My live card was: 10-9 10-9 9-10 9-10 10-9 10-9 10-9 10-9 9-10 10-9 10-9 10-9 117-111 Bivol UD When I rewatched it I didn't give Canelo rounds 3 or 4. Either way it was a very wide UD. 115-113 is a joke.
I'm not bothered how anyone scores those rounds. I gave Canelo none of them, the judges gave him all 4.
8-4 Bivol at worst (Canelo home field & crowd bias) Prolly closer to 9 - 3 or even 10-2. Bivol. If the fight was in a vacuum.
I'm not bothered how anyone scored those rounds either. You could theoretically give all 4 to Bivol or all 4 to Canelo. They were close enough to be scored either way. So it would be accpetable to score those to either fighter. The people who are bothered are trying to make it seem like those were all clear Bivol rounds and couldn't be scored to Canelo.
And just to be clear, I never had any problem with anyone who scored fight 1 116-112 for GGG. So going into your deep dive of the scoring of that fight, I always considered 116-112 GGG an acceptable score. However, after taking a closer look at the scoring due to your topic, I then went through the rounds in greater detail and as a result of that investigation, I concluded that it was not acceptable to give 8 rounds to GGG. I realized that 116-112 GGG was quite a stretch, and as I said, the only path that I saw for GGG after the deep dive were 7 rounds, I thought Round 11 was too much of a stretch to give to GGG. Yes he landed a couple good shots, as I noted, but Canelo was in complete control of the rest of the round and GGG just didn't do enough in my opinion. So just as you went back and adjusted your view of the fight, and realized that you were too being too harsh on Canelo and now see a path for a draw, I realized that I was being too lenient to GGG in thinking 116-112 GGG was OK. I realized that I was just beng too nice to GGG fans in order to be friendly and say that their scores were OK. I was giving too much benefit of the doubt to GGG fans and GGG in that fight, and now have adjusted my view of what I consider reasonable. Before your RBR deep dive, I thought 116-112 GGG was accceptable and reasonable. Now I do not, thanks to your topic, now my range on what I consider reasonable is only between 116-112 Canelo and 115-113 GGG.
Well we also know you don't think 4 consecutive close rounds should be scored to the same fighter. So you do also disagree.
Which is exactly the point. After 5 years your view of the fight changed. Let's do that deep dive now so it does not take you 5 years this time.
8-4 is reasonable, 7-5 is more of a stretch. No one can decide on who won the first 4 rounds. If you give all to Canelo, that's 7-5, if you give all to Bivol, that's 11-1. Most people split close rounds and find it hard to give the same fighter 4 close rounds in a row. So anywhere between 11-1 through 7-5 are reasonable scores. And if you say "no, 7-5 is too close" then you can say the same thing about 11-1 being too wide. If scoring 4 close rounds in a row to the same fighter to start the fight is hard to accept, if it's not OK to give Canelo all those rounds because that's too many close rounds in a row to give to the same fighter, then the same argument applies to anyone who scored it 11-1 and gave all those rounds to Bivol which many people are arguing. The difference in those rounds is that Canelo landed the bigger heavier more eye catching shots with those uppercuts, and he blocked a lot more punches than Bivol did since Bivol threw a lot more but wasn't landing as clean or as hard as Canelo was. So it's easier to understand why the judges gave Canelo those rounds, he was the one with the flashy heavier shots in those rounds, while Bivol was just "busier" but wasn't scoring as effectively.
In general that's proving to be true, why do you think so many people have a hard time with Canelo winning the first 4 rounds? It's because they're splitting those rounds and don't think it's reasonable to score 4 close rounds in a row to the same fighter. Which was precisely my argument in Canelo GGG 1 and why I found it unreasonable to give GGG rounds 4-6. Fans and judges typically try to split close hard to score rounds.
That's funny, because it was you who created that topic and changed your view of the fight after 5 years. My view of the fight didn't change much, I just became less OK with 116-112 GGG. You on the other hand went from thinking the result (a draw) was crazy for 5 years to realizing that it was acceptable. So it wasn't me who's view drastically changed, that was you who had your view and acceptance of the result altered. A draw (the result of the fight) was always in my range of what I found acceptable.
I'm not arguing with them. I'm saying the first 4 rounds were close and could be reasonably scored either way. They're saying no, you can't score all 4 of those rounds to Canelo, that 7-5 is a "joke", unacceptable, corruption etc.
We both learnt a lot on that thread. You literally just said your view on the fight changed because of it. You agree with them. You also wouldn't give 4 close rounds to the same fighter. Honestly you should just score this fight yourself and see what you think.
I agree we both learned a lot i that thread. All I'm saying is, the result of that fight was a draw. And people for years had a big problem with that result, that a draw was a robbery because they thought GGG won. But you realized that there was actually a path to a draw, so therefore the result is now acceptable to you. But it wasn't before. My view of the fight didn't change all that much, only slightly. But my view of the result being acceptable never changed. I always thought a draw was acceptable. You didn't, but now you do. That's the difference.
And @lufcrazy in this fight, the result was a Bivol win, the judges scores were 115-113. So the question is were the judges scores of 115-113 Bivol acceptable. Many people are saying no, they weren't, I'm saying yes they were, because the first 4 rounds could go either way. Comprende?
