Trout: Canelo Showed A Lot, But Draw With Golovkin 'Ridiculous'

have you ever read your comments?

 

I try to keep it real. If you look at that post that I called delusional, I mean, that was seriously delusional. I'm not under any such delusions like that comment from mirkofilipovic. He says "lets be honest" but then makes a statement like that. Just read it. That's delusional. You're suggesting that I'm delusional, I challenge you to point out how I'm delusional. I'm not acting like Loeffler has judges in his backpocket like the other side says about Oscar. I'm not here crying about the decision like many G fans are. I'm trying to keep it 100, and I'm gonna calling out those that make ridiculous or delusional statements.

 

There are probably not more than a dozen people who "are something" within the boxing community that scored it for Canelo, and that's including Canelo's promoters and mum. The poll was done on this forum.

Here it is:

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/who-really-won-the-ggg-vs-canelo-fight.593715/

I was wrong. It wan't 80% that had Golovkin winning. It was 90%.

Nice try at conjuring up mysterious crowds of people that thought Canelo won, somewhere. FFS even most Mexicans agree GGG won.

"Appeared to land" more punches If you have a version where Canelo landed more punches, ring Oscar now. He'll pay you handsomely for the footage

Uuummmmmm. Maybe because he won?

GGG outlanded Alvarez in 10 of the 12 rounds. Any further questions?

Well, yeah, Byrd's 118-110 is problematic because GGG outlanded Canelo in 10 of the 12 rounds.

After review I settled on a 8-4 score. I had it 7-5 initially. Many people don't agree with the method I use for scoring. If there are rounds that seem very close at first glance I alternate in awarding them to either fighter. Some people say it's a cop-out and that I need to make a decision. I had 6 clear GGG rounds and 2 clear Canelo rounds and 4 toss up rounds. I can get a 6-6 score if I give all the close rounds to Canelo. If I give them all to GGG I get 10-2. I don't think either is fair. 8-4 seems right.

And yet ... yet we all predicted the future before it happened, on the basis of this paranoia or conspiracy theory. If I roll the dice four times and get 12 each time, I'm going to pick 12 as the number for the 5th roll too.

Another successful defence is not a dent.

James Toney officially beat Tiberi, when everybody, including James Toney himself, agree Tiberi won.

 

Barely anyone think Canelo won! Lol

 

I had 116-112 for triple G. 115-113 is fine. IMHO a 114-114 card is generous to Canelo but not outrageous. I struggle to come up with a card which would show him winning and 118-110 is an absolute insult.

 

Pretty much how I see it.

 

He types too fast to read them as well. C'm on, you can't expect that too, surely!

 

I’m not debating that most people had G winning. I’m pointing out that the majority of those that had G winning, had it extremely close. (7-5 or 8-4)

We were talking about whether or not it was “obvious” that G won. It seems to me that most people thought G won a “close fight”. It seems to me that only a small minority of people had G winning “wide” or “obviously”. Most seem to admit that it was a close fight, which is what I was getting it. Comprende?

Again, you’re talking in generalizations. You state that G landed more punches in 10 out of the 12 rounds. You’re counting punches. I don’t count punches, I judges fights based on who landed the effective punches.

If you’re talking about Compubox numbers, does that include Round 5 where Canelo had a 14-9 lead based on HBO’s live stats, only to have G magically have an 18-14 advantage in that round based on the final numbers?? I’m still trying to understand what happened there. So you can state that G outlander him in 10 out of the 12 rounds, but even if that’s true, that doesn’t mean somebody in fact won 10 out of the 12 rounds. As we were discussing in the other thread, it’s not just about how many times you touch someone with your glove in a round, you have to make an assessment as to who landed the more effective punches in a round. And by the way I’m looking forward to your assessment of the 9th round and who landed the harder more effective punches in that round.

Well good, you have it much closer than Teddy Atlas had it. He’s just as much an outlier than Byrd. (perhaps slightly less of an outlier if you thought G won 7-5 for example) but still in the same ballpark as Byrd. So citing him is absurd because he’s literally the most extreme example. (no one as far as I know had it for G that wide)

Ok why don’t we look at who predicted what and examine who had the better more accurate predictions? I know I predicted the fight would go the distance. If I’m not mistaken you predicted it would end via knockout? Who who was right there? Most G fans predicted a knockout if I’m not mistaken.

So you didn’t get that right : the part about it not ending via knockout. If I’m not mistaken you didn’t predict a decision would happen. You probably said “if it goes the distance, G is gonna robbed” or something. So you’re getting that confirmation bias in the sense that you were gonna scream robbery if Canelo won a decision. Just because you think G won, doesn’t prove that Oscar handpicked the judges or had them in his back pocket or paid them off. That’s you’re own theory. That hasn’t been proven, all we have is a draw!

It’s not a win. It’s a successful title defense, sure, but it’s also a successful “Lineal” Title defense for Canelo. Both G and Canelo were “successful”. That’s what you can say when there’s a draw and you retain your title.

What’s you’re point? G didn’t officially beat Canelo. Apples to oranges.

 

Fine.

effective

[ih-fek-tiv]

adjective
1. adequate to accomplish a purpose; producing the intended or expected result:

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/effective

Clearly, Golovkin's punches were more effective than Canelo's, because he drove Canelo back and chased him all over the ring. Canelo's punches had no effect on Golovkin. It's not anybody's fault that Golovkin hits much harder than Saul, it's just a statement of fact that GGG's punches had more effect on Alvarez than vice versa.

I scored 5 as 17-13 in favour of Golovkin.

In a moment.

It's possible to get a 118-110 score to GGG if you are biased and give every doubt to Golovkin. It's only possible to give Canelo 118-110 if you drank bleach and thereafter Oscar slipped a padded envelope in your back pocket and gave a buttock a squeeze.

Canelo was better, GGG was older than I thought. Shrug.

Look! I just rolled those dice and got the double sixes again, just like I predicted, based on all the other times they rolled double six.

Shadow111: Those dice could roll anything. This is confirmation bias.
BCS8: Hmmmm ... Imma thinking those dice are loaded.

My point is that sometimes the "official" results are wrong and everybody knows it.

 

This is what Trout said BEFORE the fight:

"“If it goes the distance, then Triple-G ain’t winning no decision in Vegas,” Trout said. “He’s not. Triple-G is gonna have to knock Canelo out. Who knows? He can do it.”

However, Trout added, “I think they’ve both got good chins. I think it’s gonna go the distance and Canelo will win a decision, regardless of who won.”"

Trout knew the score even before the fight

 

How did he know the score before the fight? He said he thought "Canelo would win a decision, regardless of who won". That's not what ended up happening, since Canelo didn't win a decision, since it turned out to be a draw.

 

Which is why everybody says GGG got lucky with Oscar's 'special' judges. It could have been worse. A draw is actually better in some ways because now we get to see #2.

Despite all I've been saying, I'm not anti-Canelo by any means. I think he's matured into an excellent fighter with a very attractive style and I'm keen to see more of him. The first fight was very good; #2 may be better.

 

Cucknelo's cuck army out doing damage control early today.

"Trout said what? O NO HE D'INT'"!

 

Trout was calling for Alvarez to beat GGG. So his take on the fight is impartial and unbiased since he is admitting his prediction was wrong.

I don't think anyone is saying Canelo didn't do a good job. He had moments in the fight that were great....they just weren't sustained and enough to warrant a draw or a win over Golovkin.

Alvarez has had some very close fights where they could have gone either way. The fight with GGG wasn't one of them which the overwhelming consensus proves who have taken the time to weigh in on the fight. His fight with Lara was very close and could have gone either way. The general narrative around that outcome was it was close and split as to who won or should have won....Trout is insinuating that Alvarez will always be given the benefit of the doubt in close fights and provided gifts in fights that go the distance since he's the cash cow.

There's little doubt that if Nelo did enough to beat GGG that Trout would have been tooting his own horn by calling it correctly before the fight ever took place....there were a LOT of people who had to eat a bit of crow after predicting an Alvarez win only to be surprised that he had lost in clear fashion but gifted with a draw.

 

Austin's prediction of the GGG vs Alvarez fight

https://www.liveboxingnews.com/single-post/2017/07/01/Austin-Trout-prediction-for-GGG-Canelo