Canelo Bivol rounds 1-4 - "close fight" comprehensively debunked debunked

Well in this case there isn't a unanimous winner for rounds 1-4 now are they. Tons of fans have scored each of those rounds for Canelo so your typical appeal to the masses don't work here.

 

After 1-4 when i watched it live, I thought this could be 3-1 or 2-2. Didn't think it was 4-0, but I haven't re-watched it properly.

 

Nowhere in the rules does it address shoulder/bicep punches specifically one way or the other. However, I'm not the one arguing that they can't be scoring blows now am I? That was not my argument, everyone recognizes shoulder/bicep punches as legal, so why wouldn't a legal hit be counted in the scoring of a round?

That's your term not mine, inside glove slaps isn't part of official boxing terminology. What you call inside glove slaps are just hooks landed by Canelo that you want to find a reason to discount, so you call them that.

Yes the body shot attempt. I'm glad you brought this up. Ricocheted downward off Canelo's elbow. Based on ellerbe's rule of thumb, that was certainly "intentionally" blocked by Canelo, he was protecting the body with his elbow. By the way, GGG did that a lot to Canelo in their fights, tucking in those elbows to guard to the body. If GGG was credited for elbow blocks against Canelo, we gotta be consistent when Canelo did the same thing to Bivol.

A hit's a hit. And remember it's not as though we have to credit each listed punch the same. If we really wanted to do a master list Q, we list all the hits, note which ones were clean vs which ones hit glove, note which ones landed harder and credit each landed punch accordingly.

If you are refering to your love tap that was blocked with 0:46 on the clock in round 1, then it's because it was blocked and there's no visual evidence of it landing. We can only judge what we can see Q.

Besides your love tap, what other examples are you referring to? I'm happy to look at any punch you care to bring to the table.

Answered em all bud.

 

There was an absence of clean effective punches by both fighters through the first 4 rounds, aside from the fact that I felt Canelo's clean connects were more effective than Bivol's through the first 4 rounds, there are other factors to consider within the scoring criteria other than just "clean effective punching."
One of those factors is "effective aggression." Though effective aggression does'nt weigh more than clean punching, it does factor into the scoring criteria particularly more when there is a lack of clean punching by both fighters.

Was Canelo's aggression effective in those first 4 rounds? I would say it was more effective than anything Bivol was doing in that it was keeping Bivol on the defensive as Bivol was shelling up with his elbows tucked tight to his midsection while he tried to steer away from Canelo while offering little of any even attempts at anything that would be valued as "effective punching."
Throwing out a gauging jab that only touches the top of the head and does zero to thwart Canelo's advances I value as next to zero on the scoring criteria.
The guaging jab to me comes to value when its followed up by a clean scoring blow right after. Bivol made very little attempts at such a thing through the first 4 rounds. Bivol did some of it, but clearly in my view not enough to offset Canelo's come foward hard aggression.

Bivol clearly in my view as the fighter on the backfoot did'nt land enough clean effective punches to offset the fact Canelo who was the aggressor and the fighter taking risks with that aggression.

Typically throughout history proffesional judges will score for the fighter going foward and putting himself out there when there is a lack of clean effective punches being landed by both the fighters.

 

You are just repeating the same nonsense.
You are done pal.
Take the L like a man.

 

Complete bollocks.
You can't get around Bivol clearly outlanding Ginger for all 4 rounds.
You're clearly a patient at Arkham Asylum like Shadow.
I've just called the nurse so that you can both be medicated.
It will all be over soon.

 

Yeah he did in the Flat Earth thread after I completely molested him and shamed him to to vanish for weeks afterwards.
He's hoping we give up so he can claim a hollow victory when it''s been a complete tooling from the start.
It's hilarious that he's still trying the arm punch scoring narrative. That's how desperate he is at this point.
Completely embarressed AGAIN.
tragic failure.

 

It was always a fallacy premise. he was always beaten he was just too dumb to realise.

 

Sure I have, you just don't like the answers.

Nowhere in the rules does it specifically address punches that land on shoulder/biceps/arms as being or not being scoring shots. That means there's no rule that says you can or can't consider them as scoring shots. So as such, it is well within the rules to count those as scoring shots, or to not to depending on how you rate their effectiveness.

You've framed the question to describe landed punches as inside glove slaps. My response to that is they aren't necessarily inside glove slaps just because you call them that. That's just another word for "punches to the head" that you don't think have enough power to count as scoring in your opinion.

What a shot can do and what a shot did do are 2 different things. The shot bounced off the elbow then deflected down off the belt-line. So no, it never hit Canelo's body. Blocked by the elbow, sent downward to the belt-line. If you will be trying to argue this as a landed punch by Bivol, you're in for a world of punishment.

Because the elbow blocked the punch from landing on the body. I'm answering all your questions, and am happy to do so. We've having a discussion. See how this works. You ask a question, I answer, then you respond and we keep going back and forth, what a concept.

If it's a block for GGG then it's a block for Canelo.

What you consider a scoring shot is your own personal opinion. Judges have their opinions on what they consider scoring shots. It's not as if something being a scoring shot is an objective thing. Whether a punch lands or not, however, that's objective. How we credit each punch is, or whether we consider a lightly landed punch scoring or not, that's more subjective and would vary person to person judge to judge.

You haven't proved anything Q, but I enjoy your spirited effort and your unwillingness to back down from a good debate.

In fairness I've only gone through the last minute of Round 1 of your timestamps. Perhaps I should go through the first 2 minutes as well to complete the rest of round 1. Then we'll be well on our way to a master list of Round 1.

I asked you if there were any other punches besides the ones we already went through, at least in the last minute, that you disagreed with me about. If not then we can finalize the last minute of round 1 and complete the rest of the round.

 

No matter what happens, I can always count on you to claim victory then brag about how well you did in a topic. This is what you do, so brag about how well you think you did all you want, but it screams of insecurity. I know you do this to pump yourself up to keep your spirits high during tough times.