Canelo: "I watched the fight back. I won by 2 rounds"

Lol the psy op that is Erislandy Lara a guy who ran round the ring from Canelo and yet would’ve faced Golovkin at Middleweight lol.
This is one of those bones Canelo fans love to chew on even though Lara’s management said it wouldn’t and couldn’t ever happen,turns out he was just doing a Rigo on Twitter and look how that turned out for him lol.
Austin Trout is a new one on me re Golovkin,where have I been as it sounds like GGGs been ducking the entire light middleweight division.shame on him.

You’re wasting you’re time rewatching the fight mate as you’re not dealing with someone who you can reason with.
Honestly I’ve tried it when Shadow asked me to rewatch the Floyd v Canelo fight explaining that it should of been a draw despite it being one of the most one sided fights I’ve ever seen and that even Canelo himself said I couldn’t lay a glove on him,according to Shadow Canelo was wrong on this score and fought the closest toughest fight of Floyds career lol.

This is what you’re dealing with pal.

 

You made a claim that you had GGG winning 9/12 rounds. I've been trying to have a civil debate with you regardless of your continuos condescending tone.

Im asking which 9 rounds you gave GGG. I'll wait for your respond.

As for Lara, he was practically begging GGG for a fight and was willing to move up for a shot at him. Whether he would have won or lost is irrelevant to the point that GGG had elite fighters calling him out.

Canelo challenged ggg to a non-title fight at 155, GGG refused despite claiming he would fight anyone between 154--168.

You lose credibility when you say Trout is a C level fighter. C level fighters dont beat Cotto the way Trout did. C level fighters lose to Cotto, the way Daniel Geale did, who was considered GGGs best opponent before he was easily destroyed by Cotto.

GGG didn't want to fight Canelo at 155. Yeah that's a CW, but it was GGG who said he would fight anyone between 154-168, and Canelo had never fought above 155 before that. GGG wanted Canelo to move up to 160, which is fine, its his choice, but he could have fought Canelo sooner had he accepted the challenge.

 

lol wow that comment wasn't even in response to me but yet you felt the need to harp back to me and the Floyd Canelo debate. Is that what you really want to do though lol.

First of all, I never said it "should have been a draw" in fact I've made statements quite to the contrary that I had it a narrow Floyd win. If you have to lie about what I said, then what does that say about the point you are trying to argue?

Second of all, if I recall, you never got back to me after saying you'd rewatch it, you never showed a willingness to discuss specific rounds, all you did if I recall was reiterate that was it was one of the most one sided fights you've ever seen which is laughable.

The one thing you did get right is that I did say he fought Floyd to one of the closest fights of Floyd's career which is a matter of actual fact. He took Floyd to his absolute limit but came short of beating Floyd.

As far as Canelo saying he couldn't lay a glove on him, I think you're putting too much stock in this quote. Since you keep bringing this up, can you show me the video of Canelo actually saying this? I wouldn't be surprised if it was translated wrong. It sounds to me like he was just showing respect to Floyd on how difficult he is to hit. Floyd was going to great lengths to make Canelo miss, some of which put him off balance and caused him to bite on a lot of feints. I think you're taking this statement too literally, and I don't know how (even if it was translated correctly) that proves that it was such a one-sided fight. There's video evidence of him landing his gloves on Floyd throughout the fight, it sounds like you are trying to act like he didn't land a single punch on Floyd all night which is obviously ridiculous.

 

Nah, bull****. Canelo did much better than we thought, correct, but it's possible to do much better and still lose. He lost and was given a draw. That's why we're pissed.

 

Maybe you. Not the vibe I get from the lot though. Even your response. I reckon there's some salt in a self made wound.

 

The post you responded to was spot on. It's not BS at all. Nonito Smoak hit the nail right on the head, I couldn't have said it better myself. It was in fact a great razor close fight, and you for whatever reason just can't accept that. You're pissed because you and you alone think he lost.

Sure a lot of your fellow Golovkin fans agree with you, and they give you this confirmation bias. But reasonable unbiased fans like Nonito Smoak recognize how obviously close it was. And frankly, going into the rematch, given your highly biased stance on the first fight, I have no confidence that you will be scoring the rematch fairly. If it's even remotely close and it goes to a decision, it's to be expected for you to come on here and scream robbery, argue Golovkin won no matter what, argue Oscar paid off the judges again, etc etc etc.

It's the same old dog and pony show with you BCS8, calling that post BS just comes off as petty. Are you just getting lazy at this point lol? It's abundantly clear that the reason for the outrage was the 118-110 which you bewilderingly deny, and you've made this argument before if I recall.

 

I'm salty whenever a boxer gets a result that he is not entitled to. We all predicted that there would be scoring BS BEFORE the fight, and tahdah! there was. Canelo's pocket judges to the rescue!

Boxers themselves have said the same thing:

"If the rematch takes place, Las Vegas is the likely landing spot, and Saunders expects Canelo to get the victory, regardless of what happens during the fight – if the contest goes to the judges.

“Golovkin must go out there and knock him out, because if they go to the cards they will give the fight to Canelo, even if he loses,” Saunders told Fox Deportes."

http://www.fightsports.tv/saunders-ggg-needs-to-ko-canelo/

It's shameful.

 

How's the weather in Delusiolandia today?

“I thought Golovkin won the fight,” Trout told .com. “At the same time, Canelo did show that he’s got a hell of a chin and he’s got a hell of a punch and he’s got a nice set of balls. But I didn’t think he won the fight. I think a draw was ridiculous, too."

 

Let's not forget this:

WHO REALLY WON THE GGG VS GOLOVKIN FIGHT?

GGG 90%
Canelo10%

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threa...-vs-canelo-fight.593715/page-12#post-18773174

Yeah, we're ALLLLLLLL Golovkin nuthuggers here. YOU and IsaL are the ONLY guys with the inside track to the truth ... lmfao! Don't forget to post pics of your threesome with Byrd to Imgur

 

Going in predicting there would be scoring BS goes hand in hand with not thinking Canelo had a legit chance of winning which you've admitted you underestimated him on. We get it, you went into the fight thinking that Golovkin is entitled to a win over Alvarez. Then you were surprised at how well Alvarez did, but still that wasn't even close (in your estimation) to enough to get a victory. Well naturally with that kind of a mindset, you're predisposed to outrage over anything but a Golovkin decision.

See, unlike you, I didn't go into the bout with any preconceived notions or expectations. I actually just, you know, watched the fight for what it was and saw it for what it was, not for what I expected it to be like you did !

See the difference?

Lets review : You went into fight predicting scoring BS whilst not believing that Canelo had a chance in hell of a legit win. You admitted that Canelo did far better than you thought he would or could, right? So much so that now you actually believe that Canelo has a legit chance to win where you didn't before, right? So given how wrong you were on how good Canelo was and his (legit, non-scoring BS) chances of success / winning vs Golovkin, is it so improbable that you could be equally wrong about your scoring BS predictions? I mean you were clearly wrong about the scoring BS to the extent that you were sure Canelo would win a decision if it went to the cards, right? So at least somewhat that shows that not only did you massively under-exaggerate Canelo's legit chances of winning, you also over-exaggerated (to some extent at least) the extent of the scoring BS you expected. (which was a sure-fire Canelo decision win)

You can tell how much you are reaching by calling all 3 judges (apparently ?) Canelo's pocket judges (plural)? Even the judge that scored it for Golovkin Dave Moretti? Was he a Canelo pocket judge too lol. Or just Byrd and Trella, Trella a judge that didn't even have Canelo winning lol. This is comedy please keep it coming.

 

lol what I meant by that is that it's you and you alone who believe that Canelo lost so decisively. Most people, even those who had Golovkin winning, had it a close fight, recognize it was a close fight and could be seen either way. Like Trout, just reading his statement, it shows that he's conflicted. He said he's got a hell of a chin and a hell of a punch and a nice set of balls? Those 3 statements suggests that Canelo did really well, but yet he says that a draw is a ridiculous? That sounds like peer pressure to me, that sounds like he heard other people in the crowd say Golovkin won and didn't want to be an outlier. Not only that, but Trout had a relatively close fight with Canelo himself which he probably thought he won, so that's right down his alley to act like Canelo is getting preferential treatment yet again to support the idea that Golovkin got screwed out of a win vs Canelo just like he thinks he did vs Canelo.

 

BCS8, since you felt the need to bring up the Trout quote, out of all the possible people to quote, can you remind me who you had winning the Canelo Trout fight?

Now surely, Trout believes that he won that fight right. Even though he was knocked down, but regardless, naturally he thinks he won the fight, as naturally most fighters don't admit they lost right?

Well would a fighter like Trout, who had already lost a close disputed decision to Canelo that he surely believes he won, be more or less inclined in your view to have Canelo winning a close fight vs Golovkin?

 

Were you "salty" when Golovkin got the W over Jacobs? Of course not.. You only care when it goes against your bias agenda.

 

c level fighters don't fight for titles. c is average, .500 fighter or a completely sheltered bum.

 

Lara 's management never once contacted Loeffer, unless twitter call outs once GGG had a fight count. Instead Lara has been on his bum fight tour up until now. You claim GGG record is crap then you should take a proper look at Lara's.

Austin Trout is indeed C level, outside of Cotto he's list everytime he's stepped up. Kirkland Laing beat Duran that doesn't make him the better fighter.

List me Trouts top 5 wins....they're laughably crap. Also how has GGG avoided him?

As for 155 that's a make believe division....Infact it's middleweight but Canelo only wanted to drain GGG.