Is canelo the biggest cherry picker in the game?

You have to give Canelo credit for fighting Golovkin, albeit an ageing GGG, and Jacobs is no mug either.

So, personally, i feel it's a little unfair to just write him off as a total fraud who has been protected and had easy routes to titles against fighters with some kind of issue or disadvantage (be it too old, too small etc...)
On the other hand, you have to acknowledge that beating Amir Khan impressed no one and proved nothing.

Beating a clearly terrified, and out of his depth, Rocky Fielding, and claiming it has any kind of legitimacy, is pushing it.

Kovalev, yes, I see both sides.

Had it been a recognisable version of Krusher, somehow back to something approaching his old self, having gained a "second wind", many would have said Canelo was in a lot of danger and would have deserved praise for taking on such a challenge.

He, Canelo, might well have faced that, all things being fair and equal.

You have to give him a little credit for that.

However, unfortunately, we got a diminished, rather timid Kovalev; who seemed reluctant to throw anything with any power.
Whatever way you look at it, Canelo can only fight what's put in front of him and the name on the resume will look good.

But, can we say he doesn't try to stack the deck?

Can we honestly say he gave Kovalev as much time and rest as he needed after the Yarde fight?
That's not his job, his problem, some will say.

Did he deliberately add a (re)hydration clause to try and weaken the already tired and ageing Russian?
These kind of things are what taint his legacy, and mean, to some, there's always a "what if" about him.

To me, personally, he can't call himself a legitimate 4 weight champion with a straight face.
Face some real contenders, like a Smith at 168 or stay at 175 and fight a real live opponent, and I think he wins a lot of respect.

At the moment, though, I'm still not totally convinced.

 

I've never understood this mentality that sees people supporting fighters no matter how bad their decisions, or how dishonest they are, the tricks they pull etc...

Do you know what I mean?

Surely, the sport comes first?

Any fighter who makes a mockery of the sport cannot be a fighter I support; regardless of who he is or where he comes from or how much I admire his ability or courage.

Right is right...right?

That's why, first and foremost, I'm a boxing fan and not an AJ fan or a GGG fan, or, for that matter, a Canelo hater.

I praise a great performance irrespective of who the fighter is, even if I'm not a fan of them as a person.

Example: Wilder, can't stand him, think he's a terrible person based on the persona he sells to the public (can't say about the private man), but , I give him credit for annihilating a decent heavyweight like Breazeale in half a round, and for dropping Fury twice, despite being outweighed by 30 or 40 pounds.

 

Im no fan of ginger nuts but he does have a top class resume and there's loads of fighters who will go through long reigns without attempting to face anyone decent

cough Wilder cough

 

Then just say from the start that you simply hate him, there’s no need to act all critical when you criticism is purely based on mindless hate. It all started with “it is cherry pick” and ended with “he is on roids”.

What a pathetic comedian.

 

Yes you’re bang on and also I think you’re very fair as I try to be.The sport should come first though and I’m not gonna just blindly agree to everything if I think it’s bull s***.These prunes who call us haters must fail to see how or why we end up having these conversations about Canelo? It’s not like we’re making this stuff up and I’ll give credit where it’s due in that Golovkin and Jacobs or Lara or Trout are not cherry picks and that it’s Oscar that dreams up all the negative BS anyway.
I heard a good one the other day about this actually re those computer game characters that you bump into and they all have a pre set questions or answers and nothing will ever change that.Well you could say that some of the Canelo huggers are like this as they all come out with the same rhetoric and it’s the rhetoric that GB wants them to think.Well I ain’t buying it.
After two great 50/50 fights with Beterbiev and Govodzyk and Taylor v Prograis which both delivered I’m not gonna rate that debacle over those and for those who think I’m hating GB have previous for this with the sham that was Canelo v Chavez another weight clause and very similar response by someone physically to weak to even bother to fight.Just take your money and the beating seems to be the order of the day.

 

Canelo is both a top level fighter and a cherry-picking cheat.

The two aren't mutually exclusive. They actually lend well to one-another.

It's not one thing or the other. He's all of those things.

 

Since you’re a clown yourself, you expect everyone to be imbecilic like you. Kindly go find another idiot like yourself to discuss with.

 

How do you cherry pick top 3 rated champions? That is baffling to me, Berterbiev just unified 175 and is 35 of Canelo fights him is that also a cherry pick... you guy sound fu(king stupid I swear.. THERE IS NO FIGHTER IN BOXING AS ACCOMPLISHED OR WITH A BETTER RESUME Fighter of the Decade for 2010-2019

 

Canelo was once guilty of real legit criticisms but the reaction to him these days has descended into pure delusional paranoid hysteria.

Of all the things he deserves crap for , cherry picking is not one of them.

The problem is not neccasarily the opponent selection but the ridiculous standars he's held to.

His haters would never hold their guy Golovkin anywhere close to the same standard. He can fight sub 90 ranked opponent like Steve Rolls and get away with it.

Canelo has has exactly 3 fight at 160. 3 of them were against Golovkin - the #1 in the division , and the other was against top 3 ranked Champion Danny Jacobs.
In 3 of those fights he took many hard shots against bigger guys that punch a lot harder then he does. That damage doesn't go away.
Even the the constant thudding jabs in his face for 11 rounds against Kovalev will have taken a toll on his prime.


Canelo is not without fault , but only a mickey mouse "fan" of boxing would claim he is a cherry picker.

 

He's been doing that in several threads now. "What about Lomo!!!"

 

Show me a thread that said Golovkin was past his best BEFORE he fought Canelo. I recall he was favorite to win both fights.

 

Answer the question