(Must read) How GGG was screwed by the system

I commend the fact you actually state corruption is relevant.

The next statement i would put it to you is the four factors that make corruption more relevant to this fight.

1) The fight is in Vegas, a renowned area for robberies.
2) Canelo has had many favorable score cards which the majority disagree with.
3) Byrd has had many score cards that once again are very very questionable.
4) GBP fighters are usually up on the cards on fights that each other pundit has them down on.

Arkham razor applies here i believe, and the amount of factors that add up point in the light of a form of corruption.

Don't get me wrong, i believe GGG won 8-4 against Canelo, maybe 7-5 in favor for GGG. So yes, i can say the fight was slightly closer than a lot say, but i couldn't see any more rounds i could give to Canelo. (I personally liked Canelo before the GGG vs Canelo fight, especially after chavez fight so was trying to be generous to him at times for his counter punching style). But the work rate, volume and that jab won the fight for GGG.

Bob Bennett's reaction to the Byrd also raises questions as it seemed to be quickly "swept" under the carpet, the fact she is still judging (Even thought they are low level fights recently) is just a mockery to boxing.

 

This is something I hear a lot but most of the worst robberies / unpopular decisions didn't even happen in Vegas. Whitaker Chavez was in Texas. Lewis Holyfield was in NYC. Fury Wilder was in LA. Wilder Ortiz who many fans diagreed with the cards at the time of the stoppage was in Brooklyn.

I think we live in an era where pretty much every close fight gets called a robbery by someone on social media. Vegas is the Fight Capital of the World, the fight being in Vegas doesn't make it more likely to be a robbery. It's not any more corrupt there than in other states. There's something called confirmation bias which leads you to believe things like this. You look for something, it becomes more suspicious because that's the argument you want to make.

Not really. You get more controversial decisions when you dare to be great and fight top fighters. There was a healthy split between who thought won Lara vs Canelo and Trout vs Canelo. With GGG we saw a much different phenomenon as GGG has a legion of dedicated fans who will defend him rigorously. This is notoriously a pro-GGG board too so you need to keep that in mind.

If that's the case then that would indicate that Byrd's scoring wasn't Canelo favoritism or any kind of corruption. If she has a history of "different" scorecards then Canelo is just another in a long list of scores where she's differed from the normal. I know she was the only judge who had Khan leading Canelo after 5 rounds. IIR she scored Mayweather Berto a total shutout 12 rounds to 0.

These kind of scores aren't helping your case that her score in Canelo GGG 1 was a result of corruption as Mayweather certainly didn't need her to score the Berto fight a shutout for him to win. She's obviously looking at a different critreia than you are and possibly most boxing fans. But I don't think vast majority of boxing fans really pay close attention to quality landed punches so I'm not sure that's something that we should criticize her on.

I think this is an exaggerated generalization that can't fully be quantified because it's all subjective. Again I'm not saying that it hasn't happened, but if it does happen more than usual for GBP fighters then there could be reasons for that. GBP is a relatively small stable these days when you have different promotions fans and those close to the sport tend to side with fighters from promotions they are either a part of or are friends with. I don't know how you prove this point, but a lot of it could have to do with the styles and skills of GBP fighters vs fighters under other promotions.

"Arkham's" razor ? A trope mostly in comedic works where, when given multiple explanations for an event, the oddest one is most likely to be true. The inverse of Occam's Razor??

Sounds to me like it's just lazy thinking. Like you believe something, you believe something else, and thus they proves that it's what you think it is. This is just an exercise in confirmation bias.

Good. At least you recognized that the fight was close but I don't know what 7 or 8 rounds you gave G to win. Canelo did better than G in rounds 1-3 & 10-12. Most agree on that. Then you have rounds 4-6 all close all hard to score. G didn't clearly win those rounds.

G's best rounds were probably 7-9 particularly round 7 when he landed his best jabs of the fight imho. But even that round he nearly gave the round away in the last minute by getting tagged by a big uppercut and a series of punches by Canelo so much so that Sanchez chewed GGG out in the corner about it after the round. 8 and 9 GGG was the more active fighter, Canelo was backing away but Canelo still scored the most telling punches of the rounds, the upper and the big right hand. Nothing G did in thos erounds compared to that so while those are probably a GGG round it wasn't clear when you have Canelo getting some impressive work in to offset a lot of what GGG was doing.

Many fans especially GGG fans will not give Canelo rounds that he backed away set traps for G while GGG was doing all the work trying to cut off the ring and chase him down. Doing so would go against their own boxing philosophy and that's why the majority gave the fight to GGG. What rounds did you give GGG in the first fight, and what was your toss-up rounds?

You're doing it again. BB's comments werent unusual. Didn't he say something like she's one of his best judges but she had a bad night ? That's very vague and it's certainly not something that sounded suspicious. But GGG fans looking for blood acted like his comment proved some kind of corruptionm. It's honestly comical, a lot of thse GGG fans sound like 9/11 conspiracy theorists with some of this stuff.

 

ggg is the most overrated fighter ever!!!!! His record is mediocre and he got beat by canelo and jacobs

 

No one cries for poor Felix Sturm either who beat the .... out of DLH and won at least 9 rounds.

 

1) Las Vegas is the "Gambling capital of the world". Its very well documented that alot of "corrupt" events happen in favor of the "cash cow", Much like a Eddie hearn event with his prize fighter.

2) so the Canelo winning card against mayweather wasn't "fishy" to you ?

3) Apologies for the spelling/grammatical error but the point still stands, you are creating a lot of excuses to factor for the iffy decision.

4) Byrd's poor resume of cards for the home fighter shows something more than just "shes just a bad judge". If you really think she can score all those clear winner fights so badly, how did she become a reputable judge in the first place.

GGG Pressed the action and dictated the tempo with his jab. Yes, i will not deny Canelo got some "flashy" counters off, but 2-4 flashy punches which didn't knock GGG down, nor did it stop him dictating the tempo, warrants you a victory or a draw.
Like many said, and i believe, GGG's jab just out-pressured Canelo and he couldn't deal with it effectively. Fancy body movement doesn't get you points unless you come back effectively.

BB's comments were very unusual, to the point he started defending the Byrd choice as a judge. There was no heavy disciplinary action, especially with how much money and "legacy" was riding on that fight.

Stop using the phrase "Canelo landed the clearer punches", as landing 1-2 right hands do not beat a round of pressure from a jab and various other shots. If Canelo put GGG down, i would understand, but he didn't. I've watched the fight 3-5 times now (Mainly during Long cardio sessions) and like i said, i still struggle to give Canelo anymore than 4 rounds, 5 rounds at a push. GGG's defense is just less "Camera friendly", and far more energy friendly.

 

People in general can be corrupt. That is not the point though so don’t try to twist the subject. The point is that you made an idiotic comparison between RJJ’s Olympics robbery, which got the judges banned for life as a result, to a close fight between Alvarez and Golovkin. That comparison makes you look like just another mentally slow Golovkin fan.

The fight was bad for BOTH fighters. Alvarez was getting tired early and Golovkin was as stiff as a tree in the opening rounds facing a crowd like that(which is comical considering he has nearly 40 fights at that point). Golovkin also didn’t exactly prove to be the murderous puncher everyone barked he was facing someone that wasn’t pre-picked to hit the canvas as soon as possible.

 

Jesus stop whining.

 

you still have yet to read the quote so please. Use the door.