(GIF) This Punch From Canelo Should Have Obliterated And KO'd GGG Cold...

If you land a clean punch and I didn't you would have the scoring advantage. Also, if you were staggered on the ropes from a partially blocked punch but I couldn't follow up with a clean punch I must be a really dumb slugger, and you should get the scoring advantage in ring generalship as you recovered and looked to counter, even if you're a light puncher. Willie Pep won a round without throwing a punch, doncha know.

Your fantasy scenario still misses the point of what should be seen as the 'effect' of a punch. The opponent doesn't have to be hurt more for it to be more effective. And almost any clean power punch by anyone except the lightest puncher will affect the opponent's aggression.

Though it didn't hurt Golovkin like it would've hurt a lot of other guys certainly that punch of Canelo's effectively thwarted Golovkin's aggression. And to contrast, Golovkin's often partially blocked punches didn't have anywhere near the effect of staggering Canelo to the ropes.

 

think you mean effective aggression, punching doesnt have to be 'effective'

 

So Clottey was robbed against Pac?

 

one thing i forgot to say is that GGG has the best poker face in boxing. That punch definitely hurt. Not enough to drop him, but it hurt as others have but his poker face is the best. Tyson talked about this in his fight with Pinklon Thomas(google it if you haven't seen it). It was a brutal ko but Tyson said when he started the combination Thomas just stood there as if it hurt but he knew that punch had to hurt so he kept pouring it on until he finally dropped. So no the punch didn't hurt him enough to drop him, but he felt that **** just like Tszyu was feeling them punches from Vince Phillips until his brain/body couldn't take it anymore.

 

Lol, of course you don't get it, conveniently.

Good thing that everyone outside Nelo's two promoters and mom GET IT. Lol

 

GGG lost that round doe! Lol

 

Maybe you're right and it doesn't matter whether the punch makes the opponent do the chicken dance or doesn't even make him flinch. I don't see it that way and from what I can tell, most judges don't either.

Here's what Steve Weissman says in the following interview:

http://www.premierboxingchampions.c...ge-steve-weisfeld-offers-tips-how-score-fight

Clean punches: To me, clean punches are the most important aspect, and the other factors are really tied to that. Take the phrase, "effective aggressiveness." How is a boxer effective? He's effective by landing clean punches. How about "defense?" A boxer shows great defense by not getting hit with clean punches. And, finally, the term "ring generalship." A boxer uses the ring to put himself in a position to land clean punches.

So let's focus on the phrase "clean punches." It may not be initially apparent, but there are various elements included within that phrase. First, there's the number of punches. The boxer who lands more punches generally wins. However, harder punches count more than lighter punches.

Now, there's no mathematical formula that equates the number of punches with the hardness of the punch. The judge has to weigh the two based on his experience.

This content is protected

 

Clean punching is entirely different from effective punching! A clean punch is leather on flesh, a punch that isn't partially blocked or partially evaded. Indeed clean punching is 90% of scoring. But how hard a clean punch isn't and shouldn't be weighted into scoring. Power is its own reward. It either allows a boxer to land more punches, or gets a knockout win.

When clean punching is about equal in a round, then you look at the effectiveness of the punches. Which is more how the punches allowed the guy who landed them to be able to take the play away, not how hard the punch was. That's my opinion, I don't care what some judges say, but the sport's called boxing, and my perspective recognises that and favours the effective boxer. You are judges like Steven Weisfeld watching tough man contests, not boxing matches like I'm watching.

 

https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-medi...ogressive,q_80,w_800/tsapbnuu7gccyzeaprvz.gif

Both nerutralized each other a bit really.. Ala Calzaghe Hopkins.

 

The notion of giving the same credence to two clean punches, irrespective of power, is absurd.

 

Light Refreshment

 

Good shot. Did anyone notice GGg turning his head and rolling with the punch.? Still a good shot. Rolling with the punch took some of the mustard off it.

 

Exactly, some fighters are able to mask that they're hurt or that a punch didn't hurt them better than others.
Sugar Ray Leonard has talked about it being an art to mask the hurt, and he's talked about being hurt in several fights he's been in where he didn't let on to his opponent.

PH|LLA, you just phrased it wrong my friend, you said that if a shot doesn't stop a fighter in his tracks or backs him up, its ineffective, that's not true at all.
Margarito kept marching forward while Pacquiao was raining shot after shot at him, you're not going to say those shots from Pacquiao were ineffective.

Both Canelo and Golovkin took shots from the other where they shook their head that it did nothing to them, you know if they shook their head, they felt the shot.

The plain eye can guage when a punch lands how clean and hard the punch is, just like in the GIF here. You can guage how good a punch it is by looking at the fighter delivering it.
Canelo had his feet well planted, he started throwing the punch from well back, and the punch traveled some distance with a good amount of force behind it.
Golovkins' rock solid base with his thick neck, swiveled in its socket, and the sweat on him splattered in a way to indicate the force of the blow. Its a huge scoring blow that weighs heavily whether the Golovkin took a backward step or not.

Now, if Golovkin would have countered that shot with a push jab that hit Canelo straight in the face and stumbled him backward from what seems that the placement of his footing had a lot to do with him stumbling backward, then no, that jab would not override and weigh more than the big right hand from Canelo.
Now, if that jab made Canelo do the chicken dance and it was obvious from his reactions after the shot that he was hurt from it, then that jab definitely has to weigh big, maybe even as big as the right hand Canelo landed.

Sometimes a fighter gets hit with a good hard shot and loses his footing, but isn't really hurt by the punch where his legs are not under him, one and the other weighs differently and has to be judged accordingly.
Fan or judge, when you've seen enough boxing and are experienced in scoring, you know what weighs more than the other, that's why I don't put a lot of credence to all these casual fans that scored for GGG and hang on to this notion that because Canelo was on the ropes and GGG was punching, its GGG that won the fight.

I remember back when I was a young fan in my teens, just starting out watching boxing, I'd give more credence to the aggressor who came forward. As a teenager with only a couple of years experience watching boxing, I'd have given GGG more credit for the work that he did on Canelo on the ropes than he actually deserved.
Now that I'm much older and watched so many fights, I look for so many other nuances to the game that render a fighter effective or ineffective. The more you watch and actually take a pen and paper to score, the better you become at looking out for certain aspects of scoring.

So many fans looking on and even media people not specialized but there to cover the fight, really don't know how to score.
For example, just read a quote from Jamie Foxx, "GGG, he was beating that ass!"
LOL, I'm willing to bet Jamie Foxx only watches fights when they're big events and could care less about taking pen to paper and actually using all the scoring criteria to score a fight.