GGG is - at the very least - the Greatest middleweight since Hagler

You are entitled to your opinion. It just so happens that your opinion is contrary to reality. He never vacated his Lineal Claim by leaving the division. There is no 1 year timeframe on when you need to fight in the division so to speak. Technically his fight with Liam Smith while at 154 anyway which was below the MW limit of 160. Lineal Titles are only vacated when a fighter retires or moves up in weight never to return. (for example, moves up and challenges / wins a title, etc) That didn't happen in Canelo's case. He and DLH made it very clear that he had every intention of fighting Gennady at MW this year and true to his word he did, and he defended it successfully.

 

continue on this path to enlightenment, grasshopper

 

I don't see how it should baffle you, as we compared scorecards and only differ on a few rounds. (2,4,&11) We both agree Alvarez won rounds 1,3,10&12. Given your scorecard, you're basically saying that rounds 2 & 11 "weren't close"? If they weren't close, then how do you explain all 3 judges scoring those rounds for Alvarez. That truly baffles me because we're not just talking about 1 rogue judge, we're talking about all 3 judges seeing it a certain way, but you not only seeing it a different way but then basically by process of elimination are saying those rounds "weren't even close". That's truly baffling to me. Rounds 4 and 5 were also very close, Rounds 8 & 9 were also very close. However, if you thought G outworked him in those rounds, that's understandable to me. That doesn't baffle me that you gave those rounds to G. Again, it's not who you thought won those rounds that baffles me, it's your insistance (apparently) that rounds 2 & 11 were not only G rounds, but weren't even close, to which all 3 judges and a good amount of people who shared their scorecards disagree. I challenge you to go through rounds 2 and 11 with me and point out the major punches landed in the round, but then you said that that's too nitpicky or whatever. I think you should be able to recognize that your POV on these two rounds in particular are different than all 3 judges and why that's more baffling than my POV which is simply a reasonable "I thought Canelo won those rounds, but I recognize that they were close."

I simply ask you this : if those rounds were so clear for G (the rounds that gave G the win on your card) then why did all 3 judges score them to Canelo? Surely at the very least those rounds must have been close enough for the judges to score it to the other guy than you did, no?

I'm a fan of Jacobs as well, and I was impressed with his performance, and I agree it was a very close fight, without the knockdown and Jacobs gassing in the 12th, maybe he would have edged it. You had Jacobs edging it? Interesting, seems reasonable to me, it was a very close fight and could be argued either way in my estimation, but the knockdown would make it a little harder to have Jacobs winning. If you preferred his work though, then I don't have a problem with that. Plenty thought he won, it's also interesting since just yesterday BCS8 made it seem like only me and two other posters thought Jacobs won (even though I never made that argument) and here we have you saying you had Jacobs won.

I've gone to great lengths to try to bridge the gap here, to point out like which rounds we differ on, to try to eliminate that "baffling" sensation. It's difficult to wrap my head around how you find it baffling for me to have Canelo winning in the ballpark of 7-5 or 8-4, a margin that's pretty much equidistant between the Byrd card and the other two judges cards. You're outside the 3 judges cards with your score of 8-4 for G, with 2 rounds that all 3 judges scored for Canelo as the difference between your card and a draw.

IIRC you said you initally had it 7-5 for G but revised your card to 8-4 for G. I mean, you watched the fight live and thought it was about 7-5 G but are baffled by my possibly seeing 1 or 2 rounds differently? I think you're just being overdramatic. Again, I'm not accusing you of being a fanboy, I'm just saying that you're coming off as fanboy-esque by your unwillingness to admit that the fight was "close", by your unwillingness to discuss the crucial rounds that we differ on, by your unwillingness (at one point at least) to admit that Canelo is the Lineal Champ.

These are my points of contention, not your having G won. (that's fine that you thought G won) My bones with you aren't in your score, but rather your unwillingness to admit that the fight was close, that most of the rounds we actually agree on who won. (we agree on more rounds that we disagree on) I think you'd agree that generally speaking an unwillingness to admit that a fight was close "screams fanboy, screams biased towards a fighter". Perhaps not in this case, as you've explained yourself good enough that you had Jacobs winning, that you are an Alvarez fan, but I think if you're honest most people polled on the fight admitted that it was a close fight, and neither of the 3 judges had it a "clear G win" like you do. So if you look at it that way, it's you not me that has the POV outside the realm of the general consensus, but I guess we're all kinda of in our own bubble and can use whatever metrics we need to argue that we're (as in you or me individually) are part of the norm.

 

Scrolling...scrolling...still Shadow posts...scrolling.

Maybe he should just be given his own forum. This is borderline spamming. Hes not saying anything, its mostly same repeated crap.

 

Take your 200 page argument to Transnational Ratings then. They are acting in the interest of restoring the sports integrity, you just have an agenda.

 

I'm acting in the interest of integrity. I respect the judges scorecards in Canelo G. Others do not. I respect the integrity of the Lineal Championship. Others do not. What are you accomplishing here : Do you have anything useful to add?

 

I only had Nelo winning 3 rounds, maybe 4 being generous. So we are both baffled which is cool. Alvarez only won rounds 1, 3 and 11...12 was generous. I don't think you mixed up 10 & 11 for my card? I don't give the official judges much credit in their scoring just as I didn't give the judges credit in the LL/Holyfield and the Whitaker/JCC fights for how they saw those fights.

I can't answer the question relating to how the 3 judges called the GGG/Alvarez fight. I think they were influenced by GBP based on the outcome. I'm honestly not surprised because it happens frequently in this sport.

It just wasn't a close fight...competitive, yes. Competitive enough that I want to see it again and give Canelo a shot at making adjustments that wouldn't be a big surprise to see him win in a rematch. Do I think he will win? No...Not based on what I saw from him in the first fight but I know he's a true competitor and champion so he's going to be better when he decides to make the rematch. Alvarez is a great boxer and he did well but Golovkin clearly won.

 

I had a look at the Transnational Boxing Rankings Kentucky Cobra. In the P4P tab, in the comments below, they indicate that they have an 18 month requirement (not 1 year as you alluded to) to defend a Lineal Title. Further, in another one of the comments, they stated that Canelo's bout with "Chavez -a former contender in the division- at 164 can be considered an over-the-weight middleweight bout". So it wasn't a lack of defending the title within 1 year as you indicated that caused their Middleweight Crown to be Open so to speak. But rather, if you go to the Successions tab, there is more information as to why they declared the MW "Championship" Open earlier this year.

There it states : Throne declared open 18 April 2017 after Saul Alvarez, in answer to a question posed by member Jake Donovan about his middleweight title status on 11 April, stated: “I am not a middleweight champion. I was at one point, but I am no longer the middleweight champ.” Alvarez has thus formerly abdicated, as per the charter, the middleweight throne.

This quote was discussed here earlier this year, and they interpreted that quote to mean that Canelo had essentially vacated the Lineal Title by saying he wasn't a MW Champ anymore. When he was asked that question, if you recall, Canelo was adamant in that he would not fight for or accept the Huichol belt that the WBC made specifically for Canelo vs Chavez. As we discussed back in April in reference to that quote, that quote is vague at best as far as what specific title he was referring to. As we know, Canelo was once the WBC MW Champ, but is no longer being the WBC MW Champ. For all intents and purposes, he was making it clear that he wasn't a MW belt holder, but that's not the same thing as the Lineal Title. Canelo didn't want anything to do with the WBC when he made that statement, and his quote stating that he wasn't a MW Champion was clearly in reference to him not wanting to have anything to do with the WBC or their belt or being considered their Champion.

Moreover, after that date, he was still recognized repeatedly as both the Ring and Lineal Champion, by HBO's Max Kellerman, at the press conferences leading up to his fight with Triple G, etc.

So quite simply, that quote, interpreted wrongly, is the sole reason why the Transnational Boxing Rankings has had their Middleweight Crown "Open" since April. Clearly, Canelo had not exceeded their 18 month requirement to defend the Lineal Title in the MW Division and the they suggested that they even discussed whether or not to count the Chavez fight as an over-the-limit Middleweight Bout for Lineal purposes. (that I don't agree with since it was over the MW limit - if anything I would count the fight with Smith before I would count the Chavez bout since 154 was under the MW limit and only 1 lb less than the weight he won the title at, but regardless even not counting either of those as defenses, May 2016 - Sept 2017 is still within their 18 month window)

So there, now we know why the Transnational Boxing Rankings has the MW Crown Open. It wasn't because Canelo was fighting outside the division too long as you suggested. Making their MW Crown "open" was attributed to that one quote from Back in April when Canelo was adamant about him not being associated with the WBC in any way when the WBC tried to make him fight for the "made up" Huichol belt, to which Canelo vehemently rejected. It's clear to anyone paying attention that Canelo was simply stating that he was no longer a MW belt holder so to speak. That quote in no way officially vacated his Lineal Championship or the Middleweight Crown. The TBR though indeed used that quote though to declare the throne Open.

That's ridiculous of course, if Canelo officially relinquished the throne, then he wouldn't have still been announced as Lineal Champion in the buildup to the Triple G fight.

And even if you go by the Transnational Boxing Rankings, taking that quote ridiculously as a relinquishing of the throne, still there would be no way for Triple G at any point to be considered Lineal Champion. If you go by the TBR, as it stands "nobody" holds the MW Crown, which would be contrary to what JohnnyDrama99 was arguing earlier, how Gennady was considered ”the Man" or The Lineal Champion. (that’s not what the TBR is saying) If you go by TBR, they don't consider "anybody" as holding MW Crown due to that quote from Canelo. And before that quote, they considered Canelo "The Man" not Gennady despite Gennady having the belts. So anyway you slice it, depending on if you consider that quote an official relinquishing of the Crown, either Canelo is the Man or Nobody is the Man. Certainly Gennady's not the Man because he never beat the Man, which was what JohnnyDrama99 stated on page 18 which started all this back and forth.

For the TBR or anyone to use that translated ambiguous quote from Canelo back in April when he was repeatedly being asked about the WBC and whether he would fight for their belts, specifically the Huichol, is ludicrous. That in no way was an official vacating the Lineal Title or the MW Crown despite the fact that the TBR used that quote to declare the MW Crown vacant in their rankings.

 

You're flip flopping and are pretty much exposing yourself with this post.

Just a few weeks ago, I asked you for your card and you indicated that at first watching it live you had it 7-5 G, but after rewatching it you revised it to 8-4 G. I asked you which rounds Canelo won and you clearly stated 1,3,10&12. Now you're saying "3 maybe 4". So you go from giving Canelo 5 rounds initially, to 4, to "3 maybe 4 being generous" lmao.

Listen to yourself. You don't sound like you have any idea how many rounds Canelo won because you can't seem to decide which rounds he won when asked. I didn't mix up anything, I'm simply quoting the rounds that you stated a few weeks back that Canelo won on your card. You gave a very concrete 8 rounds to 4, with Canelo winning 1,3,10&12, now you're saying "11 & 12 if you're generous". You're proving my point without even realizing. 11 was close, then, also round 2 all three judges gave to Canelo, that was obviously close as well. That's 6 rounds that you either gave to Canelo, you admit were close or the general consensus agrees were at the very least close (or Canelo rounds). That's not even counting rounds 4,5,8,&9 which were also close for the reasons I've already explained.

Then you state the 3 judges were mysteriously "influenced by GBP". I mean seriously? We're not talking about the Byrd card here, we're not talking about the 1 rogue Judge that you claim Canelo always has in his pocket. We're talking about all 3 judges now, they all gave the rounds that you gave to G to Canelo, the rounds that seperated your card that you gave from a draw. It's impossible to deny that the fight isn't close given that reality. I don't know what else to tell you, if you can't admit that then you're just in complete denial. Again, I'm not here to criticize your card, or your view of the fight. You're entitled to your opinion as to who won the fight, if you thought G won 8-4 or even 9-3 then so be it, but don't sit here and tell us it wasn't close when the rounds you gave previously to Canelo + the rounds that all 3 judges gave to Canelo you end up with a draw, and that's not even counting rounds 4,5,8,&9 which Canelo did quite well in and were at the very least quite close.

I don't know how else I can spell it out for you, and if you can't admit it was close then it just sounds like you're in some kind of denial. And that's OK, you don't have to admit it was close, but it's just hard to take you seriously when you're flip flopping all over the place and changing the rounds that you gave to Canelo presumably so you don't have to admit it was close lol.

 

Not flip flopping at all. I originally had it 7-5 for GGG but as I mentioned, I was inebriated and had a bunch of distractions so I rewatched the fight a couple more times after that. I only found 3 rounds to give Alvarez in confidence but round 12 was fairly close...being generous, I gave it to Canelo. That's 8-4 in favor of GGG. It wasn't close. Again, I can't take the judges cards seriously and don't base my scoring on what they saw. It's obvious 2 out of the 3 judges were completely off their game, Byrd especially. There's no denial on my part....I have been consistent in saying GGG won and did so in clear fashion. Some fights are close....this one wasn't.

 

You are flip flopping becuase you originally said you gave Round 10 to Canelo, now you're saying 11 and 12. You're giving different rounds than you did before = flip flopping.

So let me ask you again : Which round did you give to Canelo besides Round 1, 3 & 12 : Round 10 or Round 11 ? ? ?

 

Again.. I wasn't flip flopping. I may have mixed up 10/11 but I believe I gave Nelo 11. I don't have my card anymore and it's been a while since I watched the fight. So my recollection isn't firm. I really can't call it without watching it again. What I absolutely know is it that it wasn't close. Lol

 

LMAO With such a foggy recollection of which rounds you had Canelo winning, how can you have any credibility as far your recollection of the closeness of the fight as a whole?

I mean you can't even remember who you had winning Rounds 10 & 11 but yet you're sure it wasn't close overall. Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds lol. Surely 10 & 11 were both (at the very least) close (if not Canelo rounds)? FYI All 3 judges gave both the 10th and the 11th to Canelo. How about Round 2? Close Round? (All 3 judges gave Canelo Round 2)

 

Respecting corrupt/incomptent judges is not respecting the integrity of the sport.