Canelo was robbed

In other news, I hear that Klitschko beat AJ, Germany won WW2 and that black is white.

Keep it up

 

Back pedaling doesn't mean **** if the other guy just stands in your face too scared to throw anything significant.
The jab was good but it didn't do much. You gonna give him the fight because of jabs despite all the more significant body and head work Canelo was doing? Those weak ass jabs?
Those punches were weak and only a few connected. Canelo was backing up because he'd gas himself after blasting GGGift face and body with power shots.

 

Oscar bribes 2 judges, bribing just the 1 is no good to guarentee the result you want. The result Oscar wanted was a draw, he doesnt give a jot about Canelo, doesnt give a jot about Golovkin and doesnt give a jot about Boxing. He loves MONEY and another fight means alot more money, for him.

1 judge gives it to Canelo, 1 judge gives it a draw and an honest judge is honest and you get a guarentee draw. Unfortunatly Byrd has put a spanner in the works by being a spanner and scoring it stupid when there has been talk of dodgy scores, judges, refs ets when it comes to Oscar and GBP. Next time round K2 wont be so generous on the contract table, especially about the state the fight would be in.

 

I'm seriously surprised on how many casuals were influenced by Letterman and his scorecard just to appear as if they know boxing. As primarily MMA fans It's no wonder they they think aggression wins all when it comes to judging in the sweet science

 

I actually agree that back peddling isn't relevant if the guy across from you is only chasing and not throwing anything. But you, I and the rest of the world knows that's not even remotely close to what happened on Saturday. Canelo wasn't back peddling just to get in some extra road work for the sake of conditioning. If GGG wasn't throwing and landing punches that were "significant", Nelo wouldn't have opted to fight going away or be on the ropes as much as he was that night. I didn't say Nelo didn't have his moments...He did, but it wasn't sustained or consistent enough to control the pace, tempo or range which GGG dictated.

If the "weak ass jabs" were really weak....Or if the straight right and hooks didn't affect Nelo, ask yourself the question of why did Alvarez choose to hop on his bike and avoid, evade and do whatever he could to keep as much distance between him and GGG as possible? I mean....if GGG was only "standing in front of him", throwing "weak ass punches", where only a "few punches connected", why wasn't Alvarez the ring general that night? Why didn't he just walk through GGG the way he did with Kirkland, Liam and Kahn?

 

Most of the list below arent casual fans who are typically influenced by Letterman.

Nigel Collins, Tom Loeffler‏, Dave Coldwell, Lennox Lewis, Mike Tyson, Terrance Crawford, AL Berstine, Dan Rafael, Paulie Malinnaggi, Riddick Bowe, Doug Fischer, Mikey Garcia, Conor McGregor, Dana White, Jimmie Riviera, Robert Flores, Dan Fleyshman, Anthony Mudine, George Willis, Brian Campbell, Mark Cuban, Manny Pac, Lance Briggs, Robert Griffin III, Vladimir Tarasenko, Joey Langone, Guillermo Riggondeaux. All scored the fight clearly for GGG. They all are calling this a robbery or a terrible decision.

 

Wlad Klitschko / Tyson Fury is your favourite fight, isn't it?

'Fess up.

 

Even IF you feel GGG won no way in hell you can have the audacity to call it a robbery. Boxing is scored on different criteri. It just means you hold aggression to a higher standard than clean effective punching and ring generalship

 

Hahaha no but thats funny.

 

I call it a gift....but that list of pro boxers, athletes, analyst and boxing writers definitely had the audacity to call it a robbery. I actually don't hold aggression above ring generalship and/or clean and effective punching. Every fight is different and I take into account the individual styles as well as the strategic approach they implement in each fight to score. It varies because no one fighter and no one fight are exactly the same.

You every watch James Toney vs Vasilly Jirov for the Crusierwieght championship? This is a good example of how I scored "Quality" over "Quantity". Vasilly outworked James every single round. And in every single round James was the cleaner, more effective puncher....however, Jirov won some of those earlier rounds because Jirov simply outworked Toney while landing clean, scoring shots and James didn't do enough. By the end of the fight Jirov was still throwing more, landing more, but James was increasing his connect percentage and his punches were inflicting more damage. He was also controlling the distance and tempo of the fight so he was the ring general that night. By the end of the 12th, I had it a competitive fight but Toney won on my card by 4 rounds. He scored a KD in the process.

GGG vs Alvarez had elements of that fight only it went the other way. GGG was the aggressor, he was also the ring general. Alvarez landed cleaner more flashy punches but he wasn't doing it enough, nor was he able to wrestle control of the action from Golovkin. So while I do score for aggression sometimes, it has to be coupled with other elements that are part of the scoring criteria for me to give any fighter the round.

 

Just gonna drop this here

Heading into the decision, oddsmakers believed Golovkin had won the fight. International sportsbooks had Golovkin as high as a -500 favorite when live betting on the bout closed.

Oddsmakers what a bunch of casuals

 

Read what I post before first responding. I said he got tired after punching himself out and weak ass GGG could do nothing but stand in his face and throw pitter patter jabs and then get backed up.

 

I read what you posted before I replied. I addressed everything you took the time to post including the statement you made calling GGG's punches "weak" and where you claimed all Golovkin did was stand in front of Alvarez while chasing home around the ring. I take it you don't want to argue your points? That's fine but I interested in hearing you out. I might not be considering everything and you could have a valid point that may move me off my stance? Let me know

 

I don't understand how you can say you don't want to argue your points, when you ask a question about something I already answered.

If you have something to move the conversation further I'd be glad to answer but it just seemed like you briefed my statement and ended up asking what I had already answered.

 

I asked you a couple of questions and made some statements that you didn't address in your original post or any subsequent replies. Maybe I missed something or you did articulate your points clearly? See below

"I actually agree that back peddling isn't relevant if the guy across from you is only chasing and not throwing anything. But you, I and the rest of the world knows that's not even remotely close to what happened on Saturday. Canelo wasn't back peddling just to get in some extra road work for the sake of conditioning. If GGG wasn't throwing and landing punches that were "significant", Nelo wouldn't have opted to fight going away or be on the ropes as much as he was that night. I didn't say Nelo didn't have his moments...He did, but it wasn't sustained or consistent enough to control the pace, tempo or range which GGG dictated.

If the "weak ass jabs" were really weak....Or if the straight right and hooks didn't affect Nelo, ask yourself the question of why did Alvarez choose to hop on his bike and avoid, evade and do whatever he could to keep as much distance between him and GGG as possible? I mean....if GGG was only "standing in front of him", throwing "weak ass punches", where only a "few punches connected", why wasn't Alvarez the ring general that night? Why didn't he just walk through GGG the way he did with Kirkland, Liam and Kahn?"