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

so 7th time you are told I am not bovvered. You reply "ahh so you are bovvered, i get it!"


i mean.... u gott quit the charade sometime. U cant do this ad infinitum. can u??

 

Ok, Ok...relax. I believe you kid. You still seem a little upset, but if you say you’re not bovvered I’m happy for you. I still find myself worrying about you. If you can’t tell... I have a heart of gold

 

Why does it have to be a matter of 3 judges or 1 judge? You phrased the question in such a way that you controlled the answer, that is a common fallacy, and not worth the trouble. I don't know why you guys bother with such nonsense, hence my non answer questioning the point of such stupidity.

Your original question:

"So are all 3 judges who scored Canelo G corrupt/incomptent, or just Byrd?"

To answer this as "yes" or "no" would be the definition of OXYMORON. Because it would be an agreement or disagreement with two scenarios that can't co-exist.

I'm awe struck by your abuse of logic. This is what you have to do to yourself to support Canelo? It's like the worst marriage ever.

[url]https://media.giphy.com/media/yHUiExmU40A4U/giphy.gif[/url]

 

[url]http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/disgstd.gif[/url]

 

On the last round, I don't see how you're being generous by giving it to Alvarez. Alvarez clearly won that round. He came out fists flying and took a big lead, and didn't let G get back into the round by creating separation and essentially going tit for tat with G after the early barrage and lead. Not only that, Canelo finished the round strong in the final 30 seconds. You're acting like you're doing Canelo a favor by giving him the 12th. He clearly won that round and I don't see anyone saying that G won that round. It just shows your biased right there just by you saying that you're being generous in giving the 12th to Alvarez. There's nothing generous about Alvarez winning the 12th. He won it clearly and thoroughly all by himself with a fantastic display of boxing skills putting an exclamation point on the bout in the Championship rounds and in the 12th round in particular.

I'm quite relaxed Johnny, just sitting here watching some football and talking some boxing during the commercial breaks lol. I know "Relax" is your go to phrase when you're getting schooled on here, but why do you assume those who disagree with you and take the time to discuss matters related to boxing aren't "relaxed". I see you're "worried about HerolGee" lol, it's humorous that you feel a need to take to to some kind of a personal level. I find this entertaining to go back and forth with you on this stuff. It's good and it doesn't really get me stressed out or anything, I'm a boxing guru and I like discussing fights especially involving such a fascinating bout like Canelo Triple G. I'm not emotionally invested in this at all, lol again for you to go this route shows that you're really grasping at straws since you can't debate on substance. I mean think of it, you focused on how relaxed or how emotionally invested you think I am instead of discussing what we're here to discuss : boxing, the match itself which is what I'm trying to do.

Influenced How? You say such a thing but then you don't explain it. You think that promoters influence big fights, but you're not being specific or providing any evidence to support your theories. At least in regard to Canelo Triple G, your theory that GBP or DLH somehow "influenced the judges" is simply just an unsubstantiated belief you have. (extremely delusional in my opinion, as a desperate way to validite your POV) I guess you're just more of a conspiratorial type of person than I am. I don't need to have such crazy theories about promoters influencing judges to discuss how close a bout was.

But speaking of which, as far as Whitaker JCC, have you heard this interview with Mickey Vann, one of the judges that scored it a draw?

This content is protected

He goes into detail about how he gave Round 4 to Chavez because he saw two low blows from Whitaker in the 4th, which in his estimation enabled Whitaker to win the round. Due to the low blows, he said he scored the 4th for Chavez, in what he thought was an even round before the low blows, and Whitaker only won it down the stretch as a result of the low blow. That's an interesting explanation as to how he came to a draw which you may find interesting, so please comment on it.

Also the two draws in that fight had scores of 115-115, which meant that there were apparently two even 10-10 rounds in there, with the other judge having it 115-113, giving Whitaker the 12th round which the media stated was probably Chavez's best round. He even goes into how there were rumors about how there were "headlines in the paper" that he'd been bribed and all that which should be right down your alley lol. I think most would agree that Whitaker was outboxing him doing his usual backpeddling and making JCC come to him and all that, similar stuff that Canelo was doing to Triple G.

I'm not stating that shady stuff hasn't gone on in boxing in the past, all I'm saying is it's pure speculation on your end to try to suggest that shady stuff like you're suggesting went on in Canelo G. I think generally judges go through extensive scrutiny especially nowadays and generally speaking they simply try to score the bouts fairly. I'm not convinced that Byrd had an agenda to give the fight to Canelo like you have suggested simply because she scored it 10-2. You yourself said that you at one point considered scoring it to G 10-2. It really depends on what you value in the rounds. Don't get me wrong, I agree that 10-2 Canelo is too wide, I thought G won more than 2 rounds, but I would say that after going through it, there were several rounds that Canelo did quite well in in terms of landing the hardest most impactful punches in a round that he was outlanded, like a round 8 or 9, that would generally be seen as a Triple G round but I'd be more inclinded to give a round like that to Canelo for landing the single best punches of the round.

As far as Whitaker JCC, take a look at that video of the judge explaining his scoring and let me know if you buy it. My guess is he may have scored some of the rounds 10-10 that many thought Whitaker edged with his flashy punching and his outlanding of JCC. Maybe it was one of those rounds like Rounds 8 or 9 in Canelo G where one guy lands the harder punches and another guy outvolumes. I've said before rounds like that are good candidates for 10-10s but judges rarely score 10-10s anymore at least not in America.

You got me all wrong Drama, I could care less how many people think Alvarez won. Remember you're the one who's all gung ho about using the popular opinion so to speak to validate who you thought won lol. You're the one alleging vast promoter conspiracies suggesting they influenced the judges. I don't have to take such a "deep dive" like that so to speak as you have. I simply agree with the judges. As you know, I'm somewhere in between Byrd and the other 2 judges. I don't see how that's unreasonable at all. I rate Canelo's performance a lot higher than you did as far as what it takes to win a round vs Triple G. I have no problem agreeing to disagree on how we saw the fight, but I've done quite well to call you out on your flip flopping and switching the rounds you gave to Canelo, all the while refusing to admit that it was close. It's frustrating to hear you be so stubborn in what I see as a biased Pro-Triple G argument, but I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it. I look forward to seeing what you come up with and will be happy to discuss the matter further. Please watch that video of the Whitaker JCC judge explaining his score and I'd like to hear your reaction to it, and whether you think he was bribed. Also I'd like to hear the results of any investigations on the JCC Whitaker judges or the Lewis Holyfield judges as you were the one who brought up these bouts as it relates to Canelo vs Triple G. (or any other boxing investigations that you find relevant)

 

You're extremely over-thinking this, and listening to you jump through all these hoops is nauseating. You've made yourself look like enough of a fool already, no need to continue to put on this charade trying to desperately justify attempts at poking holes in my very simple straight forward "Yes/No", "either or" question : were you alleging corruption incompetence for all 3 of the judges or just in regard to Byrd? A simple answer like "I was fine with the 2 other judges, it was only Byrd that I'm allegding the corruption / incompetence" would have sufficed. But no, you had to endlessly mind numbingly deflect because you can't even defend your own ludicrous statements. Sad !

 

The last round was not clear for Alvarez. A lot of the media gave round 12 to GGG. And I can see why...I would have as well if I wasn’t feeling so generous and if I didn’t like Canelo.

I’m not doing Nelo any favors...it’s not my place nor am I in position to do so. The problem is he didn’t do himself any favors in how he opted to fight Golovkin. His promotion were the ones who did him the favors as well as the judges.

I’m glad you are so tranquil shadow. Hopefully this is your happy place? It’s great to see your perception of yourself is so high. You might want to reel that in just a smidge. Class is definitely in session but it’s not your class. Lol. Take a seat and be easy man. You’re not doing yourself any favors trying to come off bold on a message board. Lol

I’m worried about you too, but you seem to be perched up higher on your pedestal and less emotional so I tend to be a little more concerned with Heerl. I mean, you are “schooling” people in your virtual class room. Lol. You’re a “boxing guru” and You’re totally believable when you say this exchange doesn’t stress you out and it’s “fascinating”. You’re an interesting guy shadow....I’m sure your just a normal person in the real world? Well...as normal as any other “boxing guru” can be. Lol.

You are the guru, right. You should not sell yourself short if you are unfamiliar with the historical background of how the FBI had investigated a number of well known promotional outfits in relation to buying off judges, referees and governing bodies. This is your class, right? lol...I’m sure with all that information on the sweet science some things just get lost in the sauce?

The Whitaker/Chavez fight definitely wasn’t a draw. Regardless of the explanation any of the judges who scored the fight offered, it’s really not worth my time. Water under the bridge and that fight is widely regarded as a Pernell victory despite the recorded draw.

Whitaker rarely back peddled...he used pivots, angles, lateral movement and pronounced upper body/head movements that created offensive opportunities he took advantage of. Back peddling the way Alvarez implemented it against Golovkin was merely a way to relive the pressure he was under and stifled his offensive opportunities. It was purely a defensive tactic with no strategy for his offense. Whitaker blended his defense and offense beautifully and had a better ring IQ.

You could care less about the overwhelming consensus because they don’t align with your perception of the fight. That’s why you are so heavy on the 3 judges and their score cards because it fits so well with your narrative. Lol. I'm not stubborn at all shadow....this is the pot calling the kettle black. Don't lose sleep over this stuff. It's not worth the stress. I'm less distressed about you than your guy Heerl. Lol...you should give him some of that aplomb you have in abundance..You "boxing guru" you. Ahaha. Good stuff man

 

If you really wanted my opinion you would ask, "What judges do you feel were incompetent or corrupt?" But you don't want my opinion, you still don't, you want me to play along with an argument you already imagined and laid out because you are sick in the head.

[url]https://media.giphy.com/media/ZCnBUZM3ZgLMQ/giphy.gif[/url]

 

Probably. BF24 is a good place for Toney to sell those old pairs of underpants and worn through socks he was gonna throw in the trash.

 

"wot u say im no bovverd yeh"

just say ...

This content is protected

 

The correct question is:

"Why do you think that the judges were incompetent and /or corrupt?"

 

So you're a mind reader now ? I don't want your opinion ? Really ? Keep telling yourself that. Man are you on some kind of lunacy. You're just embarrassing yourself at this point.

In all seriousness, I was just asking you flat out whether you thought only Byrd was corrupt or incompetent or whether you had a problem with all 3 judges. That's all I wrote, all I meant, nothing more, nothing like the crazy stuff you're writing on here. Take a walk outside, smell the fresh air, dear lord you sound like you're out your damn mind. And see BCS8's comment above, that's the correct question. Go ahead and try to explain yourself, explain why you're so sure Byrd or the other judges are corrupt or incompetent. Get into specific rounds, show how wrong Byrd's card was I dare you. I didn't agree with all the rounds Byrd gave to Canelo, but the fact is Canelo landed some bombs the rounds she gave to Canelo like 6,8&9. Show us why there had to be corruption or incompetence with Byrd. It couldn't just be that she was impressed by what Canelo was doing in 10 out of the 12 rounds. It's always gotta be some crazy conspiracy don't it?

 

My question was kind of rhetorical.

It's clear that Canelo has gotten some wildly favourable scores in the past. Byrd's score is likewise laughable.

If you think her absurd score can be justified, I can justify a 11-1 score for Golovkin based on nothing more than favouritism and stubborn stupidity.

I'd not be surprised if the Byrd score was the result of a brown paper envelope.

 

And inside the brown paper envelope were green backs and pictures of Oscar in fishnet stockings.

 

How any True Boxing Fan can say that Canelo won that Fight is beyond Me.....a Draw was a bad enough decision but to say he won that Fight surely is a disgrace...