GGG vs. Canelo 2. The only square thing about it could be the ring.

Look I've said from the very beginning that Canelo Golovkin wasn't a 9-3 / 10-2 kind of a fight. It just wasn't that kind of a fight OK. But you have to ask yourself can a judge theoretically find reasons in 10 of those rounds to give to Canelo? I went through each and every one of those rounds and it's abundantly clear that Canelo was doing well or landing bombs in every round that Byrd scored for Canelo by herself.

You have to pinpoint where specifically the ineptness occurred. What specific rounds did Byrd give to Canelo that in your estimation he had no business winning? You score a match round by round. When Sugar Ray Leonard beat Marvin Hagler, one judge scored that fight 10 rounds to 2 as well, 118-110. Was that judge inept too? Surely most people thought Leonard won a pretty close fight. But different judges pay attention to different things, and one thing we know about Byrd is that she gives credit to counter punchers. She just doesn't score rounds to the aggressor for simply being the aggressor and throwing more punches. So given that, it shouldn't be shocking that she gave so many rounds to Canelo. He was counter punching very effectively.

I agree with you though, I don't agree with that score just hearing it out loud and I fully comprehend the outrage over it. I know how close and competitive it was and that score didn't seem right. Round 5, I gave it to Gennady Golovkin OK. Byrd gave that round to Canelo. In that round, Canelo did well in the first 2 minutes, he was winning that round, but Golovkin changed the momentum in the round with that right hand and in my estimation edged it out down the stretch. So I wouldn't have that fight 10 rounds to 2 like Byrd OK. But at the same time, it's not unreasonable to give that round to Canelo. He was winning the first 2 minutes clearly, HBO's live stats had him with 4-5 punch landed advantage. (at the end of the round)

OK, you look at Byrd's other rounds, Canelo did well in those rounds. Rounds 6 and 8 Canelo landed major uppercuts right? Those were the best punches by either fighter in those rounds. In round 9 Canelo landed a big right hand. So I'm not justifying Byrd's score. I didn't see it that wide, but the idea that Canelo had no business winning those rounds isn't really supported by the footage. If you give Golovkin rounds 5 and 7, 7 I thought Golovkin won by landing so many clean jabs, more clean jabs that he landed the other rounds, so in that round Canelo's late uppercut wasn't enough to offset those clean jabs. (not just the number of landed jabs, but how clean Golovkin's jabs were that he landed that round, get it?)

If you find 2 of these {4,6,8,9} to give to Golovkin you end up with an 8-4 Canelo victory. I mean, 4 was a toss-up in my estimation, I felt good about giving Golovkin round 5 because I gave the 4th to Canelo, which was a round that could have went either way. I thought those 2 rounds (4 & 5) were close enough to where I thought splitting those was reasonable. But all 3 judges gave the 4th to Golovkin, even Byrd, which I have no problem with. You look at 6, that's another close one, but Canelo landed a bomb in the round. You look at 8 and 9, bombs away. Obviously these punches had an impact on Byrd. So what I'm not gonna do is sit here and crucify Byrd for giving Canelo credit for such effective counter punching. But that does not in any way mean that I'm justifying her score or I agree with that score OK. I mean frankly you could make the argument that a lot of these rounds were even rounds. This was a hard to score fight. In any event, I just don't think the fight was that wide. You split the close rounds, and you end up with a close competitive decision. 7-5, 8-4 depending on what you value, you score it appropriately. Judging a boxing match is very subjective. You have 3 judges for a reason. So if 1 judge scores it wide for somebody, the other two can over rule that judge. It doesn't mean it's corruption. Corruption is something much different. We can agree that 10-2 didn't represent how close that fight was OK. No doubt about that. But remember, judges score fights on a round by round basis. They don't know who's gonna come on in the championship rounds. Many judges have a tendency to keep it close in the middle rounds which isn't right either OK. So don't just dismiss what I'm saying. I'm on board with what you're saying but lets not just crucify Byrd either.

 

And to your original point about Canelo Floyd, you're calling the 3 judges awful. Dave Moretti is a pretty respected judge. He had it 8 rounds to 4. Seems reasonable to me. I don't know how you get that to be an awful judge. I just don't get what causes you to say that. In Round 4, all 3 judges gave it to Floyd, but I thought Canelo clearly won that round down the stretch. The problem was that the last punch of the round Floyd landed a hard right hand through the gloves, and I think that last punch left an impression on the judges. But in fairness, before that last punch, there was about a minute that Canelo was making Floyd miss and tagging him repeatedly. So if you want to talk about awful judging, that's an example of that. They should have given the 4th to Canelo, but they didn't, they got swept away with that last punch that Floyd got in, and forgot about the minute before where Canelo was putting on a clinic.

 

Void is void................

Oscar will own the judges, referee and boxing commission, watch and see.............

 

This content is protected

 

Hagler Leonard was a close fight and that rightfully divides opinion so this is a bad example as it’s a pick em as you like it.
Byrd deserves crucifying for that and has been by everyone,yet again you see things vastly different to the rest of us and I’ll say it again with re to Canelo that judging should not be about looking your hardest to give someone rounds and let’s be clear you can have a competitive fight like Usyk v Breidis but the scorecards can still be wide.
It was expected by so many that there’d be some dodgy goings on and so it proved,118/110 is like giving Lemieux that score against Saunders it’s that bad,if you can’t see that then I don’t know how you can watch it as you’re seeing something nobody else can see.

 

If Golovkin has enough left he needs to push the pace from round 1 and force the stoppage.

 

Golovkin needs to knock him out it really is that simple, if he can't do it then take the loss like a man. He disappointed me in their first bout, i can't see him doing better tbh.

 

More fool Golovkin and his team for letting Canelo's team walk all over them if they really did.

 

No mames güey le partieron la madre al canelo ni por favor le puedes dar un round

 

You don't even believe that statement yourself. Lemeiux was not competitive and looked like a fool against Saunders, not only that but he did not even win a single second of his fight against BJS. In contrast it can easily be argued that Canelo won rounds 1-3, and 10-12, and the vast majority of the rounds were very close. Lets be real here and not grasp at straws.