What fights has Canelo

You'd like that wouldn't you. Take a page from @lufcrazy and remember that scoring matches are subjective. You get far too emotional when it comes to Canelo. Your avatar picture speaks volumes about what you're all about. You have major Canelo issues clearly. Some people think Canelo won, some people think GGG won. Deal with that, have some respect for yourself and others. You coming at me all sideways isn't a good look. It shows how triggered you are by Canelo and anyone who disagrees with your extreme pro-GGG scoring. Anyone who isn't a fanboy can recognize how close both fights were. You on the other hand refuse to recognize that and continue to paint a picture that GGG easily beat Canelo and as far as you're concerned it's so clear that GGG won both fights that it can't even be debated. Who do you think you're fooling? Everyone knows how close both fights were, and some people pretend like the second fight was close but the first fight was a clear GGG win. That's BS too. GGG never beat Canelo, I know this stings but those are the facts. You have no ability to change what happened and how you're going about it throwing a hissy fit doesn't help your GGG damage control campaign one bit. Take a chill pill Q. I don't take any of your disrespect personally because I know it's all just a result of you being incredibly butthurt after what Canelo did to GGG and you being unable to accept the reality of what happened.

 

I do not care that Cenelo did not had beat nor Trout nor Lara nor Jacobs. He was not able to finish them in distance.
Clenelo cards and other bull**** you might put in one place together with clenbuterol.

 

Damage control campaigns?
LOL, everyone does knows that clenbuterol is big cash cow, pro boxing is career job to earn money not any king bull**** fans and pundits love to talk about HOF, ATG, legacy and other nonsense.

Will be offered more for exib fight vs wrestler or media star than for pro boxing fight?
They will do this.

This is not legacy and HOF, ATG, it is job like all jobs and businesses.
Only fans think that this is something more.

 

What about the win over Saunders? Anything wrong with that one? Were you impressed by how he finished Billy Joe inside the distance?

 

What I love about Shadow are the Consise replies lol

 

He moves forward making Canelo slide along the ropes as he touches Canelo more times than Canelo touches him & won the fight Typical clenbutt boy

 

Dude when Canelo went to the ropes in fight I, Canelo slipped and counter the majority of GGGs shots, unlike you super stans I don’t hold bias for fighters I like if not for winning the championship rounds I would have likely scored for GGG but he lost all the early rounds and lost all the championship rounds then got demolished in the rematch

 

Shut up ideeott...

 

@shadow111 is this one of the dumbos who doesn't score shoulder shots?

 

My point was that Max and Roy thought that GGG's shot landed to the chin better than it did. In reality it only grazed the chin and landed to the shoulder. So it didn't have the impact to the chin that they made it seem like it did. Max and Roy wouldn't call a "good right hand" if it was just a light punch to the shoulder. They clearly thought that he landed a hard punch to the chin, which wasn't the case. They were saying GGG landed a good right hand that wasn't really a good right hand. They thought it landed better to the chin than he did. It still "counts" as a grazing chin shot / shoulder shot but not as a quality, flush, or hard shot that they made it seem it was.

 

They know about shoulder bombs. They saw a shoulder bomb and felt it was a very good right hand.

These things are easy to miss if you don't know about them.

 

LOL is that so? I can't recall ever hearing Max or Roy call a shoulder shot a "good right hand". But if you can find me one, then I'd interested to see some examples.

Remember you're talking to the shoulder bomb expert, the guy who was told by countless clowns that you couldn't score shoulder shots when I did in Canelo Bivol round 1, only to be proven right by someone who also thought that you couldn't score shoulder shots, by sharing a link that he didn't realize proved me right until it was too late. You can't make this stuff up lol.

 

Here is one example, they said he landed a good right hand. You said it wasn't, it was just a shoulder bomb and that doesn't count.

Maybe this was the moment you realised.

 

You're not getting it. It wasn't a "good right hand" to the chin or to the shoulder. It didn't land hard to the shoulder, and it only grazed the chin. It's an instance of the commentators not having a good angle of the shot, and thinking that it landed better than it did. It has nothing to do with whether shoulder shots would be counted, it's a matter of it not being a "good" (hard/flush) shot to either the chin or to the shoulder. You would not expect the commentators to call a shot to the shoulder a "good right hand", that kind of comment typically would come when the commentators think a good shot landed to the chin or the head. So, you're really reaching here trying to make it seem like when I wrote that I didn't count shoulder shots or something. Again it wasn't about whether the shot (chin or shoulder) could be counted as a scoring shot, it was how well it landed, and whether it was actually a "good right hand" which it clearly wasn't, as it didn't land hard or flush on either the chin or the shoulder.

 

So you don't class shoulder bombs as good punches then?

Best let everyone know in the Bivol thread, you know the one where your debating rounds you haven't scored, on the strength of shoulder shots which you never used to count and now don't class as good shots.