Was Terence Crawford vs Canelo Alvarez competitive?

Absolutely, while my 116-112 Canelo card in retrospect was obviously a bit excessive, I missed the first minute of Round 9, going back and rewatching it, yes... Bud won it clearly. Which drops my card down to 115-113 Canelo, which is perfectly acceptable. The fight from the 1st to the 10th was a nip and tuck affair, with both men having an argument for shading them. But the gushing over this masterclass or schooling that supposedly Bud carried out, never happened. It's a delusion planted in the minds of the viewers by vermin like Max Kellerman and Andre Ward. People love to pretend like they're not impressionable lemmings, yet they fall for these bull**** narratives over and over. 115-113 either way is fine, any wider, you're full of it and were clearly overreacting to and blowing out of proportion everything Crawford did. While of course I picked Canelo to win, I intensely dislike both of them. Ironically the AI score and punch stats reflect what I saw, whereas the wide scorecards for Bud, well... reflect what you were all programmed to think.

 

Very. There's a reason why they drafted in two massive Crawford salad tossers in Kellerman and Ward to do the commentary: In order to create a narrative that Crawford was outboxing Clenelo even when he wasn't and to acknowledge or make a big deal out of his shots which are falling short, missing or are being blocked and to do the reverse when Clenelo lands

You have home country ref and three home country judges

Home country commentators at least 2 of whom are known massive salad tossers of the home fighter Crawford, 1 of whom is a notorious Clenelo hater and has been taking shots at him for years trying to discredit his resume whilst blowing smoke up Crawford's ass for his far worse one

I had Crawford winning but he was barely doing anything in many of those rounds apart from moving and moving his arms more whilst barely landing with anything. Clenelo was landing with big eye catching shots, especially to the body, even though he wasn't doing too much either whilst Crawford was busy putting on a clinic giving the appearance he was outboxing him despite hardly doing or landing with anything

 

Maybe the fact that you weren't focused so closely on scoring and pushing your agenda, it gave you a clearer perspective as to what was actually happening. Because you saw it as clear as day. Crawford was clearly dictating the flow of the match for the vast majority of it, but people far too often become hypnotized and fall into the trap of awarding the fighter they think is in control of the fight more credit than they deserve. That happened a mere two matches earlier, with many on the RBR, with the expectation that Mbilli was going to eventually catch and KO Martinez, ended up ignoring the fact that Martinez through virtually every round was lighting Mbilli's ass up with counters. So they were so distracted by their assumption of what was going to come o pass, that it blinded them to what was happening right before their eyes. Crawford edging it is perfectly fine, not going to argue that, but only by a smidge.

 

Precisely, and people hilariously deluded themselves into thinking that Crawford was the B-side here. Propagandists push propaganda with the expressed intention to mislead, sometimes the gulf between what is happening in the ring and what they're saying is so vast, that it becomes impossible to ignore. While sometimes when the match is close, all it takes is a nudge in one direction or the other to completely alter the viewers perspective entirely. Great, so many of Canelo's wide hooks were being caught on the arms on Crawford, or the back/rib area. While Crawford was fencing with his jab, but rarely landing it flush. So who do you give credit to in that round? The guy landing shots that while not scoring, are still impactful, or the guy mesmerizing people into thinking he's doing more than he actually is?