorface (Jun 14, 2013)

nvs said:


> http://www.secondsout.com/columns/thomas-hauser/conflicts-of-interest1
> 
> Thomas Hauser wrote a brilliant piece about this:
> 
> ...


Hauser whining about conflicts of interest is a bit rich given his history as a bought-and-paid-for "journalist."


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Believe it or not, we have at least one poster on here who thinks Byrd's scorecard was sincere. This is a hell of a place.


----------



## V-2 (Jan 1, 2017)

nuclear said:


> i mean i guess. i thought it was close but clear for ggg but whenever its close i guess a draw isnt out of the question


This, in an absolute best case scenario for Canelo because there's really no argument for him winning and plenty to the side of 3G. I was pleased with Golovkin's assertiveness and the relentless pressure he put on _after the third round_ - the shots he walked straight through as his face grew angrier made for good lolz - but I gotta say he landed a very unsatisfying amount of hard leather on the whole. He had Canelo in real distress at points, but not a whole lot more than that.


----------



## OneTime (Nov 10, 2014)

I saw some idiot in the round by round thread claim canelo landed the more head snapping punches that's why he won :lol:

Dumb mother fucker landing 2-3 head snapping shots every 2 rounds doesn't mean he won.

Also if we're going by that erislandy lara landed way more head snapping shots on canelhoe than hoe landed on ggg


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Kurushi said:


> No, it's the same issue. The floor is open for anyone wanting to justify the result of this fight. Doing so includes having to justify that card.


That's like saying Canelo beating Cotto isn't reasonable because the cards were atrocious. I'm soliciting individual opinions on the margin of victory.


----------



## Setanta (May 24, 2013)

Press scores:

17 scored it for GGG
3 scored it a draw.
No-one scored it for Canelo

http://mmadecisions.com/decision/8418/Gennady-Golovkin-vs-Saúl-Álvarez

ESB poll

228 - 18 in favour of GGG

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/who-really-won-the-ggg-vs-canelo.593715/page-6#post-18771135


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hookjaw said:


> At the end of this fight, Canelo knew he'd lost and Golvkin knew he'd won. Any hint of doubt was removed by the hundreds of Mexican fans booing their own man throughout the post match interviews. This was complete bullshit, pure and simple. It's the one thing that puts me off the sport overall. How does all that effort and talent get held to ransom by historically inept and corrupt officials? The brazeness of it truly takes your breath away.


What are those 7 rounds that GGG inarguably won then?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

It was as near to a draw as Chavez v Whitaker was.


----------



## The Sweet Science (Jun 5, 2013)

116-113 for GGG. A draw is certainly better than a screw job win for Canelo.


----------



## Floyd_g.o.a.t (Jun 11, 2013)

Kurushi said:


> People can try and detoxify the blatant fix if they want. They can be apologists for corruption. It's obvious that at least one judge was bought off. Orchestrating a lucrative rematch was clearly one of the aims.


As ridiculous as that scorecard was I have to mention that if Byrd scored it a draw, the outcome would be a majority draw.

Would the fans then accept this result or claim that not just Byrd but the other judge is corrupt too?


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Floyd_g.o.a.t said:


> As ridiculous as that scorecard was I have to mention that if Byrd scored it a draw, the outcome would be a majority draw.
> 
> Would the fans then accept this result or claim that not just Byrd but the other judge is corrupt too?


Dunno, who cares?

A scorecard was turned in that is completely beyond the realms of possibility. Completely inconceivable.

No point in speculating how fans would feel if it was a 114-114 card. It was 118-110.

Bullshit. Ban the cunt.


----------



## JamieC (Jun 2, 2012)

kevcefc said:


> Obviously, but canelo was pretty comfortable until he started blowing out his arse


But he always has and will because of that style i think


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

If people are really honest with themselves, take out your emotion, take out the disgusting scorecard, and watch that fight back I don't think there is anyone who could break down 7 rounds in that fight that Golovkin won unquestionably. Nor Canelo for that matter.

That was a tough, tough fight to score and neither guy put their stamp on it. Canelo took rounds off and fought the way he always does in spots and Golovkin just did not land enough clean, significant shots to assert dominance.

A draw is a very fair result to both men in my opinion. Neither guy won 7 rounds clearly which barring a TKO/KO is the only way to clearly win a boxing match.


----------



## Hookjaw (Mar 31, 2017)

Bogotazo said:


> What are those 7 rounds that GGG inarguably won then?


That great big swathe after the first couple, ending at around about the 12th I reckon. Canelo was looking utterly discouraged for the latter half of the fight. He celebrated with absolutely no conviction whatsoever - he knew he'd lost, as did his supporters. It wasn't a blowout, but it was decisive, and the gulf between the two became more and more apparent as the fight wore on. Canelo's saving grace was that he rallied in the final round. Not that, I suspect, that made a great deal of difference to the score cards.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hookjaw said:


> That great big swathe after the first couple, ending at around about the 12th I reckon. Canelo was looking utterly discouraged for the latter half of the fight. He celebrated with absolutely no conviction whatsoever - he knew he'd lost, as did his supporters. It wasn't a blowout, but it was decisive, and the gulf between the two became more and more apparent as the fight wore on. Canelo's saving grace was that he rallied in the final round. Not that, I suspect, that made a great deal of difference to the score cards.


You're saying 4-11 were inarguably Golovkin's? I'm asking for specific rounds


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Well I watched rounds 9-12 earlier again on the replay. I scored the 10th for Golovkin despite all three judges giving it to Canelo. I'm not saying it's an inarguable round, mind.

I'm about to watch the whole thing again. I'll post my scorecard after.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

By definition in that a lot of rounds were close depending on what you do and don't place significance on (jabs, clean punches, pressure, ring generalship etc) then yes you could say it's a draw. I had it 7-5 for GGG I believe but a draw is feasible even though looking at it from a whole GGG definitely won the fight IMO.


----------



## Floyd_g.o.a.t (Jun 11, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> Dunno, who cares?
> 
> A scorecard was turned in that is completely beyond the realms of possibility. Completely inconceivable.
> 
> ...


She should have been banned years ago. That's a given.

I'm just struggling to find out the anger of the fans, it seems split. Some are complaining that GGG should have won some are complaining that the fix was in. Some are saying this is a robbery though neither man won. It was a damn close fight.

It seems there is a lot of anger but the direction is all over the place. A rematch must happen next year. September ideally so GGG can collect BJS belt and destroy him early next year.


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Floyd_g.o.a.t said:


> She should have been banned years ago. That's a given.
> 
> I'm just struggling to find out the anger of the fans, it seems split. Some are complaining that GGG should have won some are complaining that the fix was in. Some are saying this is a robbery though neither man won. It was a damn close fight.
> 
> It seems there is a lot of anger but the direction is all over the place. A rematch must happen next year. September ideally so GGG can collect BJS belt and destroy him early next year.


hopefully not September.. GGG fans had their excuses lined up as backup just in case he is dominated and will more so in a whole year from now...

May would be nice.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Setanta said:


> Press scores:
> 
> 17 scored it for GGG
> 3 scored it a draw.
> ...


Wow very interesting. This fight definitely isn't no Hagler-Leonard


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Floyd_g.o.a.t said:


> She should have been banned years ago. That's a given.
> 
> I'm just struggling to find out the anger of the fans, it seems split. Some are complaining that GGG should have won some are complaining that the fix was in. Some are saying this is a robbery though neither man won. It was a damn close fight.
> 
> It seems there is a lot of anger but the direction is all over the place. A rematch must happen next year. September ideally so GGG can collect BJS belt and destroy him early next year.


Nobody can be that incompetent at judging a fight. The fix was in. That isn't to say that a draw is totally out of the question, but at least one judge was paid for and was not going to score the fight in Golovkin's favour unless she was forced to by multiple knockdowns.

I'm not suggesting we should all stop scoring fights on a round by round basis and just listen to the crowd reaction after 12, but it's hugely indicative that Canelo was being booed by his own fans after the scores were read out.

I consider the fight to have been a robbery on the basis that one judge was paid to score the fight for Canelo. Even if the fight is close and debatable, how can we call it anything else? 118-110? FFS. She couldn't even be arsed to be subtle about it. Maybe she was pre-empting some late knockdowns fucking things up for her.


----------



## jonnytightlips (Jun 14, 2012)

Draw was fairly reasonable imo. No more than a couple of rounds in it either way.


----------



## Hookjaw (Mar 31, 2017)

Bogotazo said:


> You're saying 4-11 were inarguably Golovkin's? I'm asking for specific rounds


I think you already got your answer from me, mate. Just reading the articles on the front page of The Ring earlier today, and the narrative being pushed is pretty damn clear. Shut up gormless punters and just get ready for the rematch. So what if a third of the judging panel was clearly corrupt or else utterly, miserably incompetent. We get to do all this over again next year, and with a bit of luck, the year after that, too. Don't worry about the scores, though - they're just for fun.

The real pity here is there was simply no reason to jury-rig the thing anyway. Had Canelo dropped a close-ish decision, there would still have been plenty of appetite for the rematch, with another 6-9 months on Golovkin's clock to even the odds in Alvarez' favour. If they were that set on a trilogy from which their boy emerged triumphant, dicking the Kazakh over in the opening stanza was simply not necessary. Don't talk up a fight as a showcase for the sport and then deliver this mess. Mayweather must be laughing his fucking arse off - at least his con was there for all to see, and nobody seems to hold it much against any of the participants involved in it. This was supposed to be the real deal - well, it's got about the same stink to me.


----------



## Hookjaw (Mar 31, 2017)

https://www.ringtv.com/517349-canelo-ggg-entertaining-draw-best-possible-outcome/

https://www.ringtv.com/517375-canelo-ggg-dont-let-one-atrocious-scorecard-ruin-excellent-fight/

Un-fucking-believable


----------



## Juiceboxbiotch (May 16, 2013)

I begrudgingly accept a draw. Really hard to give Canelo more than 4 rounds though and I couldn't help but feel like GGG was robbed a bit. It felt icky, but I'm not gonna complain too much.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hookjaw said:


> I think you already got your answer from me, mate.


I didn't get any specific rounds. I agree with your point that we shouldn't keep quiet about that corrupt card but it's just not what I'm asking here.


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Hookjaw said:


> https://www.ringtv.com/517349-canelo-ggg-entertaining-draw-best-possible-outcome/
> 
> https://www.ringtv.com/517375-canelo-ggg-dont-let-one-atrocious-scorecard-ruin-excellent-fight/
> 
> Un-fucking-believable


Is it really going to be a trilogy??

I'm all for that


----------



## Setanta (May 24, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Wow very interesting. This fight definitely isn't no Hagler-Leonard


I still haven't settled definitively on who won Hagler SRL !


----------



## Cableaddict (Jun 6, 2013)

The only way to come up wit a draw, is if you can't count.

It's a shame, because Canelo fought incredibly well and with massive balls, but he lost, and now that great performance is tainted with bullshit.


----------



## Big Yank Bal (Aug 2, 2013)

Tko6 said:


> Very happy with the draw. I called the draw around round 10 in skype, if it went to the cards (nb when I saw Adelaide Byrd was scoring I also said her card would be awful). GGG didn't deserve to lose his titles and Canelo didn't deserve a career-stalling loss. It was an enjoyable fight and we may get another one or two fights from it. That said, if I didn't know either fighter then I would have given the nod to GGG, but boxing isn't a simple sport and GGG, at 35 years old, isn't the future of it.
> 
> A draw was the right decision for the sport imo.


Yeah, I agreed with the draw. I'm glad the judges called it a draw, but I wish the 118-110 scorecard was either a 115-113 Canelo, 115-114 Canelo, or 114-114 so we could have still had the draw but not a bullshit corrupt scorecard that put a damper on the night.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

I just re-watched the fight.

Canelo: 1, 2, 3, 11, 12
GGG: 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ,9 , 10

Draw is a perfectly reasonable result to be honest. The 10 could have been scored for Canelo.


----------



## nuclear (Jun 15, 2015)

Pedderrs said:


> Doc
> 
> What should be done about Byrd?


she really does need to be investigated though. she even has a bad reputation in mma. just a terrible, terrible judge


----------



## Broxi (Jul 24, 2012)

Having just watched again there, I think the two other judges cards are a correct assessment of the fight, for me it came down to the last 3 rounds. If I give Canelo all of rounds 10-12, having given him rounds 1-3 ... then the fight is a draw for me 114-114 ... however, I don't give him all 3... I give Round 11 to Golovkin so I end up with the same score card as Dave Moretti at 115-113, only difference with me and him is he gave GGG the very contentious Rd 3.

If I give Golovkin Rd 3 as well then it becomes even more clearly a GGG win. Where I struggle is to give Canelo 7 rounds ... never mind 10.

Basically a draw is a very reasonable card but Byrd should be shot is what I'm saying.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Broxi said:


> Having just watched again there, I think the two other judges cards are a correct assessment of the fight, for me it came down to the last 3 rounds. If I give Canelo all of rounds 10-12, having given him rounds 1-3 ... then the fight is a draw for me 114-114 ... however, I don't give him all 3... I give Round 11 to Golovkin so I end up with the same score card as Dave Moretti at 115-113, only difference with me and him is he gave GGG the very contentious Rd 3.
> 
> If I give Golovkin Rd 3 as well then it becomes even more clearly a GGG win. Where I struggle is to give Canelo 7 rounds ... never mind 10.
> 
> Basically a draw is a very reasonable card but Byrd should be shot is what I'm saying.


It's closer than people are making it. At least not many are screaming a Canelo victory.


----------



## Chip H (Oct 8, 2016)

GGG won. Its that simple. 

He dictated the pace from the last 20 seconds of round 3. He was the boss in there. Completely in charge.

I had it close as fuck watching live with that crazy electric nervousness only top top sport can bring. On rewatch its very very clear who won this. 

Marvelous fight.


----------



## Chip H (Oct 8, 2016)

Juiceboxbiotch said:


> I begrudgingly accept a draw. Really hard to give Canelo more than 4 rounds though and I couldn't help but feel like GGG was robbed a bit. It felt icky, but I'm not gonna complain too much.


The reason your not complaining is because you know 90% of fans agree. Triple G won that fight, it cannot be disputed. The 10% lose.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> That's like saying Canelo beating Cotto isn't reasonable because the cards were atrocious. I'm soliciting individual opinions on the margin of victory.


I don't recognise any similarity in those statements. Most people feel Golovkin beat Canelo whilst most people also feel Canelo beat Cotto so, without even scraping the surface of your analogy, it's immediately redundant. What those fights have in common is that there was probably at least one corrupt judge on the panel. This is how it's been for a while now with Canelo.

I've read you long enough to know that there's no malice in your "soliciting of individual opinions on the margin of victory" but this thread smacks of people trying to persuade themselves that an amount of corruption is ok if the end result was possibly achievable. It's a 'stick-your-head-in-the-sand' thread that dilutes the derision that the result deserves.


----------



## Mexi-Box (Jun 4, 2013)

Chip H said:


> The reason your not complaining is because you know 90% of fans agree. Triple G won that fight, it cannot be disputed. The 10% lose.


I have not seen a poll yet that doesn't have GGG as the overwhelming victor by fan's vote.


----------



## Chip H (Oct 8, 2016)

Mexi-Box said:


> I have not seen a poll yet that doesn't have GGG as the overwhelming victor by fan's vote.


That's because he won. Anyone who genuinely _enjoys_ getting smacked by Canelo can only be the G. 
P4P level with SOG IMO.
Yup I'm a fan boy and i don't give a fuck.


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

I think it's definitely reasonable to score the fight 114-114


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Are we all in agreement that it's almost impossible to score the fight for Canelo?


----------



## Kingboxer (Jul 31, 2012)

I had it 7-5 GGG, but felt the draw was reasonable, very close back and forth fight. No real conclusive winner.

The real problem and controversy though, stems from the bullshit 118-110 card and how everyone knew it would be next to a miracle for Golovkin to win a decision in a competitive fight before it even started.

It doesn't take a scientist to see there is bias for Canelo with atleast one of the judges in his fights. Mayweather, the biggest boxing star of the era, shut Canelo out to a majority decision. Not to mention the wide cards for Canelo in very close fights that could of went the other way. The 117-111 card in the Lara fight, 119-108 card against Trout, 119-109 against Cotto. All blatant fuckkery.


----------



## Chip H (Oct 8, 2016)

Pedderrs said:


> Are we all in agreement that it's almost impossible to score the fight for Canelo?


Not almost. Completely and utterly.


----------



## OneTime (Nov 10, 2014)

As I said in other threads I'm actually happy it was a draw and we'd get to see another and probably better fight

I just hope they don't long it out and make it go on for another 2 years when GGG is 37 or 38.


----------



## Juiceboxbiotch (May 16, 2013)

Chip H said:


> The reason your not complaining is because you know 90% of fans agree. Triple G won that fight, it cannot be disputed. The 10% lose.


I don't know about 90%, but a whole lot of people in this thread seem to agree that a draw is an acceptable result:



nuclear said:


> i mean i guess. i thought it was close but clear for ggg but whenever its close i guess a draw isnt out of the question





ShinyDiscoBall said:


> I had it for canelo 7-5...so a draw is reasonable





941jeremy said:


> Somewhat, I had it a draw under the mindset that Canelo would win every possible round that wasn't clearly a GGG round.





941jeremy said:


> Can't really vote because it isn't that simple. However, a draw was reasonable for the house fighter.





stevebhoy87 said:


> I thought there was 6 clear Golovkin rounds on how I scored it.
> 
> On that basis if you give Canelo every benefit of the doubt in all the others then yeah I can see a draw.
> 
> I disagree though, I had it for GGG but if you give everything that's close to Canelo then you can get there.





ElKiller said:


> Same here. My final score was 7-5 for 3G but there were some rounds that could have gone either way. I gave the first round to GGG, although I thought it could have have easily gone to Canelo, only because I hate 10-10 rounds.





ShinyDiscoBall said:


> Which 6? I gave canelo Rds 1,2,6,8, and the last 3





DB Cooper said:


> I watched it with a beer. Not a score pad and, as much as I was barracking for GGG, I wouldn't have been surprised if Canelo got the nod.
> 
> I don't see anything outrageous with a draw.





Strike said:


> Absolutely. I felt GGG won at the end of the 12 rounds, but my scorecard showed 6-6. Now, I could easily have switched a couple of those rounds to GGG, but on a couple went with clean, accurate power shots over higher number of shots landed. There is subjectivity involved...US judges tend to favour aggression more than say UK judges...some people will go with the guy backing someone up and landing more, whereas others will prefer flush counters that are lesser in number, but harder and more eye catching.
> 
> It was close. Canelo clearly won the last round and most people had him winning rounds 2 and 3, with a good number thinking he took 1 and 4 too. Overall...GGG probably deserved to win, but that's not how round by round scoring works.
> 
> GGG definitely looks slower in the past year than previously, but he has also fought the two best opponents of his life in his past 2 bouts, and they both have faster hands than any version of him. He needed to go to the body and not telegraph his overhand right so much.





kevcefc said:


> Golovkin probably should of won the fight on sheer aggression and pressure
> 
> But a draw is no robbery
> 
> ...





ShinyDiscoBall said:


> only reasonably intelligent pro-ggg post so far this thread... boxing is scored on a 10 point must system...by those rules I have it 7-5 canelo....a draw is also reasonable





Flea Man said:


> I can see 115-113 either way so a draw is perfect for me.
> 
> The Byrd scorecard obviously makes this a shit fest, but to those saying it was a robbery?! I mean, I love Triple G and really wanted him to win but Canelo was superb in this fight. Lots of swing rounds.





Tko6 said:


> Very happy with the draw. I called the draw around round 10 in skype, if it went to the cards (nb when I saw Adelaide Byrd was scoring I also said her card would be awful). GGG didn't deserve to lose his titles and Canelo didn't deserve a career-stalling loss. It was an enjoyable fight and we may get another one or two fights from it. That said, if I didn't know either fighter then I would have given the nod to GGG, but boxing isn't a simple sport and GGG, at 35 years old, isn't the future of it.
> 
> A draw was the right decision for the sport imo.





DB Cooper said:


> It is hard to see a draw, in a close fight, a robbery. I was barracking for GGG and would not have been surprised if Canelo got the nod.
> 
> Thing is GGG keeps his belts and he was of sound enough mind after the fight to express that.





Bogotazo said:


> That's what ultimately might have made it a draw for me, that first round was very close. As was the last.





MEXAMELAC said:


> I was rooting for Canelo to win because I supported him before he became "famous" and he's where we're from (Guadalajara), but I have always liked GGG as well. I personally had GGG winning 7-5 but I felt like most people felt that it was a close fight and I can understand a draw, even though I thought GGG deserved the win. Byrd COMPLETELY ruined the fucking fight with her BS scorecard because now people will think it was fixed and will make Canelo look bad even though I don't think it's his fault and even Oscar said Byrd had a horrible scorecard. But that's why there's always controversy in close fights and this is not the first time this bitch has had some bogus scorecards. Boxing is subjective scoring but she killed this shit. I would have been cool with her thinking 115-113 Canelo but not that wide. That was a joke!
> 
> Personally I thought Canelo could have won the fight but like I've always said, (years back) his fucking stamina will be his downfall. He just can't keep the same pace and sharpness for 12 rounds and he's not a "BIG" MW like some retards think because of his weight. His body type is no ideal for a boxer. He has abilities to do more but his physical always fails him. He needs to find a better balance between his offense and defense and still hasn't found it, which is why he always leaves me wanting more in his fights. He was too defensive and even though he did some good stuff and made GGG miss over 500 punches, he didn't do enough offensively in my book. GGG did enough to win IMO but the rematch is fair and it should happen next. I expect Canelo to do the right thing with the rematch and I respect that he stepped up to fight GGG as the underdog. It was a great fight overall, and I expect the second fight to be just as good. Canelo has the abilities to do more in terms of skill but physically his limited with his stamina. IN the rematch, he needs to me more offensive and risk more to win the fight clearly. Overall I respect both fighters because they made the fight happen when it still mattered and relevant and that's always the best for boxing! The fight was GREAT!





Bogotazo said:


> I think the people saying a draw wasn't reasonable need to specify the 7 inarguable rounds Golovkin won.





Doc said:


> That's a hard one... and good ask to see what rounds GGG fans are looking at.
> 
> The 2 sane judges had 1, 2, 10, 11, 12 all for Canelo = *5 Rounds
> *
> ...





CuckoCuckitas said:


> I can see why some thought it was close or in Canelo's favour, but had GGG winning 3,4,5,6,7,8 and 9 clearly. Off memory 11 as well. I missed the 1st round but that was unanimously Canelo's by the sound of it.





Kampioni said:


> I had Canelo up by a round or two. Canelo rounds 1,2,3,4,5,11,12 all Canelo rounds. But you can make the argument that GGG won also, depends how you viewed the fight. I felt GGG did a tremendous job as usual in cutting off the ring and being relentless in his approach but Canelo landed the more meaningful punches and boxed well imo. Can't wait for the rematch, every round I was on the edge of my seat, fuck !!





poorface said:


> From my initial viewing, think you can get to a draw by extending as much charity as possible to Alvarez. I think that precludes this from being considered a robbery in the strictest sense of the term but I'm not sure that it necessarily makes for a reasonable card.
> 
> That being said, enough people whose scoring I respect have been defending a draw or 7-5 Alvarez win, so I need to rewatch.





Deadendgeneration said:


> Justifying the 114-114 card is easy enough to do. It gives the benefit to Canelo in all of the close rounds which is what I expected to happen anyway. Canelo landed slightly more eye catching shots but I'd say GGG landed comfortably more big shots upstairs as well as outworking him with the jab.





Boxalot said:


> Of course a draw is reasonable. Canelo won the first two and the last two clearly imo. It's entirely possible he won 2/3 of the rounds inbetween.
> 
> No way is this a robbery, not even close. The real cause for outrage is the 118-110 card which is ridiculous.





Football Bat said:


> As has been said a zillion times already, I had GGG winning but I could see a draw.





Floyd_g.o.a.t said:


> Are people seriously labelling this as a robbery? After a draw was the final outcome?





Floyd_g.o.a.t said:


> There were many swing rounds. For example, round 6. Canelo was looking great and sharpe, I gave it to him but the judges awarded it to GGG.
> 
> It was that type of fight.





DOM5153 said:


> It's flat out not a robbery, I'm gutted for Golovkin though, I felt he had done enough.





DirtyDan said:


> Tbh, no bias aside, a draw was the fairest outcome, no complaints from me.





Thomas Crewz said:


> Yeah im fine with a draw but Canelo is going to be having nightmares about GG's pressure.
> 
> Its unreal. The man is made of iron.





McKay said:


> Had it 115-113 GGG but a draw isn't too bad of a decision. Realistically I don't think anything between 116-112 GGG through to 114-114 is unreasonable. Don't see how Canelo could be given the win though.





OneTime said:


> I'm happy with the draw. Neither fighter truly won it.





The Sweet Science said:


> 116-113 for GGG. A draw is certainly better than a screw job win for Canelo.





Ivan Drago said:


> If people are really honest with themselves, take out your emotion, take out the disgusting scorecard, and watch that fight back I don't think there is anyone who could break down 7 rounds in that fight that Golovkin won unquestionably. Nor Canelo for that matter.
> 
> That was a tough, tough fight to score and neither guy put their stamp on it. Canelo took rounds off and fought the way he always does in spots and Golovkin just did not land enough clean, significant shots to assert dominance.
> 
> A draw is a very fair result to both men in my opinion. Neither guy won 7 rounds clearly which barring a TKO/KO is the only way to clearly win a boxing match.





MadcapMaxie said:


> By definition in that a lot of rounds were close depending on what you do and don't place significance on (jabs, clean punches, pressure, ring generalship etc) then yes you could say it's a draw. I had it 7-5 for GGG I believe but a draw is feasible even though looking at it from a whole GGG definitely won the fight IMO.





jonnytightlips said:


> Draw was fairly reasonable imo. No more than a couple of rounds in it either way.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Of course a draw is reasonable. Anybody saying otherwise is kidding themselves


----------



## Reppin501 (May 16, 2013)

I was more impressed with Canelo's defense, movement, and counter punching...not to mention when he did decide to come forward he got the better of the exchanges. I can't think of a single exchange that GGG got the better of..,Im sure it happened at some point but it certainly wasn't memorable for me. I had it 7-5 Canelo, thought he won 1,2,4,9,10,11,12, but there were at least 8 rounds that could have gone either way. There was nothing definitive about that fight, a draw was fine with me.


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

I thought it was unreasonable to give Canelo a Draw. GGG won atleast 7 clear rounds, Canelo didnt even have 6

You cant fairly give Canelo every single benefit of the doubt


----------



## MEXAMELAC (Apr 14, 2014)

I had GGG winning 7-5 first time I saw it but after seeing it again, I changed my decision to Draw or "it could have gone either way". I explained why on another post but I'll let this guy speak for me since I think he perfectly explains what I saw and I also feel I score fights similar to him...


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

Juiceboxbiotch said:


> I don't know about 90%, but a whole lot of people in this thread seem to agree that a draw is an acceptable result:


That's some multiquote

Props


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Reading this thread it seems people are giving eveything they can to Canelo to squeak him a draw and that says a lot to me. Golovkin won that fight clearly imo and I think everyone knows this deep down.

Canelo put on a good display tbh, he boxed real well but was simply outgunned in the end. He probably would have got more plaudits had the result been legit and he lost but because if the cards, especially the one card he is now getting flack.

So instead of coming out if the fight getting appraise for putting up a fantastic performance against another great fighter he is getting lambasted for being a protected fighter.

At least we can put to bed to nonesense that some people talk about GGG not being a great fighter, hes now had the big test and came through it. GGG is legit and prived he is one of this generations greatest fighters.


----------



## Cableaddict (Jun 6, 2013)

The only thing "reasonable" about a draw is that it's not an outright robbery.

That doesn't make it acceptable, it just makes it seem that way. 
- And now you start to realize why they probably WANTED Byrd to turn in that ridiculous score. It makes the 114-114 card seem legit by comparison.

These people may be evil, but they aren't stupid.


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

All credit to Canelo. Elite skills and indisputable now...he has an elite chin too. Just the wrong plan executed imo


----------



## ashishwarrior (Jul 10, 2012)




----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Pedderrs said:


> Are we all in agreement that it's almost impossible to score the fight for Canelo?


Ummmm....I think it'd be a stretch but I could _just about _see a 7-5 in his favour.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

thehook13 said:


> All credit to Canelo. Elite skills and indisputable now...he has an elite chin too. Just the wrong plan executed imo


That's his style. I fail to see how he could've been any better. It's the best performance of his career for me.


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Setanta said:


> Press scores:
> 
> 17 scored it for GGG
> 3 scored it a draw.
> ...


We've got some consistently shit scorers here at CHB though


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

The Sweet Science said:


> 116-113 for GGG. A draw is certainly better than a screw job win for Canelo.


Like that one judge he got on the mayweather fight :rofl


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

The poll has a manipulative question as well.

Should be less loaded question than that. Shame on OP


----------



## Eoghan (Jun 6, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> That's his style. I fail to see how he could've died be any better. It's the best performance of his career for me.


I think he could have tried to back up a Golovkin when he tagged him with his counters, it's where Golovkin is least effective by far. Just nit-picking really though, we saw Canelo get more out of himself than Golovkin if you get what I mean


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> That's his style. I fail to see how he could've died be any better. It's the best performance of his career for me.


I felt Canelo won a few great exchanges when he actually moved forward. Especially at the start of round 9 for starters. Golovkin was always willing to trade, i guess one is confident about their chin more than the other


----------



## The Sweet Science (Jun 5, 2013)

thehook13 said:


> Like that one judge he got on the mayweather fight :rofl


I know! That shit was nothing short of ridiculous. Canelo and his judges.


----------



## VinoVeritas (Nov 14, 2015)

Juiceboxbiotch said:


> I don't know about 90%, but a whole lot of people in this thread seem to agree that a draw is an acceptable result:


How did I say the draw was acceptable, ya banjo-playing cunt?


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

thehook13 said:


> I felt Canelo won a few great exchanges when he actually moved forward. Especially at the start of round 9 for starters. Golovkin was always willing to trade, i guess one is confident about their chin more than the other


I don't think Alvarez has the stamina to do that for very long.

Not a lack of confidence in his chin, but rather knowing that his gas tank can't sustain prolonged assaults.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Flea Man said:


> That's his style. I fail to see how he could've been any better. It's the best performance of his career for me.


I'm seeing a lot of naivety where this is concerned.

'If he could just do that for 3 mins every round he'd win easily' or 'he'll improve his stamina and win the rematch'.


----------



## OneTime (Nov 10, 2014)

I think canelo will win the rematch easier. GGG is no spring chicken and his style of fighting is made to last a long duration boxing career.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Pedderrs said:


> I'm seeing a lot of naivety where this is concerned.
> 
> 'If he could just do that for 3 mins every round he'd win easily' or 'he'll improve his stamina and win the rematch'.


Exactly. Every fighter has weaknesses. It's how they adapt their style to make it work in spite of those weaknesses that will see them rise or fall.

Canelo is doing just fine IMO.


----------



## Juiceboxbiotch (May 16, 2013)

CuckoCuckitas said:


> How did I say the draw was acceptable, ya banjo-playing cunt?


I wish I could play the banjo like that kid...

Anyway, you did say this:


CuckoCuckitas said:


> *I can see why some thought it was close or in Canelo's favour,* but had GGG winning 3,4,5,6,7,8 and 9 clearly. Off memory 11 as well. I missed the 1st round but that was unanimously Canelo's by the sound of it.


----------



## Dillyyo (Jun 5, 2013)

Uncle Rico said:


> If you're being very generous to Canelo, then at an absolutely push you can find 6 rounds to give to him.
> 
> But that's the thing, though. You're not supposed to be generous to one fighter over the other. You're supposed to be *fair* and *objective*. And on that basis..... no, I don't think a draw is a fair result. Especially not when one of those judges was blatantly ordered to scored the fight for Canelo no matter what.


Not always easy and clear cut to be objective when it's judging is very much subjective. Aside from the fact that "fair" is by nature subjective. All in all, I thought Canelo threw the more effective punches, while GGG connected more punches. I didn't score each round, but I called the fight a draw when the final bell rang.

Two things we did get out of this fight though. 1. GGG's vaunted power didn't seem like it would translate up a class or two unless maybe the opponent is willing to have a Corrales vs Castillo type fight 2. Surprised Canelo didn't gas worse than he did with all if his dramatic punch evasion. Even though the red head showed he had a chin, I'm not sure his purported power moves up with him if he did move up.


----------



## Dillyyo (Jun 5, 2013)

kevcefc said:


> I know that, that's what happens when you move up in weight, you actually gain weight, crazy


Unless you fight at your natural weight in a higher weight class without putting on more weight. LOL


----------



## ShinyDiscoBall (Apr 10, 2015)

Pedderrs said:


> I just re-watched the fight.
> 
> Canelo: 1, 2, 3, 11, 12
> GGG: 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ,9 , 10
> ...


i had the same score as yours except I gave rounds 6 and 10 to canelo...that leaves me with 7-5 canelo. however, rd 3 could have gone either way, so a draw is feasible.


----------



## Crean (May 19, 2013)

I voted yes.

But ur specific poll answers were a bit too black and white.

I thought it was on the lower end of reasonable. But I didn't think it was a VERY close fight. It was close enough, but not very close.imo.

As in, I couldn't see a real argument for a Canelo win. Best case a draw. So it falls within the 'reasonable' range.


----------



## ShinyDiscoBall (Apr 10, 2015)

so, my perceptions of the fight as it wore on were: ggg's jab helped him control most of the middle portion of the fight. in addition, ggg was walking down canelo and canelo kept backing up to the ropes. then you have the HBO commentary that's very pro-ggg. so the perception is that ggg has taken over the fight and is in complete control and canelo is being overpowered...the effects of HBO's commentary are vey evident in a lotta viewers who saw it as ggg winning big.

HOWEVER, I'm the type of guy who watches every second of every fight and every nuance, every move by both fighters. I might have a glass of wine while I'm watching but no other distractions... and i noticed that ggg was not effective landing combinations...he missed and missed and missed. and he got countered...and he got tired in the late part of the fight (due to the pace and the body punches). yes, he was still pressing the action, but his defense got sloppy and his punches got sloppy which was part of the reason canelo was able to take it to him in the last three rounds....

also, it seemed to me like canelo was able hurt or at least stun ggg with some combos late in the fight which stopped ggg's forward momentum. at one point, I think it was the 10th, I was thinking canelo can score a KO...but canelo had his share of problems....he also missed a lot, though not as much as ggg. his power shots seemed to have no effect, probably because he's moving up in weight, and he gassed as well, although he kept his composure better and was able to even mount an effective late rally in spots.

although canelo's BODY shots were effective early in the fight and I noticed ggg started to protect the body in the middle rounds, but it still took something out of him which was obvious as the fight wore on.


----------



## ShinyDiscoBall (Apr 10, 2015)

.


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

Chatty said:


> Reading this thread it seems people are giving eveything they can to Canelo to squeak him a draw and that says a lot to me. Golovkin won that fight clearly imo and I think everyone knows this deep down.
> 
> Canelo put on a good display tbh, he boxed real well but was simply outgunned in the end. He probably would have got more plaudits had the result been legit and he lost but because if the cards, especially the one card he is now getting flack.
> 
> ...


Good points all round. Though I still think a draw isn't a robbery, just that card was a joke.

You're spot on about Canelo, he did fucking great. Both their stock should go up.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

I've changed my mind on round 1. I feel like Golovkin's jab decided it.


----------



## JeffJoiner (Jun 5, 2013)

stevebhoy87 said:


> I thought there was 6 clear Golovkin rounds on how I scored it.
> 
> On that basis if you give Canelo every benefit of the doubt in all the others then yeah I can see a draw.
> 
> I disagree though, I had it for GGG but if you give everything that's close to Canelo then you can get there.


100% this. I had it 8-4 GGG with 2 rounds I consider close enough to possibly swing Canelo's way. Only if a person swung both of them to Canelo is a draw mathematically possible.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Shame about the controversial scorecard. Just watching the fight again. World class stuff. Very good fight.


----------



## Floyd_g.o.a.t (Jun 11, 2013)

For those that are claiming this was not close, you're disagreeing with Abel Sanchez.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Scored it again.

Canelo: 2, 3, 5, 12
GGG: 1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11

I dunno man, feel like it'd be difficult to score this fight for Canelo. There's a few swing rounds in there - 5, 11 etc.

Very good fight though. I was impressed with both men.

And GGG was absolutely class after the fight. 'Not my problem'. It's impossible not to love this guy.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Pedderrs said:


> Scored it again.
> 
> Canelo: 2, 3, 5, 12
> GGG: 1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
> ...


He is a legend. I mean it, a legend. Top ten middleweight of all time? Perhaps not, but a few more top scalps and he'll be there.

But mainly he is a cult hero. His style and persona, his skill, his willingness to fight anyone...he's a boxing fans dream.

A historian looking at Golovkin in 20 years time won't look at Triple G and say 'he only managed to draw with the best fighter he faced'. They'll see he was AT LEAST the equal of one of the best pound for pound fighters of his time, and that the majority of people felt he'd whipped him.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Flea Man said:


> He is a legend. I mean it, a legend. Top ten middleweight of all time? Perhaps not, but a few more top scalps and he'll be there.
> 
> But mainly he is a cult hero. His style and persona, his skill, his willingness to fight anyone...he's a boxing fans dream.
> 
> A historian looking at Golovkin in 20 years time won't look at Triple G and say 'he only managed to draw with the best fighter he faced'. They'll see he was AT LEAST the equal of one of the best pound for pound fighters of his time, and that the majority of people felt he'd whipped him.












A credit to the sport.


----------



## Uncle Rico (May 24, 2013)

Dillyyo said:


> Not always easy and clear cut to be objective when it's judging is very much subjective. Aside from the fact that "fair" is by nature subjective. All in all, I thought Canelo threw the more effective punches, while GGG connected more punches. I didn't score each round, but I called the fight a draw when the final bell rang.
> 
> Two things we did get out of this fight though. 1. GGG's vaunted power didn't seem like it would translate up a class or two unless maybe the opponent is willing to have a Corrales vs Castillo type fight 2. Surprised Canelo didn't gas worse than he did with all if his dramatic punch evasion. Even though the red head showed he had a chin, I'm not sure his purported power moves up with him if he did move up.


My apologies. "Objective" was probably the incorrect word to use. I guess I meant: free of bias. Not being generous to one fighter over the other.

And I can understand how Canelo's punches give off the impression they're more effective. But to a certain extent, it's an illusion (that's not to say they're not effective at all!). It's just that his technique and the manner in which he commits to his punches, are very attractive to watch. And when they find the mark they make themselves very visible to the viewer.






GGG by comparison looks a little more awkward / laboured. By just observing, it's difficult to believe the hype around his power. I've shown videos of him to casual followers who've said it doesn't look or sound like he hits hard. Take his finishing of Murray as an example. Those final few punches look like there isn't really anything behind them.






So I personally don't buy the notion that Canelo's shots were more effective. Eye-catching, yes. But effective? Not quite. That suggests GGG's were not. Which we know isn't true. He wouldn't have Canelo constantly backing off and tiring so easily, if his punches weren't taking effect. In fact Canelo overall, for me, was actually the more ineffective fighter out of the two. All of that running, extra movement (which didn't prevent GGG from landing) and even hitting thin air himself....contributed to a fight / story which led him to being worse off. It was in fact GGG who was being more economical and purposeful with his movement, punches, positioning, etc. All in all (when you consider more than just landed shots - which GGG exceeded him in anyway), GGG was the boss in there.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Pedderrs said:


> A credit to the sport.


The Rock makes everything better.


----------



## Divi253 (Jun 4, 2013)

Canelo won 1-3 on a lot of cards, same as 10-12 so a draw is certainly reasonable.. The odd scorecards turned in make it so there was very little doubt in anyone's mind the outcome being a draw was due to corruption though... 

It can be reasonable for this fight to end as a draw, but still have the official draw result be due to corruption, as it appears this is the case here.


----------



## Chip H (Oct 8, 2016)

Uncle Rico said:


> My apologies. "Objective" was probably the incorrect word to use. I guess I meant: free of bias. Not being generous to one fighter over the other.
> 
> And I can understand how Canelo's punches give off the impression they're more effective. But to a certain extent, it's an illusion (that's not to say they're not effective at all!). It's just that his technique and the manner in which he commits to his punches, are very attractive to watch. And when they find the mark they make themselves very visible to the viewer.
> 
> ...


Superb post. The boss he was indeed.


----------



## paloalto00 (Jun 7, 2013)

Still haven't finished watching it, only got up to the 4th. If that's any indication for the rest of the rest of the fight, then I'd say Canelo landed cleaner punches but wasn't active enough


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Having watched it twice now, I think you really have to be looking to give Canelo the benefit of the doubt to be scoring the fight a draw. Golovkin didn't impress me first time around but he was jabbing very well throughout. If either fighter was distressed at any point, it was Canelo. 

I would love to see a return.


----------



## 941jeremy (Jun 12, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Of course a draw is reasonable. Anybody saying otherwise is kidding themselves


It's reasonable considering that any swing round as well as competitive rounds will go to the house fighter. Now if we were talking about two fighters of equal popularity then no way is a draw acceptable. The fact that he was able to get a draw under the circumstances is equal to a win in my book.


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> Having watched it twice now, I think you really have to be looking to give Canelo the benefit of the doubt to be scoring the fight a draw. Golovkin didn't impress me first time around but he was jabbing very well throughout. If either fighter was distressed at any point, it was Canelo.
> 
> I would love to see a return.


Which were the seven rounds you think that you'd really have to be looking to give Canelo the benefit of the doubt in order to award him one?


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Ivan Drago said:


> Which were the seven rounds you think that you'd really have to be looking to give Canelo the benefit of the doubt in order to award him one?


Seven rounds?


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> Seven rounds?


Your post states that a draw (six rounds each) would mean 'you'd really have to be looking to give Canelo the benefit of the doubt' which implies there are seven rounds which you felt Golovkin won and it'd be unreasonable for people to score any of these rounds in Canelo's favour without being unfairly generous to him.

What were the seven rounds you thought Golovkin clearly took?


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Ivan Drago said:


> Your post states that a draw (six rounds each) would mean 'you'd really have to be looking to give Canelo the benefit of the doubt' which implies there are seven rounds which you felt Golovkin won and it'd be unreasonable for people to score any of these rounds in Canelo's favour without being unfairly generous to him.
> 
> What were the seven rounds you thought Golovkin clearly took?


I'm not sure you understand 'benefit of the doubt'.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)




----------



## Pedrin1787 (Dec 24, 2013)

If you're choosing "no argument for a draw" and your score was 7-5 you need to gtfo.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> He is a legend. I mean it, a legend. Top ten middleweight of all time? Perhaps not, but a few more top scalps and he'll be there.
> 
> But mainly he is a cult hero. His style and persona, his skill, his willingness to fight anyone...he's a boxing fans dream.
> 
> A historian looking at Golovkin in 20 years time won't look at Triple G and say 'he only managed to draw with the best fighter he faced'. They'll see he was AT LEAST the equal of one of the best pound for pound fighters of his time, and that the majority of people felt he'd whipped him.


:lol: Ducking Ward and doing as well as Erislandy Lara earns you legend status.

Fuck me


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

MichiganWarrior said:


> :lol: Ducking Ward and doing as well as Erislandy Lara earns you legend status.
> 
> Fuck me


Hes never boxed in the same division as Ward and thats akin to saying Mayweather ducked Golovkin by not accepting the fight.

Though in this scenario neither Ward or Golovkin were willing to make consessions to make the fight. It was never gonna happen as neither were big enough names to make enough money for it to happen.


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Pedrin1787 said:


> If you're choosing "no argument for a draw" and your score was 7-5 you need to gtfo.


Thats bullshit if there's a Clear winner.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Chatty said:


> Hes never boxed in the same division as Ward and thats akin to saying Mayweather ducked Golovkin by not accepting the fight.
> 
> Though in this scenario neither Ward or Golovkin were willing to make consessions to make the fight. It was never gonna happen as neither were big enough names to make enough money for it to happen.


MW is a good dude but he's kinda racist too. I mean, we know that.


----------



## Pedrin1787 (Dec 24, 2013)

thehook13 said:


> Thats bullshit if there's a Clear winner.


Boxing is scored round by round hooky.

You're telling me either guy won at least 7 of the 12 rounds without a shadow of the doubt?


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Pedrin1787 said:


> Boxing is scored round by round hooky.
> 
> You're telling me either guy won at least 7 of the 12 rounds without a shadow of the doubt?


If you gave 5 to Canelo it is charitable. 6 is unreasonable


----------



## Pedrin1787 (Dec 24, 2013)

thehook13 said:


> If you gave 5 to Canelo it is charitable. 6 is unreasonable


No Hook, I'm not asking about what you think others scored for Canelo.

You're 100% sure that Golovkin won 7 rounds without a shadow of a doubt?


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Pedderrs said:


> MW is a good dude but he's kinda racist too. I mean, we know that.


Have had him blocked for ages as he's one of the least knowledgable people on here, but not sure how he can be 'a good dude' and 'kinda racist' mate :lol: He's just a massive twat.


----------



## gumbo2176 (May 17, 2013)

Medicine said:


> GGG clearly won. Total robbery.


Same for me. I could only give Alvarez 4 clear rounds at best and I could see where a judge may have given him 5, but that crazy 118-110 was so out of line with the actual fight since neither fighter took that many rounds.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

gumbo2176 said:


> Same for me. I could only give Alvarez 4 clear rounds at best and I could see where a judge may have given him 5, but that crazy 118-110 was so out of line with the actual fight since neither fighter took that many rounds.


Canelo could have taken the first 4, the 12th, and you don't think the 9th or 10th were arguable in his favor?


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Pedrin1787 said:


> No Hook, I'm not asking about what you think others scored for Canelo.
> 
> *You're 100% sure that Golovkin won 7 rounds without a shadow of a doubt?*


Yes I am. There was a clear winner and a clear loser.

Fuck me... do you need a signed declaration too pal?


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Canelo could have taken the first 4, the 12th, and you don't think the 9th or 10th were arguable in his favor?


So you are giving Canelo literally every benefit if the doubt! Totally Unreasonable.


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

thehook13 said:


> So you are giving Canelo literally every benefit if the doubt! Totally Unreasonable.


Not unreasonable at all. A fight is scored on a round by round basis, you don't go "oh I gave that close round to fighter A so I'll give the next close one to fighter B". There's no "benefit of the doubt" whatever that means, you just give the round to the fighter you thought did the better work.

If you're looking at rounds that could have gone either way and there's enough to make a draw then a draw could be a reasonable card. In this fight a draw is definitely reasonable.


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Lunny said:


> Not unreasonable at all. A fight is scored on a round by round basis, you don't go "oh I gave that close round to fighter A so I'll give the next close one to fighter B". There's no "benefit of the doubt" whatever that means, you just give the round to the fighter you thought did the better work.
> 
> If you're looking at rounds that could have gone either way and there's enough to make a draw then a draw could be a reasonable card. In this fight a draw is definitely reasonable.


Benefit of the doubt ....Lets say there are 3 rounds that could have went either way. If a judge awards everything that is close to Canelo then you can make an arguement for bias. In close rounds you have to discern details, if you give all those exchanges benefit of the doubt to Canelo. Bias

Not hard m8


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

thehook13 said:


> Benefit of the doubt ....Lets say there are 3 rounds that could have went either way. If a judge awards everything that is close to Canelo then you can make an arguement for bias. In close rounds you have to discern details, if you give all those exchanges benefit of the doubt to Canelo. Bias
> 
> Not hard m8


That's not really what benefit of the doubt means at all...Benefit of the doubt would be having Canelo until proven otherwise...not just happening to prefer Canelo's work in the close rounds.

English m8

It's perfectly reasonable for a judge to just prefer Canelo's counter punching to GGG's aggression. No "benefit of the doubt" needed, that's enough to sway a judge depending on what he/she looks for.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Canelo could have taken the first 4, the 12th, and you don't think the 9th or 10th were arguable in his favor?


Not a chance he won the fourth. Golovkin dominated that round, one of his best. 1st is debateable but Canelo never even threw a punch till a minute in and didnt do much after. Golovkin didnt dominate, I could see why People might nick it for Canelo but I personally saw it as a fairly clear round for Golovkin.

2,3,10 and 12 were Canelos best rounds. With the exception of 12 the other three were clearly his. 5 was a close round as well but he lost the exchanges by trying to showvoat on the ropes (then get caught).

You can squeak a draw for Canelo but youve got to really want to imo.


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Lunny said:


> That's not really what benefit of the doubt means at all...Benefit of the doubt would be having Canelo until proven otherwise...not just happening to prefer Canelo's work in the close rounds.
> 
> English m8
> 
> It's perfectly reasonable for a judge to just prefer Canelo's counter punching to GGG's aggression. No "benefit of the doubt" needed, that's enough to sway a judge depending on what he/she looks for.


FFS ....If I am reading this right you are saying there is no such thing as doubt in deciding a round, as if a judge logically knows who won each and every round. All the time.

A judge in must pick a winner in almost all cases, if this weren't the case we would see a lot more even rounds in championship boxing. When a judge is pushed to pick a winner, they will rationally justify why they picked their winner. There is still doubt as to which fighter won the round, hence why we say 'could of went either way'. If you award a certain fighter every single one of these situations then you are giving them every benefit of the doubt. I frequently speak with judges registered with the ANBF and the wording 'benefit of the doubt' is commonly spoken among them so it's good enough for me....


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

thehook13 said:


> FFS ....If I am reading this right you are saying there is no such thing as doubt in deciding a round, as if a judge logically knows who won each and every round. All the time.
> 
> A judge in must pick a winner in almost all cases, if this weren't the case we would see a lot more even rounds in championship boxing. When a judge is pushed to pick a winner, they will rationally justify why they picked their winner. There is still doubt as to which fighter won the round, hence why we say 'could of went either way'. If you award a certain fighter every single one of these situations then you are giving them every benefit of the doubt. I frequently speak with judges registered with the ANBF and the wording 'benefit of the doubt' is commonly spoken among them so it's good enough for me....


:lol: I don't think "benefit of the doubt" is a term that really fits when choosing between 2 fighters on a round.

lol at ANBF

Anyway the point was that it's perfectly reasonable for a judge to prefer Canelo's work to GGG's work. It's not just "giving him the benefit of the doubt" as you whacky ANBF Aussies would say, it's preferring his style and what he's doing compared to the other fighter.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

thehook13 said:


> So you are giving Canelo literally every benefit if the doubt! Totally Unreasonable.


Round to round a fighter can edge out close rounds. The fighter that dominates his rounds doesn't get any extra points in close rounds he loses. The points for a close round lost and a clearly lost round is the same (barring knockdowns and dramatic stuns leading to a 10-8).



Chatty said:


> Not a chance he won the fourth. Golovkin dominated that round, one of his best. 1st is debateable but Canelo never even threw a punch till a minute in and didnt do much after. Golovkin didnt dominate, I could see why People might nick it for Canelo but I personally saw it as a fairly clear round for Golovkin.
> 
> 2,3,10 and 12 were Canelos best rounds. With the exception of 12 the other three were clearly his. 5 was a close round as well but he lost the exchanges by trying to showvoat on the ropes (then get caught).
> 
> You can squeak a draw for Canelo but youve got to really want to imo.


Golovkin did _better_ in the 4th but in no way can you say he dominated. That's a baffling statement. It was a close round. In the first minute, every time Golovkin landed Canelo made sure to answer. He lands virtually nothing clean when he has Canelo on the ropes in the second minute, and he lands just a few more punches than Canelo towards the end. On rewatch I think GGG edged it, but watching it a few hours ago I thought the opposite because of Canelo's sharper punches.

The idea that you have to want Canelo to win to think he edged out multiple close rounds is silly.


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Lunny said:


> :lol: I don't think "benefit of the doubt" is a term that really fits when choosing between 2 fighters on a round.
> 
> lol at ANBF
> 
> Anyway the point was that it's perfectly reasonable for a judge to prefer Canelo's work to GGG's work. It's not just "giving him the benefit of the doubt" as you whacky ANBF Aussies would say, it's preferring his style and what he's doing compared to the other fighter.


If you're going to rip off the Australian Boxing Federation then we stop speaking, you realize British Boxing is hardly the beacon in world boxing either.

It is fine for a judge to favour Canelos style but GGG won 7 rounds clearly, any less is unreasonable.

Anyway I've been drawn to arguing with you on many stupid mute points in the past, to the death actually. So this is where it'll conclude.


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Round to round a fighter can edge out close rounds. The fighter that dominates his rounds doesn't get any extra points in close rounds he loses. The points for a close round lost and a clearly lost round is the same (barring knockdowns and dramatic stuns leading to a 10-8).


You know why a draw is unreasonable. Golovkin won atleast 7 rounds. You can go on to tell me Canelo won every close round without bias, but GGG still won the majority of rounds I won't take less than 7 as fair. So it's unreasonable. There's your loaded poll question answered


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

thehook13 said:


> If you're going to rip off the Australian Boxing Federation then we stop speaking, you realize British Boxing is hardly the beacon in world boxing either.
> 
> It is fine for a judge to favour Canelos style but GGG won 7 rounds clearly, any less is unreasonable.
> 
> Anyway I've been drawn to arguing with you on many stupid mute points in the past, to the death actually. So this is where it'll conclude.


Heavy NAH on the any less than 7 is unreasonable.

And I don't know what you're trying to say about British boxing, you WISH you had officials on the level of Ian John Lewis.


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

thehook13 said:


> You know why a draw is unreasonable. Golovkin won atleast 7 rounds. You can say Canelo won every close round fairly, but GGG still won the majority of rounds I won't take less than 7. So it's unreasonable. There's your loaded poll question answered


:lol: Hook won't accept less than 7 so it's unreasonable.


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Lunny said:


> Heavy NAH on the any less than 7 is unreasonable.
> 
> And I don't know what you're trying to say about British boxing, you WISH you had officials on the level of Ian John Lewis.


I won't be giving British boxing any credit while you bag out our officials.


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Lunny said:


> :lol: Hook won't accept less than 7 so it's unreasonable.


How is that funny to you? Golvokin won SEVEN fairly. Not SIX.

Giving away a fairly won round is not being reasonable, it's complete opposite of reasonable.


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

thehook13 said:


> I won't be giving British boxing any credit while you bag out our officials.


I was joking. Ian John Lewis is widely known as the worst official of all time.



thehook13 said:


> How is that funny to you? Golvokin won SEVEN fairly. Not SIX.
> 
> Giving away a fairly won round is not being reasonable, it's complete opposite of reasonable.


Says you. It's funny to me because you're being so unreasonable in your own view that either everyone agrees with you or they're not being reasonable.

You can definitely argue 6 rounds to Canelo and plenty of decent judges of fights scored it a draw.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Was this even a legal punch?
Looks like the back of the neck to me.

If it's not a legal punch, then how can it be used for scoring?
If this punch is the difference that won Golovkin the round, is it unreasonable to give Canelo the round? (or a 10-10) illegal punches (accidental or on purpose) shouldn't count.

gfycat.com/gifs/detail/ChiefWeepyLeech


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

thehook13 said:


> You know why a draw is unreasonable. Golovkin won atleast 7 rounds. You can go on to tell me Canelo won every close round without bias, but GGG still won the majority of rounds I won't take less than 7 as fair. So it's unreasonable. There's your loaded poll question answered


So on your card, what are the 7 inarguable Golovkin rounds?


----------



## Erratic (Aug 9, 2017)

nuclear said:


> i mean i guess. i thought it was close but clear for ggg but whenever its close i guess a draw isnt out of the question


I sort of see it the same way. I had it 116-113 for Golovkin. It's being very generous to have it 114-114. The rounds I did give to Canelo were close rounds to begin with.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

dyna said:


> Was this even a legal punch?
> Looks like the back of the neck to me.
> 
> If it's not a legal punch, then how can it be used for scoring?
> ...


You're a spastic.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> You're a spastic.


So a punch htting the back of the neck is a legal shot according to you?


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

dyna said:


> So a punch htting the back of the neck is a legal shot according to you?


You are the only person out of millions that watched the fight that has attempted to dismiss that Golovkin right hand as an illegal blow. This includes Canelo himself who never complained and also Canelo's corner men and promotional team, who have not made any reference to any illegal blows that I am aware of. Basically Dyna, you're either a genius or woefully wrong. I see these antics from you on a routine basis. Stop being a humourless contrarian and engage with other posters in a meaningful, non preachy way. Yeah?


----------



## Dazl1212 (May 16, 2013)

dyna said:


> So a punch htting the back of the neck is a legal shot according to you?


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> You are the only person out of millions that watched the fight that has attempted to *dismiss that Golovkin right hand as an illegal blow.*


Accidental foul.
Hitting the back of the head or neck is a foul.



Pedderrs said:


> This includes Canelo himself who never complained and also Canelo's corner men and promotional team, who have not made any reference to any illegal blows that I am aware of.


Irrelevant to the rules.


Pedderrs said:


> Basically Dyna, you're either a genius or woefully wrong. I see these antics from you on a routine basis. Stop being a humourless contrarian and engage with other posters in a meaningful, non preachy way.


Just following the rules to the letter.


Pedderrs said:


> Yeah?


no


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

You boring cunt. :lol:


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> You boring cunt. :lol:


Don't worry, I'm about to make it even more boring.


----------



## Pedrin1787 (Dec 24, 2013)

thehook13 said:


> Yes I am. There was a clear winner and a clear loser.
> 
> Fuck me... do you need a signed declaration too pal?


Which rounds?

It seems silly but all you had to do was answer this the first time I asked.


----------



## UK fight fan (Apr 22, 2016)

Being that it was in the cesspit of Vegas, GGG should consider himself lucky to get that. Suprised Byrd's scorecard was matched by the other 2 judges


----------



## ElKiller (Jun 14, 2014)

thehook13 said:


> You know why a draw is unreasonable. Golovkin won atleast 7 rounds. You can go on to tell me Canelo won every close round without bias, but GGG still won the majority of rounds I won't take less than 7 as fair. So it's unreasonable. There's your loaded poll question answered


FFS give it a rest. You're totally overlooking the notion that boxing is hugely subjective and that everyone judges a fight based on their own personal perspective.not everybody saw the fight the way you did.

Stop trying to cram your opinion down people's throat.


----------



## Stone Rose (Jul 15, 2013)

Finally watched it, great fight , both cemented themselves as elite fighters.
I didn't score it but it was close enough to not being nearly a robbery. On the whole ggg had the better of it but a lot of the rounds were close. Insane jaws on both men.
Just a shame about that card but let's face it it's not the first time , and sadly won't be the last until corruption is booted out of boxing. 

Never then.


----------

