Ten takeaways from GGG vs Canelo

No....

 

Yeah it was a very good fight!

 

Re-watching I scored it 8-4. Golovkin should have gotten the nod. Glad I'm not a judge, I'll openly admit I am not good at scoring fights the first time around when its live. When I have a chance to watch it and rewind it at specific points to see what scores or not then I get a much better picture.

 

Additional take aways

1) GGG is actually real good huh
2) shucks so is Canelo actually

 

So GGG must have taken a leathering off Canelo to convince you he has the greatest chin EVER at 160 , right ?? But how can that be possible if Canelo lost the fight and GGG won handily according to you?? Surely he deserved to win if he tested his chin to such a level..

Golovkin hardly hit Canelo at all and never hurt or even staggered him , but if you say that GGG came away having the best chin EVER , that means Canelo must have landed a lot more harder and cleaner punches , therefore he should have deserved the decision?

You don't get a TBE level chin unless you endue a battering. Did GGG take a battering?

Reality is even Arthur Abraham has a greater chin and thats not debatable unless you prove me wrong with video footage.
Saying he has the best chin EVER from going 12 rounds with Canelo is the most pathetic level of fanboyism i ever heard. Clowns like you are not true fans of boxing. Thats the truth.

 

11. A splitting hangover

 

Who but the fighters themselves know which are the more hurtful punches. The only value of so called hurtful punches are to the boxers themselves, as they should weaken the opponent giving more opportunities to land more punches. The Judges just have to count the punches landed to body or head. IMO. I don't care if they're so called 'pitty pat' punches, a truly weak puncher will just get walked through anyway. Pressure alone doesn't score points, punches landed does; backing away obviously doesn't, but any punches you land while doing so should score points. The only caveat is that Judges can be swayed in the later rounds by the sight of a tiring fighter. Here Canelo was clearly the more fatigued of the two.

Now unless you're Ali, Leonard or Mayweather it's hard to win on the back foot. Canelo was too much on the back foot and caught more than he landed. He looked the more fatigued of the two in the second half of the fight and was backing up and resting a fair bit. This is what people saw and why they're complaining - they saw GGG landing more and Canelo looking the tireder of the two. If we ignore Byrds card, the other two Judges were possibly swayed slightly by Canelos more eye catching bombs (even though GGG walked through them), and though I disagree, neither were the worst cards I've seen. I thought GGG won, but would like to see a rematch now that he's prepared for Canelos altered style.

Other thoughts? Canelo can't fight frequently at that bulked up weight - we need a rematch in December but that would mean keeping his foot on the throttle and hence the no fight till May statement with an eye to a rematch later with a year older Golovkin.

But we've been here before. Some people don't want competitive match ups, they just want to see their heroes win, even if it's against an old man way past his prime.

 

no way Canelo gets hit with that right hand from Hearns and stays up like Hagler did, or that uppercut from Mugabi and stays up.. Hagler also went down from Roldan swinging and pulling him down, the punch did not hit Marvin.

 

That's a good post.

You obviously value punches landed no matter their quality. I tend to take a middle road where I value a hard blow over a couple of touching blows, but not more than that. Some people will prefer a couple of blows that stagger the other guy over a whole round's worth of landed shots - that's the other extreme and stupid imho.

Some fighters use a jab as a rangefinder and lightly touch the other guy to set the range - to me that's not really the same as a Golovkin jab for example, which is a punishing blow in its own right.

Anyway, in this context the discussion is neither here nor there, since GGG clearly landed more punches and they were hurtful. He controlled the ring and has Saul running all night. To me that's a winner too. However, in the really close rounds - and there were some - I do take the quality of the punches into account and Alvarez certainly had his moments.

 

over 200 times according to compubox

 

Yeah, on otherwise even rounds sporadic clusters of bombs is a good way as any. For me it became clear Alvarez had settled on that plan after a few rounds. But, I'm at home watching it on TV where I believe it's easier to score a fight than at ringside where you're looking up and across the ring. Watching it on TV as a judge, it doesn't matter so much where the action is taking place, it's easier to spot what's landing and what's being blocked. I believe this explains the two who had it close. Of course, I'm assuming, as you have to, that none of the judges had been bought.

 

SRL would take Canelo to school, even the older version of him that fought Hagler. Imagine Canelo taking his long breaks, and laying on the ropes vs Leonard?!? Wouldn't be a fun night for Canelo fans.

 

What complete ****. 10 things and you couldn't come up with one good one?

Are you daft boy?

 

1. It was a hell of a fight to watch i loved it.
2. Golovkin won.
3. Nobody official may want to admit it but corruption is rife, fans and experts alike were either worried about it or expecting it, they were certainly talking about it and it happened, once again infront of our very eyes.
4. Canelo is a real Middleweight and a damn good one, i was very impressed with him thought he was getting smashed no doubt about it.
5. Age may be catching up to Golovkin.
6. UFC fans were loving the all action fighting this fight produced.
7. UFC fans were laughing at Boxing after those score cards and not just the Byrd one.
8. A rematch is going to be very very hard to make due mainly to a disagreement on location.