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

The poll asks was it corrupt, kiwi edited it to slash biased. You don't need to score it intently to answer the question. You watch the fight, you give your reaction to the scores. I knew how well Canelo did in Rounds 1-4 & Round 9 so, therefore, not corrupt.

 

Interesting that you gave Canelo round 6. If you give him round 6 then there's a path to a draw as many fans gave Canelo rounds 1 and 3. Not sure what made you think 1 and 3 were clear Bivol rounds. Canelo landed a big uppercut to end round 1, as well as a hard shoulder/bicep shot, roughed up Bivol against the ropes several times, and it was very even over the first 2:30.

I will definitely have to go through 2-4 again and round 6.

 

Hunting that path to victory

Lol

 

Well he felt Canelo won round 2 and 4, I thought Canelo won round 1. So between what I've scored and what he scored, that only leaves Round 3 as the only other round you'd need to have 1-4 as a Canelo sweep.

 

Someone else also gave him round 10.

 

Good for them

He lost and that's that

 

Maybe it’ll matter more next time when it’s split decision

 

Yes so it's a poll about biased. You said if all hard to score rounds goes to the same fighter it's biased.

So you agree, unless you've scored all 4 and determined them clear rounds, which you haven't.

So you agree.

 

Look at the poll question : It states "Do you think the judging in Canelo vs Bivol was corrupt?"

kiwi added the biased part midway through the poll.

The 3rd option was not part of the original poll question. I can't really speak to bias, what I can speak to is whether the judging was corrupt which is an emphatic No.

 

So at this point of the conversation, biased is still an option. Biased is part of the title.

Do you think giving 4 hard to score rounds all to Canelo is biased or not?

When I gave 4 hard to rounds to Golovkin you said it was biased.

 

To your point, I would have to study rounds 2-4 before making that assessment. But from what I've seen, and given how many people are on record giving rounds 2, 3 or 4 to Canelo, we can confidently say it's not corrupt. Biased? Possibly, but definitely not corrupt. Yet the poll is currently 68% - 32% corrupt to not corrupt. Probably kiwi made a bunch of alts to pad his poll since he was losing his own poll early on.

 

Hence why I said you don't have an opinion. You have only scored the first round for some strange reason.

I'm glad you concede that the scoring could have been biased, I hope that's how you voted on here.

 

I have an opinion on whether it was corrupt. Biased is a different question. I voted "No" back when the poll was created, which was before kiwi_boy added the 3rd option.

 

So now you agree with the premise of the thread, that the scoring was probably biased.

Like I said originally, you probably agree with the thread starter.

 

No, as I said, I don't really have an opinion on whether or not it was biased. My opinion of whether it was corrupt is a strong "No".