People are justifying Canelo's win by his style of performance, not what actually happened. GGG took on the role of the 'Boxer' tonight. He had a superior jab to that of Canelo in the first fight..... He landed more frequently than Canelo in the first fight..... He hurt Canelo, unlike the first fight..... He wasn't backed onto the ropes, unlike Canelo in the first fight..... No consistency whatsoever.
To me GGG won clearly both fights. But this is Vegas and DH time. GGG knew the risk when he went back to Vegas.
I thought GGG won 8-4ish the 1st fight. Canelo won about 9-3 A draw and a close md were way too cautious scoring, its like the judges gave rounds back to make the fights appear closer than they were. I felt sorry for GGG in the 1st, but it would have been sad if Canelo was robbed like Danny Jacobs was too.
Your logic is making no sense buddy. If Canelo lost this fight(which he did)….. he still would have lost the first fight.
Golovkin wouldn't stand and trade with Canelo because he knew who the better boxer was. All those who bashed Canelo for fighting off the back foot will probably give GGG credit for doing the same. Backing up was the only adjustment Golovkin made for this fight. He neglected the body again and and fought way more cautiously which is the exact thing he was not meant to do. Canelo took it to him from the first round to the last and gave him exactly the type of fight Able kept asking for.
Most of the punches, including the jabs that GGG landed were the pawing probing type. When he put his weight behind his punches he missed most of the time. So yes GGG is a bigger puncher thanCanelo but Canelo landed the harder punches and more importantly Canelo landed the cleaner eye catching punches you remembered at the end of the round.
First of all you must be blind. Second, if your flawed observation has any merit on winning a fight(which it hasn't), then how come Canelo won the first fight?
Tbf this is a valid point. There is no consistency in the two sets of judging. It's like in football when one ref gives a red card but a different ref in the same league doesn't give a red card for exactly the same type of foul.
Yeah draws the first fight because he was countered and just came forward, second fight boxes off the back foot moves better than first fight and lands more than his opponent in both fights yet loses and draws the first. Maybe he needed byrd for the second fight might have actually had at least one judge score the fight for him ironically and could of got another draw.
Just kind of funny to see the partisans for each fighter argue out of both sides of their mouth one year later. Looks clear to me that at this stage of their careers, they are about equally matched. Draw was probably the more appropriate result, but no question Canelo learned more from the first fight and turned the table on GGG. Plus the rounds were mostly debatable, so for those reasons I have absolutely no problem with the result. People crying "robbery" are shafting true robberies like Holyfield Lewis etc where the fight is not close and there is literally no doubt about who won.