In my estimation, Canelo has had 7 "serious" fights and is 3-3-1 in them

Trout - Canelo
Jacobs - Canelo
Smith - Canelo
Lara - Lara
Golovkin 1 - Golovkin
Golovkin 2 - Golovkin
Mayweather - Mayweather

I have him 3-4.

 

Judges do score even rounds..

 

More likely you'll act like a Gypsy schooling took place even if it didn't. If Canelo gets the decision, anything remotely close will be deemed a robbery. As far as trying to de-legitimize Billy as an opponent after the fact, that will only happen if Canelo wins to argue that Canelo didn't really do anything special by beating him.

Basically, unless Canelo knocks him out or completely dominates, robbery claims and confirmations of self-fulfilling prophecies are pretty much guaranteed. I expect a close encounter and a decision that could go either way. We'll see. I'll fully expect the usual crying and excuses if Canelo wins. But if Billy wins or if Billy even comes close to winning but loses a decision, I'll absolutely give him credit for making it a great fight and will of course entertain the robbery claims.

 

The margins tend to narrow when u fight at the top level so not every fight is going to be dominant but Canelos margins take the ****.. I've rarely seen a supposed p4p #1 so continually reliant on such biased scoring & truck loads of prime rib.. say what u want about roid merrywater but he won most of his legit.. I bet Cinnamons doping regime is off the scale!

 

I don't understand how any boxing fan can take pleasure in your fighter winning by robbery, controversy or even the other fighter getting injured or whatever else if it isn't what I'd call "fair and square"

Surely you want your fighter to prove you right, no questions, no controversy?

That's a lot of the pleasure for me just watching as a boxing fan, maybe seeing something others don't, knowing your boxers, understanding how styles will clash, understanding, unravelling and plotting out the tactical battle that will take place and then making your pick.

This idea that you have to try and justify the unjustifiable is beyond my understanding as a fan, if you're wrong then you're wrong, that's the sport, that's why we watch, anything can happen, nobody has a 100% prediction ratio.


I also don't understand why people just can't say "yeah, got it wrong, congratulations whoever and to the people's who picked him".


Anyway, I hope whatever happens next week that it is fair, that's all I can hope for as a boxing fan.

 

Tell that to GGG fans who refused to say they got it wrong and never congratulated Canelo when he beat him. I totally agree with what you're saying here. I find the outrage every time there's a close decision to be way over the top. And the extent that people go to deny what happened because their favorite fighter lost is totally immature. If your guy loses, be a man about it. Admit you had it wrong, congratulate the other guy for a great fight. Instead, we get the five stages of denial and grief every time Canelo wins.

To your point, after Canelo and GGG fought to a draw, the first time, everybody should have been saying "man what a great fight" "it was so close, I can't wait to see the rematch". Instead we got "robbery" "wahhh corruption", etc etc. When Canelo beat GGG, it should have been "man Canelo kicked GGG's ass, what a warrior" "I was so wrong, I never thought in a million years Canelo would kick GGG's ass like that" instead it was more crying "wahhhh robbery, corruption, GGG didn't lose, it's a conspiracy" etc etc.

So what you're saying now about how people should just admit when they had it wrong and congratulate whoever is spot on. However that didn't happen when Canelo beat GGG. The complete opposite of that happened, which as you're saying now is the problem.

Couldn't agree more. I just want to see a fair fight and may the best man win. Unfortunately, due to the Canelo envy issues, we have to expect the robbery claims or other means of detraction in the event that Canelo wins.

 

Please show me a recent example of a boxing judge scoring a 10-10 or 9-9 round without point deductions or knock-downs.

 

Your impression was wrong. Good of you to go back, rewatch it and realize you were wrong. This should tell you something though, that you had an impression about a Canelo's match that turned out to be completely wrong. This should cause you to rewatch other matches which you have made inccurate claims about, like Mayweather or GGG 1.

You refuse to go back and watch other matches like Mayweather or GGG 1 because you're scared of what you will see and how different it was than what you currently believe. Outside of a handful of rounds, like Round 7, Mayweather Canelo was extremely close. It was a clear Mayweather win but highly competitive throughout. Mayweather won by landing more jabs, but the power punches were pretty even and Canelo landed some great shots on Mayweather including hooks and body shots, where as Mayweather was mostly landing jabs and straights upstairs.

Canelo GGG 1 was extremely close and not a clear GGG win by any stretch of the imagination. Rounds 1-3 & 10-12 were Canelo rounds, and rounds 4-6 were each extremely close and could be scored either way. You need to watch that again, but you won't because you're scared of being wrong like you were about Trout.

 

Out of the 3 losses that you now claim, and the 1 draw, neither of those decisions were far from a loss. One of those was an actual loss, to Mayweather, another was a split decision to Lara, another was a Split Draw in GGG 1, and the other one was a Majority Decision 115-113, 115-113, and 114-114.

The press scoring for Canelo vs Lara was a pretty even split, with Canelo winning on 34 scorecards, Lara winning on 30 scorecards, and 25 scorecards having it a draw.

There's nothing wrong with having Canelo Lara a draw, but the press scorecards did have Canelo with a slight advantage. I bring this up because many people used press scoring in regard to Canelo GGG since GGG had an advantage there. Well using that same logic, Canelo had the advantage vs Lara.

 

I made it quite clear that it was a clear win for Mayweather, but pointed out that it was highly competitive throughout. As for Canelo Lara, I stated that there's nothing wrong with having it a draw. As for GGG 1, you claimed "Clear as day drawbbery. No impartial fan had Golovkin losing or drawing this fight.". I'm as impartial as it comes, and Canelo won rounds 1-3 & 10-12. That's a draw right there, even if you give GGG rounds 4-9. However rounds 4-6 were each extremely close and good Canelo rounds. Hard to score rounds 4-6, but any one of those rounds for Canelo adds up to a Canelo win. For you to claim that you can't be impartial and have GGG losing or drawing, this shows that you need to rewatch it. In the first match, Canelo landed the cleaner and more impactful shots.

You claim for GGG 2 that "Golovkin is allowed to score points while moving backward and boxing." No one's saying he isn't allowed to score points that way. Canelo though landed more power punches and maintained a higher work rate throughout. On the flip side, Canelo is allowed to score points while moving backward and boxing as he did in the first match. The difference is that in the first match, Canelo was the one landing the cleaner shots and the harder shots, where as in the rematch Canelo on the front foot was still the one landing the cleaner and harder shots. Though GGG was able to land more cleaner and harder shots the 2nd time, as Canelo chose to box less and stay in the pocket more.

 

I am pretty objective and the only clear and definitive L I see on that list is Mayweather... I’ve watched both GGG fights a number of times and both could have been draws, while Lara dropped too many rounds on inactivity.

Canelo has an interesting style, like a super patient Chavez, but that very patience is the flaw that will undo him at some point imo, as he doesn’t punch with much frequency and really only looks comfortable in the pocket. Not saying BJS or Plant will win but they have a chance if they channel Mayweather /Whitaker and stick to throwing FLURRIES of scoring jabs and counters off the back foot at a high volume as to upstage his low work rate.