***They were trying to rob Canelo***

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by IsaL, Sep 21, 2022.

  1. shadow111

    shadow111 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,301
    5,953
    Aug 1, 2012
    You trying to pull rank by labelling me a flat earther is rather humorous. The globe deception / flat earth debate is a societal issue. There are intelligent people on both sides of the argument, the difference is that globsters typically are not interested in getting into the nitty gritty when it comes to proving their beliefs, while flat earthers are more inquisitive in nature and question what we've been told about our world. Globsters are more willing to accept what they've been told. It's not in my nature to just blindly believe things that can't be demonstrated or proven. I take a more pragmatic view of our world, as I do boxing. I base my views on what I can observe not based on what an authority tells me.
    Well I haven't given a scorecard for either match. I have no reason to. You live in a world where I can't debate rounds unless I provide a scorecard in advance. That's not how it works. I was very disappointed in GGG over the first 8 rounds. He gave the judges no reason to give him any of those rounds, but some judges still gave him some of those rounds. That's favorable scoing for GGG, in the same way you complain about Canelo getting favorable scoring, only GGG did less in any of those rounds to warrant winning them than many of the rounds Canelo won in other instances. Like for example, Canelo winning any of the first 4 rounds vs Bivol is far more reasonable and warranted than GGG winning any of the first 8 rounds against Canelo in their 3rd fight. That's because Canelo was landing eye catching power shots. GGG wasn't landing hardly anything. So it's really no comparison between the two.
    Good, I agree that Canelo won the first 8 rounds. As for the last 4, some of those could have gone to Canelo as well, whereas you gave the last 4 to GGG because he was more competitive in those. GGG did better in those last 4, but they still could have and probably should have gone to Canelo. People gave those rounds to GGG for doing better in them, for being more competitive, not for actually winning them. That's favorable scoring.
     
  2. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    73,187
    13,123
    Sep 15, 2009
    Being a flat earther just marks you out as someone to not take seriously.

    Yes to debate scoring you have to first score it.
     
    MAD_PIGE0N likes this.
  3. shadow111

    shadow111 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,301
    5,953
    Aug 1, 2012
    The idea that the earth is literally a sphere is pretty crazy, it's hard to wrap your head around that, and it's hard for me to take anybody seriously who thinks that Australians are living upside down. If that's what you believe, and you're proud of believing that, I find that humorous. I take a more pragmatic view of the world, based on what I can observe. Why would you take beliefs that are fed to you and can't be proven more seriously than objective facts and observation? That is a weakness on your part.

    To debate scoring requires you to focus on a round, study the round, analyze what happens in the round. Who said I never scored Canelo Bivol? You? The same person telling me I'm a flat earther is telling me what matches I have or haven't scored. You just said I scored Canelo GGG 3 but yet I haven't posted a score. You constantly jump the gun based on what? Feelings? You're reaching trying to lump me into things in order to avoid dealing with my points directly.
     
  4. shadow111

    shadow111 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,301
    5,953
    Aug 1, 2012
    :eyepop:

    You know what they say, ignorance is bliss.

    Update : looks like someone just deleted their post, after realizing how stupid they were for posting it. MAD_PIGE0N, more like MAD Space Nerd flying around on a rotating space testicle. :roflmao:
     
    drenlou likes this.
  5. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    73,187
    13,123
    Sep 15, 2009
    Like I said, it's just an easy way of determining who I need not take seriously.

    You told me you hadn't scored Canelo vs Bivol. You told me you hadn't made it past round 1.

    Youre saying Golovkin received generous scoring. To say that I assumed you'd scored the fight.
     
  6. m.s.

    m.s. Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,228
    3,268
    Nov 2, 2010
    No it was because Canelo lost.
     
  7. m.s.

    m.s. Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,228
    3,268
    Nov 2, 2010
    DAZN definitely favored Canelo, it was extremely bias.
     
  8. m.s.

    m.s. Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,228
    3,268
    Nov 2, 2010
    Alot of Canelo's shots were blocked by GGG, and most Canelo's body shots were low, on the hips, leg, rear, or elbows. Canelo got credit because his shots are dynamic, whether they landed or not. Canelo only Out landed GGG by 10 punches. This was a very winnable fight for GGG, but he waited too long to get started. If the fight was 15 rounds GGG would have pummeled Canelo for the next 3 rounds. Golovkin wasn't tired and Canelo was spent and panicking. Canelo couldn't even begin to hurt GGG. What happened to" I will knock you out and end your career" "not maybe, WILL!?? when Canelo fights GGG now days, You might as well call him Canelo Malignaggi.
     
  9. shadow111

    shadow111 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,301
    5,953
    Aug 1, 2012
    The same argument that Abel Sanchez gave for why GGG couldn't KO Canelo in the first fight. The opponent didn't fight in a way that made a KO possible. GGG fought far more defensive and scared in the 3rd fight than Canelo did in the first fight. GGG was so worried about getting hurt and KO'd he refused to engage and give the fans a "Mexican Style" fight. Which is ironic considering he criticized Canelo for fighting defensive in the first fight. Canelo while backpeddling in the first fight at least was throwing hard shots and mixing it up with GGG at times in the first fight, whch made it exciting. GGG in the 3rd fight just wasn't doing anything. He was pretty much just covering up and occasionally throwing weak jabs with nothing on them for 8 rounds. It was a horrible gameplan and fight style.
     
  10. shadow111

    shadow111 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,301
    5,953
    Aug 1, 2012
    It was a draw, and should have been a Canelo win. I know we disagree on who "Should have won", but you don't see me saying GGG lost. You state things as facts that didn't happen.
     
  11. m.s.

    m.s. Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,228
    3,268
    Nov 2, 2010
    According to the crooked judges. They robbed GGG of a sure victory just to keep Canelo from having another loss in addition to the loss to Mayweather. Its ok, they got exactly what they wanted.
     
  12. m.s.

    m.s. Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,228
    3,268
    Nov 2, 2010
    Golovkin arguably won the last 4 rounds, coincidentally thats when he started trying.
     
  13. shadow111

    shadow111 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,301
    5,953
    Aug 1, 2012
    In your view, why wasn't he "trying" in the first 8 rounds?

    And don't you think that's a problem for GGG given that he was the one who complained about "how Canelo fought" in the first fight, and challenged him into fighting in a more fan friendly "Mexican" style for the rematch? For GGG, the guy who was all about giving the fans a "big drama show" and was all about "fighting aggressively", it turned out he was the one who ended up fighting too defensively and not giving the fans the kind of a fight that he called for after the first fight?
     
  14. shadow111

    shadow111 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,301
    5,953
    Aug 1, 2012
    Look man, we can go in circles about the first fight until the cows come home, however all the separates your view of the first fight and my view of that fight is how we scored a handful of close, competitive rounds. You gave several of the close, hard to score rounds to GGG, while I gave them to Canelo. Why can't you just admit that it was a close fight that could have gone either way? Neither man truly won that fight Clearly. It might have been a clear GGG win to you and a clear Canelo win to me, but it wasn't abundantly clear. We're talking about a handful of close rounds that we scored differently, that's all we're talking about. It depends on how you interpret them. I accept that you gave that fight to GGG, that you thought he did enough to win. At the same time, you should be man enough to accept that I gave the fight to Canelo. The first fight should go down in history as a very close fight, with a draw being seen as a reasonable verdict. Because lets face it, if either fighter got the decision there, it would have been seen as controversial and would have warranted a rematch. So the draw was not a bad thing. It was probably the best result there in a fight that close and competitive.
     
  15. m.s.

    m.s. Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,228
    3,268
    Nov 2, 2010
    Strangely most agree with my view on the first fight. You can make an arguement that on the 3rd fight that GGG won the 1st, the 6th, and the last 4. There was nothing wrong with the judging. Credit to Canelo for going to work early and securing the win. He did what he needed to do, Even this nonchalant 40 year old GGG was in no real danger vs Canelo. He just gave up too many early rounds. When he picked up the pace Canelo had his hands full more than against any fighter outside of Bivol since he and GGG last fought. I think Golovkin can still beat Canelo, he just fought the wrong fight.