Kellerman: “Canelo won against Trout, Lara, Jacobs and Golovkin. He is the Golden Boy.”

Daddies $$$ & influence got him his job Typical know nothin spoiled brat

 

ROFLMAO

 

only in boxing do we have folk who readily accept this rubbish.Problem being we see time n again how this reasoning causes folk to look for reasons to give rounds,home advantage is mental one up for the home fighter and that's as far as it should go imo.

 

Kellerman.......a watered down version of Rummy's corner.

 

That ******* kellerman is getting worse and worse with his statements. ESPN loves it though.

 

He should stick to basketball because he DKSAB.

 

GGG beat him in the first fight. The official cards were garbage. Anyone saying otherwise is talking nonsense. The second fight can go either way and I have no problem with people saying Canelo edged that fight by a round. I scored it a draw personally.

And he only just squeaked past Jacobs despite the fact that he dominated the first half of the fight. That shows to me that he is good at coming up with gameplans but weak at adapting when he's been figured out.

Canelo is gonna get whooped by GGG in a third fight, and taught a lesson against both BJS and Andrade.

 

To be fair he did beat trout, Jacobs and ggg in 2nd fight. 1st fight was a draw or slight edge to golovkin. Lara beat him.

 

Exactly, just another shill for the networks.

 

Wrong. GGG did not beat Canelo in their first fight. And I take offense to you stating that anyone who doesn't have GGG winning is "talking nonaense". You're talking nonsense. Canelo won that fight hands down. He won the first 4 rounds and the last 3 rounds for starters. GGG did not land enough clean effective punching to deserve to win. GGG should have lost, but was gifted a draw.

 

The usual Canelo fab boy nonsense. It's now been long enough on from that fight that you feel confident enough to move the party line from "it could of gone either way" to "Canelo won that fight hands down".

**** off dickrider.

 

What do you expect from a poster who claims Canelo "Whooped 3G!" or "Put a beating on 3G..."

 

Anyone who claims that there is no argument that Canelo won the first fight is biased af, plain and simple.

Canelo won the first three rounds clearly, and he won the last three rounds clearly. Between rounds 4-9 there are a couple of rounds that can be argued for Canelo easily, round 4 for example.
I can also see why someone would argue that Golovkin swept rounds 4-9 and maybe got a roind in the first three or last three. The fight was that close, anyone who says each round wasn't close is in denial or has an agenda.

 

So let me get this straight : if you think GGG won the first fight "hands down" you're not a GGG ****rider but if you think Canelo won the first fight "hand down" you're a Canelo ****rider ?

I get the argument that GGG won the first fight, that is a reasonable stance to take, but don't tell me you're talking nonsense if you didn't have GGG winning. That's fanboyism, that's ****riding. I'm saying Canelo won that fight hands down, at the same time I've always welcomed opposing arguments that GGG won. The fight was close enough to be argued either way, at the same time Canelo landed the more clean effective impactful flashy shots, he did more body work as well. Arguments that GGG won are not as strong imho which is why GGG fans have to resort to tactics like "it's nonsense" if you didn't have GGG winning. It's not nonsense : Canelo won that fight. Just because Byrd's one-sided card caused outrage doesn't change what happened in the ring and who won more rounds legitimately. (Canelo)