Thoughts on Canelo-GGG II

lol.. If you apply that reasoning to TKO6 , then Lewis must have been well ahead since Vitali's face was literally coming apart and he was hurt /holding on tight after eating brutal uppercuts.

Anyway , GGGs face looking like a car crash victim reflected the amount of times he got tonked by Canelo all fight long.

Canelo's face didn't have a mark on besides that cut which may have been caused by head clash.

I struggle to think how a guy gets ramroddd by a heavy jab for 12 rounds and finishes the fight without a mark on him.

I struggle even more to think how Golovkin can rain down punches on him all fight long without even dropping or staggering him since previously only a few of his shots were enough to cream bigger fully fledged MWs


http://www.boxing247.com/wp-content/uploads/canelo7657-420x333.jpg

^ Looked more damaged after his 12 round loss to Floyd Mayweather

 

If my opinion differs from that of the vast majority, I'll often have a look again. Sometimes I alter my first perception. There can be some adrenaline watching the fight live which sometimes affect how clearly you see things. At least this has been the case for me on one or two occasions where I have changed my opinion quite a bit on second viewing.

I've watched Canelo-GGG I three times and haven't really altered my opinion. There were so many close rounds that I can always go back and forth on some of them, but my general perception of a very, very close fight where Canelo showed better defense and landed the best blows but GGG landed more and also seemed to be a pretty effective aggressor remains (although it was hard to say to just what extent GGG made Canelo retreat and how much he retreated on his own volition). I felt that a part of the difference between my scoring and the majority's was that I didn't put as much emphasis on the aggression, but I saw no real problem with anyone giving some of the close rounds to GGG on account of his aggression.

I found the first and the second about equally close. I know I differ from most there, but that's how I see it. I also think I differ from most in that I generally watched the fight with commentary in a language I don't understand.

 

Yea, a second Daniel !

 

What I have seen of opinions of current and former fighters' so far (I have omitted those that have fought either one before or have some other clear link):

For GGG: Malinaggi, Frampton, Crawford, Lewis and Toney

For Canelo: Ward, Foreman, Mikey Garcia, Roberto Garcia and Fearon

Draw: Badou Jack and RJJ


This is a small sample, but it's still interesting how much this differs from the media scores.

 

Actually your list is not accurate. For example, Toney thought that GGG won a close fight. RJJ thought that it was a close fight that could have gone either way. Mayweather SR is obviously biased cause his son beat Canelo.

Also fighters or former fighters are in general not good judges.For example, Ward is talking about a lot of things but none of these things are an official scoring criteria.

The vast majority of fans and medias press scored this fight as a GGG win or a draw.It is pretty obvious that the judges got this one wrong again.

 

The interview I saw with Toney he did not say GGG won. On the question "Did the right guy win it?" he answered "Whatever the judges say. It is who it is."."

EDIT: Toney said later on in another interview that GGG won. Fair enough.

But on second viewing you're right that Jones was inconclusive as well. And I can also see a case for Mayweather sr being biased.

But are reporters and fans now better judges than those who have actually done it in the ring? I don't buy that for a second. Quite the opposite. Unlike most reporters and fans, they actually know which punches hurt and which doesn't. I'll take a fighter's opinion every day over a reporter's or a fan's.

 

Watched it twice, once under the influence! My sober card was 8-4 to GGG but I could easily give it a draw, I had four swing rounds, great fight, no robbery, just disagreed with the decision, thought GGG fought all three minutes better than Canelo, this was decisive for me in the close rounds.

 

PS I never have the sound up, don't know why people need to hear other opinions and the crowd can influence too.

 

I had the fight even going into the championship rounds. In my view GGG won the final 3 rounds. GGG finished stronger and that should have been the difference in close fight.

 

GGG won it. Media cards say this to the tune of 79%. Canleo only got 6% of the votes on the media cards. Very lopsided, suggesting a robbery. Yet Judges buck these odds. Like I said before, robberies to this tune need an asterisk saying the scoring was extremely off and goes against the conventional wisdom of the other who scored it.

Perhaps boxing is better off picking the judges from a pool 20 or more people at the weigh-in. In theory, this would make it more difficult for briberies. Or perhaps boxing should have five judges on title fights. One for each side of the ring, and a video only judge. Either way, I suspect flipping 7-5 cards to house fighters / golden goose on large events when those in boxing can make a lot of future money on the golden goose is the new normal.

 

It's interesting to note what Jones Jr was intimating in his words, both during the event and in an impromptu interview, afterwards, i.e. the Press and Golovkin's camp called for Canelo to stand his ground and fight, rather than "run". Canelo did that - and what did Golovkin do? Ultimately, it was still a closely contested battle and could have gone either way.

 

Both fought smart. GGG limited the counters and opted to out land Canleo rather than give him a chance in a corner / ropes to " win " rounds as he did in the first fight. He also visibly hurt Canelo. He was landing on the top of Cnaleo's head and should have targeted that are more.

His problem in hindsight was the judges gave 4 rounds or so to Canleo when GGG landed more. GGG's jab is a power punch all by itself. At age 36, he just isn't as quick as he used to be and might have lost some power on his punches due the diminished velocity.

Canelo is improved, not on defense or hand speed but with conditioning, it was much better in this fight.

 

I scored a draw in the first fight
Canelo 115-113 in the 2nd

I don’t really have a rooting interest in either guy and would not say I am a fan of either. I do hope there is a 3rd fight....although I don’t expect that would end any debate or controversy...but as a fan of boxing I would enjoy watching 2 of the current greats go at it again.

I do think as with any competitive fights among high level competitors there are always people who are going to be upset and/or claim robbery. I still disagree with Hops/calzaghe, Hagler/SRL decision among many others...that seems normal.

But I don’t see how either of these fights were robberies regardless of whether you like or agree with Decision.

 

Abel Sanchez is on video stating Golovkin did not do enough to put the issue beyond doubt and that it was no robbery. Neutral Peter Fury, Tyson's Father had Canelo up by one or two rounds .I had Golvkin wining by the same margin.