Rewatching Canelo vs Golovkin 1 rbr

Also @lufcrazy since you pressed me so hard on my range of "acceptable" scores, it's only fair that I ask you the same question. So how wide of a GGG win do you consider an acceptable score?

You scored it 117-111, and made it clear that you consider 114-114 "acceptable". But what about the other extreme? Do you consider 118-110 GGG "acceptable"? 119-109 GGG "acceptable"? How wide of a GGG win do you consider acceptable?

 

9-3 Jacobs my ass, but its clear you have had **** drained in your arse, by the tagline in your Avi. Lol, i aint judging you, but ughhh....TMI bro!

 

Which rounds? What two specific rounds being scored to GGG are unacceptable?

 

If you read what I said, I didn't boldly insist "only" 7 rounds can go to Golovkin. And you were the one who tried to pin me down on specific rounds so it's only fair that I ask you the same question. I didn't flat out state that 116-112 GGG is unreasonable, I stated that 116-112 GGG or wider demanded further examination.

 

As it stands, 1,4,5,6,7,8,9. Haven't really taken a deep dive into 10-12 since we've been focused on the earlier rounds.

That's interesting because a lot of posters have argued that GGG won Round 10. The argument was based in the fact that Canelo was "too negative" for the last 2 minutes after the strong 1st minute. So they scored it to GGG primarily because Canelo did too much "backpeddling". It's interesting that you find that unacceptable, reveals an inconsistency between that and your round 3 logic.

 

The path to a Golovkin victory is a narrow one. I don't just give him rounds for coming forward or being the aggressor. If someone gave GGG one of the later rounds, I'm willing to look into it and try to see what they were seeing. I wouldn't just shoot it down as crazy. Like with round 11, I'm willing to rewatch it and hear you out to understand why you scored it that way, to see if that's reasonable to me. I personally didn't find 10-12 as that difficult to score, but you obviously did, at least 11 and 12, and a good amount scored round 10 to GGG. So I don't personally see those as possible GGG rounds, but I'm willing to take another look and examine how close those really were.

Well the point of RBRs is to compare peoples scorecards, to see which rounds people gave to who. By the way, I agree with you that 2 and 10 should not be given to GGG. In fact, I've always thought Round 12 was closer than Round 10, and I found myself surprised at how many people argued Round 10 for GGG. So I'm glad we agree on that.

Well I didn't think I needed to take a deeper dive because on the surface they each seemed like pretty clear Canelo rounds. In addition, all 3 judges gave all 3 of those rounds to Canelo. So they weren't like round 3 where 2 judges gave that to GGG. Harold Lederman gave Round 10 to GGG while giving Rounds 11 and 12 to Canelo. So the 3 judges and Harold Lederman all agreed that Canelo won Round 11. But you disagreed, you for some reason gave that to GGG. The question is why. You noted that Golovkin was "walking him down and pushing him back" so I'm wondering if this was another "aggressor tiebreak" round for you.

 

Canelo wins by stoppage this time. Age catches up with everyone, and it's caught up with Golovkin. It's a shame as i'm a huge fan of Golovkin, but Canelo is a beast at his prime right now.

 

I'm always interested in Golovkin, but he did look like a very declining fighter in my opinion against Murata, which just shows you how highly i rated a prime Golovkin. I think he's going to get bullied and beaten this time by Canelo who right now is at his peak.