Rumour GGG won't be back til Canelo Trilogy

Sure buddy. I'll get you a bib for the amount of dribble you contain for your prince charming, Clenelo.

 

Prince charming? Lmao. Is that how you view him? Lol

Not sure why you have so much hate.

 

Not hate, strong dislike.

I dislike anything to try and corrupt or "rig" boxing. Its a competitive sport, Not WWE. Boxers fight to win, not to be screwed by a corruption.

 

Did you have a strong dislike when GGG vacated his title to avoid Derevyenchenko, or when he demanded a CW with Ward, or when he brought up at WW 2 divisions up, or when he fought a retired Jr.MW fighter and KHTFO?

 

Well you're assuming that Canelo is responsible for some kind of corruption or rigging of his matches. That's your own imagination at work, likely due to your fandom and pride of GGG.

 

1) Being Canelo is nothing like being McGregor in UFC. McGregor's popularity is due to his mostly cringeworthy out of the ring antics. And unlike Canelo, McGregor has been stopped several times throughout his MMA career. Unlike McGregor, Canelo doesn't need to act like an loudmouth outside the ring to keep his name in the headlines. Canelo doesn't trash talk at all, he's a total gentleman, and he lets his in ring work speak for itself.

You don't just become a cash cow in boxing without having the skills and performances to back it up. You're acting like Canelo is just some average fighter who just got put in this position undeservingly. Canelo had to work his way up from nothing, he's been fighting since he was a young teenager in Mexico, he came up the hard way and he has shown a consistent desire to take on the best fighters out there.

2) You can defend Kelly all you want and point out that he sounded neutral as to who he wanted to win on his podcast, but that doesn't change the fact that he was way off when it came to his scoring of the first bout. I'm addressing his scorecard, not his statements on his podcast or how much he acted like he was neutral. The vast majority of those who had G winning the first bout had him winning close, 7-5, or 8-4, and I don't recall anybody scoring each of the last 3 rounds for G. Those are rounds that pretty much everybody agreed that Canelo came on strong and took it to G.

3) The scorecard was too tilted to GGG, that we agree on. The correct person did not win, where we disagree is who was gifted a draw. I don't have any problem with you arguing G won, but there's no way G won each of the last 3 rounds. There are plenty of ways you can arrive at a G victory on the cards without giving him each of the last 3 rounds. Most accept that Canelo did enough to win the first 3 rounds and the last 3 rounds. Some disagree with the 10th, some even gave the 1st round to G, but no one to my knowledge has come out and said that G won 9 rounds in a row including the last 3 rounds. I personally scored the 4th round to Canelo as well as the 6th round, but both of those rounds were close, as was the 5th.

What you fail to realize or admit is that G hardly won any rounds clearly in the first bout. Even round 7 arguably his best round, he nearly gave away in the final 30 seconds. Rounds 8 and 9 were some of his best work but he was also tagged with massive right hands. I still gave G rounds 7-9 but then when you see Canelo up his output and put it on G in rounds 10-12 to not recognize that and give those rounds to Canelo is really inexcusible. I have to question anyone who tries to act like the first fight was a clear wide GGG victory like Kelly did. Canelo gave the G man a boxing lesson, it wasn't until the middle of round 5 that G started to mount any real offense. And though G won some of the middle rounds by throwing a lot of punches, Canelo was fighting him tooth and nail the entire time and was setting him up for huge counters. Then Canelo stepped up in the last 3 round and most agree he took those rounds. That's what happened, and anyone who tries to rewrite history needs to be called out.