Rewatching Canelo vs Golovkin 1 rbr

My stance is pretty simple : rounds 4-6 were each very close and hard to score. To give GGG each of those rounds suggests that you're looking for reasons to give rounds to GGG. Think about it this way - what would you think if I scored 4-6 all for Canelo. You'd probably find that unacceptable. I thought it was being very kind to even give GGG 2 out of those 3 rounds, more specifically rounds 5 and 6 after giving Canelo round 4. The reason is because for the first 2 minutes of round 5, Canelo was clearly ahead, but then GGG turned the tide and had some success in the final minute causing GGG to "steal" the round.

If two combatants fight two extremely close rounds back to back, as they did in rounds 4 and 5, that could be scored either way, but you give one fighter both rounds, you better have a damn good reason for doing so. Rounds 4, 5 and 6 could be argued for Canelo or for GGG, so to be fair, it's a good idea to avoid giving all 3 of those rounds to either fighter. That's my point, especially in your case with you already giving GGG round 3, another round that could or should have gone to Canelo. By scoring rounds 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 all for GGG as you did, that's being very favorable to GGG. Each of those round were close and could be argued for Canelo, but you gave every single one of them to GGG. I think it's important to avoid giving the same fighter every close, hard to score round. If you're not sure who to give it to, score it even or at least try splitting the close rounds to produce a more accurate score.

I'm citing the commentary and what they observed, not basing my scoring on the commentary. I took a deeper dive into round 11, Canelo took control of the round early on, making GGG miss several shots in the beginning and landing some shots on GGG. Near the mid-way point, Canelo started putting punches together on GGG and the crowd came alive. I see why you say it was a hard round to score, because although Canelo was winning the round, GGG did land some good shots down the stretch, including a nice left hook late in the round and he had that good right hand (the one where the ref was blocking the camera right before it). Those 2 shots were good from GGG, but Canelo made GGG miss a lot of punches throughout the round and if we're honest Canelo just landed more solid punches than GGG did. GGG did connect with more glancing shots, but Canelo landed more eye catching shots and dictated the pace of the round with his legs.

I would say it was a pretty easy round to score . . . until that left hook that GGG landed. That was one of GGG's best of the whole match. That kinda made you pause and say maybe this round is still on the table, but then Canelo shook it off and finished the round making GGG miss more and sort of put that question of it still being on the table to rest. If GGG would have been able to follow up after that left hook, maybe he could have stole the round but he was unable to follow up and make a stronger case.

As for whether I would deem it acceptable to score it for GGG, I would say it's pretty borderline, but I can see why you would find it hard to score, as someone who favors the aggressor. So it was a back and forth round, with GGG landing 2 very good shots, but Canelo landing a couple more very good shots, including a hard uppercut and controlling most of the round with his movement. It was a great round. Lets put it this way, I thought rounds 4-6 were closer and less clear for GGG than 10-12 were for Canelo, so scoring 4-6 all for GGG but only 2 out of the last 3 for Canelo is unacceptable to me. If you gave GGG round 11, but you also gave Canelo 4, 5, or 6 then I could live with that, but I don't see a path for 116-112 GGG beacuse that would involve giving GGG too many close rounds.

So I wouldn't call scoring Round 11 for GGG "acceptable" but I wouldn't call it "unacceptable" either. I'm kind of stuck in between, if that makes sense. I don't think it's crazy for you to score that round to GGG, but I also think it's a bit much, especially with all the close rounds you already gave to GGG. So 115-113 GGG is still my limit for what I consider reasonable, but I wouldn't begrudge someone who scored it 116-112 GGG and gave that round to GGG, as long as they recognize how close that round was, as you did.

 

You should score them independently but if you are finding rounds "hard to score" then you should probably be splitting those rounds or scoring them even. Otherwise that's showing bias. Now it's possible that one fighter is genuinely winning close round after close round but that's not really the case here. You gave GGG round 3 for example because Canelo was backpeddling towards the end not because GGG actually did anything to win it.

Well your range of acceptable scores is about 2 rounds away from mine, and you think 118-110 GGG is acceptable. So what you consider acceptable is far more one-sided than I do. That pretty much speaks for itself. Another problem with your scoring is your view of rounds 4 and 5. You said that round 4 was a "clear" GGG round because he matched the combos of Canelo, bossed behind the jab and backed Canelo up against the ropes for a significant amount of the round. If the combos were even, and you're giving the round to GGG based on being the aggressor, then that's not a clear round, that's a close round that is pretty even but you just gave it to GGG for coming forward again and Canelo gong back to the ropes. If that's the case, then you've given GGG rounds 3 and 4 primarily because Canelo went back to the ropes. You seem to be scoring rounds based on Canelo being on the ropes, which just so happen to be better sequences for Canelo than they were GGG as Canelo was making GGG miss along the ropes. Those were good sequences for Canelo, not for GGG. And those seem to be deciding these rounds for you. Aggressor bias is obviously a big factor here in how this match was scored. I'll have to take another look at round 4 to compare at the combos and to see who landed the better single shots, but I don't see how that could be viewed as a clear round. It was very close, and if GGG won it, would only have edged it, but you thought it was clear.

With round 5, I agree that was GGG's best round so far, but only based on what he did in the final minute. He only started to "land well" in the final minute. Over the first 2 minutes, Canelo was "well in control" not GGG, yet you made it seem like GGG was well in control for the whole round, which isn't the case. Round 5 was the first round that I gave GGG, because it was the first time that he really had any sustained offense. Over the first 4 rounds, Canelo was having ihs way with GGG for the most part and did enough to win each of those rounds. You see 3 of those rounds very differently, with you giving GGG 3 of the 4 first rounds. That's a big difference, and how we see these rounds is pretty much the difference in our range of acceptable scores. I mean, our view of rounds 6-12 is really not that far apart. We both recognize 6 and 11 as hard to score. (6 moreso for me, but still I recognized that GGG landed a couple good shots in 11) But our view of rounds 1, 3, and 4 is worlds apart. You've admitted 1 & 3 are hard to score and could go either way, but you see 4 as a clear GGG round. So I think we should take a closer look at round 4, and specifically what about that round made you think it was a clear GGG round. Also I'd like to know if you agree that Canelo was in control of round 5 until the final minute where GGG stepped it up and stole that round.

 

I'm not awarding rounds because of how previous rounds were scored. Every round I scored for Canelo I scored for him based entirely on what happened in that particular round, independently of previous rounds. But we're talking about what we consider "acceptable" scores and acceptable final margins. Since we're talking about what scores are to be deemed acceptable, we have to consider how close the rounds are and how many of the close rounds have been given to either fighter. Most would consider 118-110 GGG as unreasonable, that's the same score that Byrd scored for Canelo and fans nearly had a cow for scoring it that wide. The argument against that 118-110 Byrd card was that the match was much closer than that. You considering 118-110 GGG acceptable is as bad as Byrd's score because most people see that as too wide. Imagine if a judge had scored it 118-110 GGG. Very few would have found that score acceptable, yet you see that score as acceptable.

A score that wide is only acceptable to you because you're scoring rounds in a vacuum, you aren't seeing the forest from the trees. You have given GGG far too many close rounds which is why you consider such a wide score acceptable. While you remain focused on whether or not 116-112 GGG is an acceptable score to me, you have gone far beyond that and have concluded that 118-110 GGG is an acceptable score. So it's clear that I'm closer to the the consensus who sees this is a very close match. Most people who scored it for GGG had it either 115-113 GGG or 116-112 GGG. Very few had it wider than that because that's obviously seen as bad scoring. It was not as one-sided as you are making it out to be, thinking that 118-110 GGG is acceptable, that shows that are not scoring the match correctly, and it has a lot to do with you not splitting close rounds and giving too many close round to GGG.

There you go again misrepresenting what I said. I said that I consider you scoring Round 11 for GGG neither "acceptable" or "unacceptable". I said I consider your score of that round "borderline" reasonable. I see that as, once again, you looking for reasons to score the round for GGG rather than scoring it straight up without bias. As I pointed out, Canelo was winning the round, he started the round by making GGG miss several shots and landing clean shots on GGG, and he never really let GGG gain the upper hand. He was making GGG miss fighting off the backfoot, he remained one step ahead of GGG throughout the round. He was putting punches together by the middle of the round and the crowd was responding, so clearly was ahead heading into the late stages. GGG was fighting from behind down the stretch, and chasing Canelo trying to even up the round. As I noted, GGG did land a great left hook towards the end but that one punch wasn't enough to swing the ruond. It was a case of "too little, too late" for GGG and that's why the vast majority scored that round to Canelo.

So I consider it a stretch for you to give round 11 to GGG, particualrly in your case when you alrady gave GGG rounds 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 all of which could have been scored to Canelo. However, the fact that he landed a great left hook towards the end, which you failed to mention by the way, is a better reason to score that round to GGG than round 3 since he landed nothing in the final 30 seconds yet to gave it to GGG anyway. Understand the difference? GGG landing a great punch in the final 30 seconds (Round 11) vs landing nothing in the final 30 seconds (Round 3).

So I see a pretty clear path to 115-113 GGG, but the path to 116-112 GGG is much less clear since it involves giving GGG multiple rounds that I didn't think he deserved or earned.

 

People still bragging about this fight? Canelo was just moving up in weight and was still not at his best and still beat ggg Canelo has improved since those fights the Canelo of today beats any version of ggg, at the end of the day Canelo has the official win and will retire as the greater fighter.

 

LOL I'm not the one who took 5 years to realize that a draw is acceptable but still thinks 118-110 is acceptable. I always saw it as a close fight that could be scored either way.

 

I still don't think 116-112 GGG is acceptable for the reasons I explained, but you're trying to make it seem like now I think that's acceptable, as if you've helped me change my view on the match lol. My view of the scoring hasn't changed, your view however has. You now see a draw as reasonable which you didn't before. I'm glad you've enjoyed our discussion, hopefully it's helped you see why Canelo did a lot better than you previously thought he did.

 

Glad you've seen the error in your judging that night.

It was from @Aydamn signature. Hate to burst your bubble lol.

 

Youre kind of late pal. Hope youre having a good night of boozing and oozing!

 

Took long enough. Hell yeah. It's been a long week, and time to unwind with a few brews.