GGG's Punchstats were Padded

You are definitely biased. You still haven't acknowledged that Floyd basically admitted that he was cheating. I don't know if Pac is clean. It is my belief that he is. Dude doesn't talk smack. Dude went into a life of politics making a low wage (relative to his boxing career) to help his people. Dude put the down payment on a sparring partner's house. Dude didn't want to punch Margarito or Rios anymore after the 9th round. Dude let Ariza break from camp to help another fighter during the first Bradley fight. Dude wasn't pissed AT ALL when Ariza joined Team Rios. Does this seem like a person with a do-anything-to-win attitude? Yes, Lance Armstrong was a nice guy on the surface, but he was known as being a monumental douchebag behind the cameras. Pac liked ***** and alcohol, yes, but by everyone's account, he's one of the nicest guys in boxing.

 

I think most all the rounds were clear for GGG except for 2,3,4 and maybe 5. I'd have to watch the fight again in its totality. I gave Nelo rounds based on doing better....essentially I gifted Alvarez a couple of rounds because he wasn't completely dominated and out worked by Golovkin. There were not many close rounds

 

I believe Floyd is doping as well as Pac (as well as every top sportsman in the world... the only guys who aren't are the guys you've never heard of!). It is you who is biased. If Floyd had come out with Pac's excuses you'd still be banging on about it for 50 years!

And I also agree Pac comes across as a good egg.

But do not let it become about how much you admire Pacquiao as a boxer or personality, or how he presents himself to the world. There is one immutable rule in the anti-doping battle: it does not matter how much you like an athlete; they can still be looking for an unfair advantage. To believe anything else is to be both naive and ignorant of precedent.

And on that note I'm out.

 

Maybe....but not in reality. Depending on who was scoring, what their mental state was at the time of watching the fight, were they inebriated or completely biased. A draw simply isn't realistic. It was like those who said DLH beat or deserved a draw against Floyd. It's just not reality

 

I actually disagree, I had Canelo winning more clear rounds, but Golovkin winning more rounds total but those rounds were close.

 

I didn't out right call you "wrong" or say you couldn't "argue your points". I was just replying to what I thought was a very interesting response from you. "Yap, Yao, yap...keep talking" that made me think that you were just a kid. Not a dig, man. Be easy

 

According to your reality. Not actual reality. My reality is the same as you except, I think most people who think a draw is not possible is completely biased or just straight up morons. DLH/Floyd wasn't remotely as close or competitive.

 

Because you keep talking. You keep talking about "reality", when you're talking about your own, not actual facts, instead of making a case for why it's not possible. You talk A LOT with no substance.

 

Btw I was saying that you're saying you're wrong and can't argue with my points. I didn't say you claimed that. Instead of actually arguing rounds, and telling me 7 clear rounds that are not debatable, you just talk about your own reality, and other people's scorecards.

 

Rightly or wrongly, these were the rounds where all 3 judges scored the round to the same fighter:

Round 1 - for Canelo
Round 2 - for Canelo
Round 4 - for GGG
Round 10 - for Canelo
Round 11 - for Canelo
Round 12 - for Canelo

 

Ok. Based on clean effective punching? I thought Nelo landed some very noteworthy punches in different spots throughout the night....they just were few and far between all of the effective boxing from GGG.

I scored the fight on who controlled the fight. Alvarez didn't control the fight at any point and he was getting hit with clean shots every round. Maybe the punches didn't look or sound as spectacular as Alvarez shots, but that has a lot to due with their individual styles and shouldn't be confused with not being effective. Obviously his punches were more effective based on the strategy Nelo opted to go with by back peddling and allowing Golovkin to dictate all aspects of the fight....tempo, pace, distance. There were no rounds outside of a few where Nelo controlled the action for more than 30 seconds. That's not enough to win a round

 

I don't like to argue over the whole fight. I argue round by round basis. Here are my rounds

1-even(easily could be Canelo, majority gave to canelo)
2-Canelo
3-Canelo
4-GGG
5-GGG
6-GGG
7-GGG
8-GGG
9-GGG
10-Canelo
11-GGG
12-Canelo

So if I gave Canelo round 1 7-5, and there's just no way in hell GGG won every round I gave him from 4-9, and 11, CLEARLY. So if I swung one to him, it's a draw. I'm not going to accuse someone of a bias, even though it is possible because they scored two rounds differently than me, one of them being an even round for me.

 

This is a platform to communicate which is talking....only virtually and through text. Not sure what you expected to happen in this kind of setting? Reality is reality. It's not mine or yours....it is what it is. Just like it's a reality that the fight was scored a draw on Saturday. Just like it's a reality that GGG won the fight inside the ring, clearly. That's based on what transpired between the two boxers and who dictated the action. There's depth, breadth and substance if you understand the sweet science and what criteria a boxing match is scored on.

 

Again, a lot of talk, but you don't break down rounds. I'll take that as you conceding.