Is Canelo Fighting or sparring Bivol?

Yeah i looked on the scheduled fights, and it indicates Alvarez vs Bivol on May 7th. That is going to be a great fight!

 

Obvious alt troll is obvious. Welcome to ignore.

 

Bivol only throws practise shots anyway.

 

In such a high profile fight, you'd think they'd have fixed it more effectively so it wouldn't have been so easy to spot.

Seemingly, they learned a lesson and fixed the Smith, Yildrim and Plant fights more realistically.

But the Krusher fight was a spotlight for you, it seems. Having never been certain a fight you watched had been fixed until then, you've gone on to uncover three more Canelo fixes soon after.

It's good you've not let confirmation bias get in the way too...

 

You're a class A coward and intellectually dishonest. Failure to debate any of the points and scoot off with this meaningless post. You know what I don't care, you keep believing that shite you naive moron.

"It is easier to fool someone than convince them they've been fooled. "

 

Oh wow you totally got me there. How about you address my points you clown?

Well they fooled many naive people with the Canelo Kovalev fight so they did a pretty good job there

And gtfoh with your pseudo intellectual talk of confirmations bias. There are plenty of Canelo fights I think were real, including the Golovkin and Billy Joe fights. You just can't seem to accept there are several unusual trends in those fights (Yildrim, Kov, Smith and lesser so Plant) - who knows whether this is out of poor observational skills, love of Canelo or down to the fact you have childlike mentality refusing to believe people would fool you

 

It's just - to quote - 'The Kovalev fight is the first time I've legit thought..."wait a minute, is this **** fixed' and then after this you saw fixes in three other fights all involving Canelo.

Fixes in boxing: only since 2019 and involving Canelo is a very - how to put this - eccentric analysis of the issue.

Nothing 'pseudo' about asking if this might be a consequence of conformation bias; you patently hate Canelo. Nice use of the word pseudo, though. It's a very precise word but doesn't mix well with emotionally-fuelled language like 'GTFOH' and 'address my points you clown'.

As a result your post comes across as a bit try hard. 10/10 for effort...

 

Lol, dude, stfu. Address my points or just keep your naive childlike thoughts to yourself

 

Only took one gentle prod to see you drop the 'intellectual' façade didn't it?

As for childlike, I only have to look at your profile pic to see the projection behind that jibe...

 

Dude, you're a pseudo intellect just stop. You clearly don't have the capacity to debate any of my points (all of which are completely valid). Now do **** off

 

I would personally caution against seeing the Kovalev fight as fixed. Except that I would ask, have you ever watched the fight fixing video on YouTube and other social media sites?
The soft fix is where they talk about entering a gym and inquiring about what they want "Hey, I've got a fighter entering a weight class, he needs a good name win, but not too much resistance and definitely not a loss. Do you have what we need?" They then march out a shot fighter or at least a fighter enduring the after effect of a bad loss, someone with alcohol/drug issues, etc.
They go further into actual hard fight fixing, such as paying off judges and the like as well.

 

Pseudo is a good word when not overused. Otherwise it's starts to look like it's been inserted to add gravitas.

And how can you debate points with someone who thinks their view is 'completely valid'? You don't want a debate anyway. You made up your mind about the Canelo vs Kovalev years ago. There's barely a month goes by when you don't restate it.

You're to Canelo what Ty is That Guy is to Fury.

And I never claimed to be intellectual. You suggested that by feeling the need to dismiss it...

 

Because they are valid points that no one is prepared to debate, including yourself. People just chime in "Hur dur you're an idiot if you think the fights fixed" (when it's quite the opposite) without providing any valid or logical response to any points made. That itself is being set in your/their ways of thinking.

Look if you're not gonna debate the points Ive made in my previous post, just stop trying to get the last word and stop responding

 

How can you expect a logical response to a conclusion which is not based on anything but conjecture? You're setting us a higher bar than you're prepared to set yourself.

You think the fight was fixed but have zero proof. I don't think it was fixed and, likewise, have no definitive way of establishing this as fact.

The difference is, this matter is really important to you and your POV is atypical.

As for lastwordism. Well, you keep replying to everyone, every time. Make a stand...

 

Conjecture? Wtf are you talking about? You've kept at avoiding my points and you keep making statements like these to divert from the fact you don't have an argument. My argument is based on objective observations and comparison of Kovalves fights historically and immediately before the Canelo fight and the Canelo fight. My argument here for you if you want to finally have a go:

Also, having a short camp does not prevent someone for doing something as rudimentary as fully extending punches and not pulling punches.. throughout the entirety of the fight. From round 1..to 11..Are you suggesting otherwise