For the record, if you don't understand how a fight can be fixed or full of corruption even though the B-side still gets the decision, for instance the Bivol-Canelo fight or the two Usyk-AJ fights, or even the first Golovkin-Canelo result(where the draw was the robbery), try to comprehend that it's a handicapping situation. You can't ever get 'everyone' in on it as it becomes too obvious. And actually not everyone is able to be corrupted. The point is you stack the odds in your favour and therefore you have a good chance of getting the outcome you want. It's not perfect though and you can still lose. Just like with a Casino that stacks the odds but people still beat the house sometimes. But over time the corrupt side will tend to win most of these corrupt fights. That's why Canelo has more close results that went in his favour than otherwise.
They fooled people twice already. You have to prepare for the disappointment. If GGG KO's Canelo then then the inevitable won't have to happen.
It was either a fix or the judges are ret@#%&#. How come the results always favor Canelo? Instead of 10-2 for Bivol they make it 7-5. GGG only beats Canelo 8-4 or 9-3 usually, so that puts him in danger of being robbed.
No, the judges give favoritism towards Canelo in a big way. Hopefully a 168lb version of GGG takes it out of the judges hands.
And why would that be? Because "people" have an easier time giving Canelo rounds when he's coming forward and being aggressive rather than fighting off the backfoot? But then when the shoe is on the other foot, and Lara fights Canelo off the backfoot, with Canelo coming forward, they still say Canelo was getting favorable scoring. "But he was the aggressor". This logic makes no sense. Canelo arguably did better in the first fight and GGG did better than the rematch. But more people didn't score as many rounds for Canelo the first time because of a "style preference". Because of some whack idea that he had to "take the fight to the Champ" in order to beat GGG. Like GGG had some inherent built-in advantage because he was the Champ. Like Canelo had to fight in a style that benefitted GGG or he couldn't win. He actually proved that he could do that with how he fought in the rematch, but if there wasn't such phony outrage after the first fight he never would have had to. By that Logic, GGG would have to "take the fight to the Champ" in order to beat him this time since he's now the challenger and Canelo is the Undisputed Defending Champ. Style preferences should not have any bearing on the scoring, it's how effective you are at fighting in the style you fight in. If you're aggressive but you aren't landing clean or effective, like GGG in fight 1 for most of the fight, then it's worse than fighting off the backfoot. If you're aggressive but you are landing clean and effective, like Canelo in the rematch, that's better than fighting off the backfoot. Trying to draw lines in the sand on how one fighter can fight but how the other can't is agenda-driven warped scoring.
So many excuses, so many tears...3 weeks out. Jesus. Why not hope for a spirited affair between 2 guys who have had alot to say about one another and live with the results. Some of you have legit been crying for half a decade over this matchup. Ggg hasn't even cared enough about his career to take many legitimate fights since the 1st one. You guys care more than he does.
But even in relatively close fights Canelo will be way ahead on some cards, fore instance the Cotto fight. Cotto never stood a chance.
Golovkin won both fights. Out worked him in the first and outboxed him in the 2nd. Hopefully he will KO him this time. It should be great.