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

When Canelo drew with GGG, GGG said after the fight that Canelo didn't fight "Mexican style". GGG was all about the big drama show and according to him, Canelo didn't fight him in a crowd pleasing "drama show" style. It was GGG who was all about giving the fans an exciting fight, and according to him, Canelo didn't do that the first time.

According to GGG fans, this meant that Canelo didn't deserve to win the first fight due to how he fought, i.e. not coming forward enough, fighting off the back foot, not applying enough pressure, etc. It was GGG fans who's reasoning as to why Canelo didn't do enough to win, because GGG was the Champ and Canelo didn't come forward and take the fight to the Champ.

What happened in the rematch was very different, it was Canelo who did exactly what GGG fans said he needed to do in order to win, which he didn't do the first time, which was take the fight to the Champ as the challenger.

The weird thing is that it's the same Eastern-Euro-fighter fans who were carrying on about Champion's advantage as it pertained to GGG and how Canelo as the challenger had to fight GGG coming forward, take the fight to him, fight in a crowd pleasing style, in a toe to toe war, how you had to beat the Champ decisively when you're the challenger to take the titles. And when Canelo did that in the rematch, then the narrative changed. Then all of a sudden it was about how GGG was such a good jabber and what not. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Now the same Eastern-Euro-fighter-fans who professed the importance of Champion's advantage and the need for the challenger to fight coming forward and toe to toe as it pertained to Canelo and GGG, now all of a sudden they find themselves in the opposite situation.

Not only a Unified Champ but an Undisputed Champ in Haney, Haney a fighter known not for fighting in a crowd pleasing fan freindly style, but by keeping his distance and pumping the jab from outside, decides to fight toe to toe against Loma, Loma a fighter not known for slugging it out but known for his boxing skill and footwork, now forgetting all about Champion's advantage, and how the challenger needs to beat the Champ decisively in a fan friendly, come forward style, while Haney was the one choosing to make it a toe to toe war, pretty much the complete opposite of the narrative surrounding the first 2 Canelo GGG matches.

 

It’s gotten sooooo ****ing old hasn’t it?! And it’s soo blatant too.

 

Canelo was too scared to follow up on his "knock him out end his career" promises and GGG was asleep for half of the fight. Nice sparring session. When GGG finally opened up the taps late Canelo was out of his depth (gassed as usual) and it was too late to do any meaningful work to shift the fight. It could have been a draw too and if you had the same kind of scoring Canelo had in #1 for GGG, Golovkin could have scraped it 7-5 with judge assistance. I feel the correct score was 8-4 to canelo however.

 

Fixed it

 

I'm trying to help you out, you sounded confused about the narratives surrounding each match and how often fans move the goal posts in order to support their favorite fighter. My question to you is : what happened to "Champion's advantage?". It was such a big talking point after Canelo GGG 1. Whatever happened to challenges needing to beat the Champ decisively in order to take their titles? (especially if the fighter is an undefeated dominant champion) Do those arguments only apply if the Champion is a Eastern Euro fighter?

 

This is really what it is all about. Not one judge saw it the way the majority of fans did? Like, dude couldn't even get one draw?

Robbery may not be a fair term but bullcrap certainly is. Loma would have needed to DOMINATE to win. That is what is awful about boxing. The fight can be fixed without even the fighters knowing.

Edit: Obvious answer is GGG/Canelo.

 

He fought well, but he didn't beat the Champ decisively.

 

Trying to equate GGG's performance in the 3rd fight to Canelo's in the 1st I see. The judges gave GGG plenty of assistance in the 3rd fight, that's why the public overwhelmingly had it much wider than the judges did. If the judges gave Canelo in the 1st fight (Byrd notwithstanding) the kind of favorable scoring they gave GGG in the 3rd fight, Canelo would have won the 1st fight by UD easy. You would have to do backwards somersaults in order to give GGG the 3rd fight.

 

^ The Clenelista view, folks.

 

The controversy of GGG Canelo was primarily Byrd's scorecard. The result of the draw would not have been seen as unreasonable if it wasn't for that card. Fans agreed that Canelo didn't do enough to win, he didn't beat GGG (the Champ) decisively enough, but fans also recognized how well Canelo fought. The draw meant that the Champion retained, which rules out the robbery claim.

"But GGG was robbed of a win." Stop. If you think you're entitled to wins by applying pressure, getting countered, missing a ton of punches, getting outboxed in many rounds, etc then you don't know how boxing works. And we have to remember, Canelo finished the fight strong, he came out and put it all on the line in rounds 10-12. The difference with Loma against Haney is he had a great round 10 and 11, but he ran out of steam in the 12th. There are a lot of similarities between Loma Haney and Canelo GGG 1. Loma would have earned a draw similar to Canelo against GGG the 1st time had he won the 12th like Canelo did against GGG.

 

So, you're talking about Canelo in #2