Most controversial results: Canelo vs GGG 1, Ward vs Kovalev 1, or Haney vs Lomachenko

The Truth is that a draw was a very fair verdict after a close competitive fight 1. Both Canelo GGG 1 and 2 were extremely close and arguable either way. If you don't think both of those were extremely close and debatable, then YDKSAB. The 3rd fight, while arguable for GGG if you bend over backwards for him and give him all the close rounds, was far more one-sided on a round by round basis than the first 2.

 

lol

 

@Pimp C what are your thoughts on this?

 

Why can't we all just stop this robbery BS and admit that close fights are close fights? I have no problem for anyone who scored the first 2 fights for GGG, I can see how you came to that conclusion and don't think it's unreasonable. But what is unreasonable is for you to be oblivious to how many close hard to score rounds there were in both fights and to pretend like it was an easy fight to score or that there was only one way to score it. That's insanity.

 

Because it is not BS corruption exists in boxing

 

What you call corruption is subjective and interpretive. I'm not saying corruption doesn't exist, but what you or I identify as corruption is not provable in any tangible way.

 

Pretty big coincidence that the 3 fights in question were all in Las Vegas.

 

Another coincidence is that they were all close fights. If you have a close decision, you will always have one fighter being seen as fortunate and the other fighter being seen as being hard done. It's just the nature of the sport.

 

Yes your right it all must just be one big coincidence LMFAO

 

The thread is asking what fight do you consider the worst robbery? So im answering the question, not crying. I scored the first fight a few days ago. I had it 9-3 for Golovkin. It was a classic and as close and a exciting a 9-3 fight can be. Part of the excitement was knowing that in order to win GGG had to KO Canelo and it didn't look like it was going to happen, which made it scary in that sense. We all saw previously that Kovalev got robbed of all his belts in the first fight, so it was fresh in all of our minds. In the 2nd fight i felt the judges would score it fairly because Canelo got a huge notoriously beneficial gift of a draw, the stole Golovkins deserved lineal recognition and victory, but no they stole it again. Fans might tolerate one robbery but not two.

 

You know what happens when you lose a fight that a majority of the public thinks you won? There's a silver lining to it. You become a sympathetic figure, you become adored by boxing fans. OK, losing a controversial decision is not the end of the world. I mean it sucks but life goes on. The battle that it was, regardless of the official result, lives on. And the most important thing is that we see a great fight. Whatever the decision, the fight itself is what's important. Winning is important too, but it's not as important as the fight itself.

 

They didn't steal anything. Canelo beat the G man fair and square multiple times. You can't cope with that. Sorry for your loss(es).

 

Once fair and square, just barely though. Look at boxrec fans score.

 

Once definitely, twice officially, thrice arguably. GGG arguably won twice, but the draw and the loss in the rematch were both reasonable. Close fights could have gone either way.

And I know these results upset you, and I'm sympathetic. But try to remember how great those first 2 fights were. Both Canelo and GGG made those so great, so they both deserve a ton of credit for them.

 

The logic some of you have is astounding