It wasn't a robbery like Marquez vs. Pacquiao III, but I believe Trout beat Alvarez.

You can only score a 9-9 round if the round winning fighter loses a point for a foul.

If you think Trout won the 7th other than the knockdown (which is surreal, considering Alvarez hurt him four or five times in that round), then it would be a 10-9, with Alvarez still taking the round. You have to credit to knockdown because it is, other than a knockout, the single best thing you can do in a fight. Scoring a knockdown automatically wins you the round, it's only the extent to which you control it after that alters the margin of the score.

So, whatever your opinion, 9-9 doesn't make any sense as a score. You've basically given Alvarez no credit for that incredible punch.

If both fighters had scored a knockdown, then a 10-10 would be appropriate if the round was even otherwise. But if one fighter scored a heavier knockdown or controlled the rest of the action, you should give it to them 10-9.

Good example, Martinez-Williams I. Both guys scored a knockdown in a largely even round. Williams' was largely the result of Martinez being off-balance. Martinez hurt Williams pretty badly. So, that would have been a 10-9 to Martinez, but a 10-10 would have been reasonable too.

Too much credit is given to simply throwing punches. I always look for who's landing the quality shots.

 

In a round were a fighter is knocked down, wouldn't he need to dominate the rest of the round big to even it up? I felt the round was still close and competitive for the remaining time left in the round.

 

take the knock down out of the round and its probably a trout round - i still scored 10-8 canelo something fairly amazing has to happen for me to score a knockdown round level

i had the fight level at that stage with the 10-8.

i also dont like scoring even rounds so will pick a winner either way mostly

in the end i had trout by 1 but after the judges scores came through in the 9th i sort of lost interest in it

 

Exactly. People are taken in by work rate and forget to look at the actual quality involved.

 

I had Canelo up by three points. Tough to score and very competitive, but with the knockdown I don't see anyway Trout bagged enough rounds to take a conclusive win.

 

I see your point but i score on defensive work also. Making the other fighter miss and returning with something more significant. It was laughable sometimes the amount of punches trout was missing with.

Donaire last week was throwing more but u wouldnt of scored it for him would you?

 

For me the surprise of the fight was Canelo was the guy with the head movement and it was Trout that was hitting fresh air more.

Just too slick and ginger for Trout to handle:deal

 

I would love to see him land one like that on Floyd :hey

 

Exactly my thoughts, if someone is expending energy and being made to miss or hitting gloves then being hit with clean and crisp punches in return you have to favour the skill and technique of that fighter over the one working harder but to little or no effect.

People that scored the sturm/macklin fight to macklin also failed to take into account that macklin for all his endeavour didnt land hardly anything cleanly in the last 7 rounds while sturm rocked him with accurate shots even if it appeared macklin was throwing more.

 

I cannot view this verdict as a robbery. Whilst it is arguable that Trout could have won on points no doubt the true story was Canelo's excellent defensive skills.

 

If all Alvarez had been doing was covering up and running around the ring, fine. But he stood in range a lot of the time, making Trout miss. He did some sublime work which neutralised Trout's jab and combinations. That deserves credit in a tight round.

Canelo was doing something - he was making Trout look inept at points.

I don't think there's a claim of robbery, but I do think Trout did really well. He didn't get trounced or anything, so it'll likely set him up for other fights.

 

I had a three points gap too. I really don't think it was that close; Trout put in a lot of effort, threw lots of shots but Alvarez was very good defensively and when he went on the attack, found Trout easy to hit. Had Canelo been busier in a few more rounds, I think the decision would have been a lot wider and the closeness of the card is favourable to Trout, who was outclassed. It could have been a lot more one sides than it was.

Trout gave his all and it wasn't enough. I don't think Canelo pushed himself too hard and won most rounds easily enough. He's the classier, more skillful fighter and fully deserved the win.