Do you think the judging in Canelo vs Bivol was corrupt/biased

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

I don't think there was corruption if there was why wouldn't they just give the fight to Canelo

Could be bias, overvaluing the power punches that did land vs bivols less powerful but more consistent scoring plus crowd noise.

 

Canelo hugged Bivoll after the bell in the 12th round.
He knew he had lost.
45:12

This content is protected

 

Updated the title to suit - bias is definitely a more appropriate title.

Although I agree about the natural bias of the judges (we've seen it many times before), how can you possibly deny the following?

Effective Aggression -

This content is protected

Being aggressive gives the impression of dominance, but unless the boxer is landing shots and not constantly getting countered, it isn't really 'effective'. Judges look for effective aggression, where the aggressor consistently lands punches and avoids those from his opponent.

This content is protected

Ring Generalship -

This content is protected

The fighter who controls the action and enforces their will and style.

This content is protected

Hard and Clean Punches -

This content is protected

To the untrained eye, it can appear as if a boxer is landing a lot of shots, when, in fact, most are being blocked or aren’t landing flush. A judge needs to look for hard shots that land clean.

This content is protected

 

The guy that usually pays the judges screwed up by paying 3 judges for 4 rounds each, instead of paying 2 judges for 6 rounds a piece or 1 judge to score all 12 for Canelo.

 

I don't think the judges were corrupt. Judges are rarely corrupt (contrary to what many on this forum seem to think) I had the fight 115-112 Bivol, while my son had it for Bivol 115-113. What amazes me is that Alvarez was given all of the first four rounds. Also, this is the really rare closely scored big fight where all twelve rounds were scored the same by all three judges.

 

I've watched it twice now and it's hard to justify giving Canelo even a single round

 

Everybody knew in advance that this was going to happen, certainly when the officials were annouced for this fight, that's why such a small number of people thought Bivol had a chance to win.
I really want to hear the 3 judges explain the first 4 rounds. Wonder what bull they would come up with.

 

I think this is close to facts. It's one thing Oscar got right. Hearn should've consulted Oscar for tips on paying judges off.

 

you should have a poll choice something like "not enough to get the job done"

 

It wasn't corrupt otherwise Canelo would of gotten the decision but it was inept and biased.

You often see this when you have a fighter with a reputation as a puncher, when they land their punches are given more significance than they should compared to the opponent landing the exact same punch. So if Bivol lands a punch that clearly hurts Canelo it's scored equally to a punch Canelo lands cleanly but has no effect whatsoever on Bivol. But because Canelo is labelled the puncher that punch whether it's a good shot or not is over emphasised. So Canelo can land fewer punches but still win rounds.

I personally hate when judges and people on here do that when scoring fights. Fighters reputations should be meaningless when scoring fights, performances should be scored based on what is actually happening in that fight we shouldn't allow preconceived opinions of said fighters effect how we score fights.

 

@f1ght3rz tried to highlight the out of touch bias that comes into play for each and every Canelo fight. Unsurprisingly, the general public found this scoring to be alarmingly inaccurate.

 

Judges having to explain themselves to boards needs to be a thing.