Exactly......the issue I have is, why not try to mask it. There is a way of being bias discreetly..... It seems those goofs haven't figured that part out yet.
Neither of those fighters they faced present the style that Crawford and Canelo are going to see vs each other in September. So referencing how they looked in their previous fight is a lazy and illogical assessment. Truthfully looking at how both Madrimov and Scull were out of character vs Crawford and Canelo is evidence to the actual threat they were on fight night. Both Scull and Madrimov have shown themselves to be aggressors and push the action in their fights. Neither showed that vs Canelo or Crawford.
Yep, they probably try to make sure Canelo has a good enough lead early as a cushion in case Golovkin starts to win rounds so convincingly later in the fight that they can't possibly give them to Canelo. In the process they get carried away.
Yea, it's crazy because I had Canelo losing the first GGG fight 8-4. Had him losing the 2nd fight 7-5. Went back and watched those fights multiple times over the years and still haven't changed my judging. I even had him losing to Lara 7 rounds to 5..... but you look at the cards for those fights.... vs GGG in the first fight, one judge scored it 118-110 for Canelo..... vs Lara, one judge scored it 117-111..... That's evidence they weren't actually scoring what was going on in the ring. They simply just picked a winner.
Canelo decision but he'll find a way to be a mediocre ginger midget as always and struggle or even lose.
Actually, the so called story of the fight was " Canelo needs to win or draw at all costs, losing is not an option" and they succeeded.