Trout: Canelo Showed A Lot, But Draw With Golovkin 'Ridiculous'

Think it's Canelo's Mother....Has to be...

 

His grandmother probably.

 

Judging by the reaction to the card, it was a very tough pill to swallow. Otherwise there wouldn't have been the kind of outrage over it lol. Almost everybody thought it was an extremely close fight. That was the crux of pretty much every argument over it in the hours after the fight. That’s why so many were outraged by the Byrd card having it so wide for Canelo. The vast majority of those who had the fight for Triple G had it either 7-5 or 8-4. So right there your statement of “very few thought it was close enough to warrant a draw” just isn’t accurate. The majority certainly have it close enough to warrent a draw.

I mean look at the “media scorecards” thread. Only 8 people there had it wider than 8 rounds to 4 for Triple G. If someone has a fight 8-4 or 7-5, that’s 1 or 2 swing rounds away from a draw. (very close to a draw) If everybody had it 9-3 or 10-2 G or something then maybe what you said about not being close enough to warrant a draw would be true. But no, the vast majority seemed to have it either 8-4 G, 7-5 G, or a draw. That’s a close fight. Plenty of people who scored it for G stated they were OK with the draw like Danny Garcia.

And again, as I mentioned earlier, a lot of people I think were insulted by Byrd’s card being so wide and after hearing that became more inclined to say G won when asked just as a protest to that scorecard. So i think that’s another thing to consider when looking at how people had it.

Wow, you are really doing some mental gymnastics here. The consolation prize has nothing to do with the judges and how they scored it. It has to do with how each fighter fought the fight. Allow me to break it down for you since you seem to be having trouble with this analogy : One fighter (Canelo) was landing clean effective punches. He was a more accurate puncher in the bout. Canelo by and large was able to land on G when he wanted to. He didn't need to throw that many punches to get his scoring in. The other fighter (Triple G) was throwing more punches, and was unable to land punches cleanly or as impactfully, so he felt a need to be busier becuase he wasn't scoring. He got rounds for "working hard" for "coming forward".

That goes hand in hand with a participation award. Your attempt here to make the participation award about how people reacted to Byrd’s card is humorous. The guy that is throwing more punches, and missing more punches (Triple G) is the one “participating more”. This isn’t hard to understand lol.

The flashy punches I think were quite crowd pleasing and certainly all 3 judges were paying attention to them, as each judge gave Canelo 5, 6, and 10 rounds respectively. I doubt Canelo would have done that well on the cards if he wasn’t landing the kinds of flashy crowd pleasing punches he was. The thing about clean effective crowd pleasing punches is they are easily noticible. When you land punches like that, you leave no doubt in people's mind as to whether or not a punch scored.

As far as the booing, the boos that were heard in the post fight were during Max’s questions, not during or after Canelo’s responses. They seemed to me to be from the pro Gennady crowd who were also quite vocal in cheering G during his interview. I guess it sounds good to say Alvarez’s own fans were booing him, but that doesn’t really make any sense. Ask yourself, why would Alvarez’s own fans boo him? That’s about as ridiculous as claiming the fight was one sided for G.

I’m talking about punch effectiveness, you appear to be talking about “effective” aggression. Punch effectiveness : “clean effective punching”. Impactful punching. Punches that collide with an opponent with force and physically move an opponent in the opposite direction due to the force and flushness of the punch.

I understand the analogy just fine, and I explained it to you once again. You’re trying to be clever here but are failing miserably. It’s very clear what my analogy was. I explained it again to you above : the guy that is throwing more punches, and missing more punches (Triple G) is the one that needs to throw more punches because his punches aren't connecting. Thus he's “participating more”. He’s trying to land “more” than the opponent because when you compare each fighter's best punches, it's clear Canelo wins that comparison. G got credit for “trying to land more than his opponent”. We see this all the time, the classic quality vs quantity debate. One guy was scoring clean punches when he wanted to (Canelo), the other guy had difficulty landing clean punches, and thus needed to be more active to stay in rounds. G needed to be busier because he isn’t as accurate and as dynamic of a puncher as Canelo was. Not only that, but he wasn’t landing any body punches, while Canelo was.

 

Its far worse today its the State Boxing commissions leading the corruption they don't even try to hide the fact either

 

At the end of the day I will confess Canelo fought well BUT not well enough to win the fight or get a draw It was blatantly obvious the fix was in no way was GGG going to get the win he richly deserved

 

They just need a shoulder to cry on lol,is it me or should Canelo already have several losses by now,whatever the truth is that when he steps up in an equal fight he gets beat.

 

It was definitely a tough pill to swallow for many, just not for me. It was kind of expected that this fight would end in controversy if it went to the cards. It's a fallacy to say most people thought it was close....if that were true there wouldn't be such a lopsided scale of those who had GGG winning....it would be more balanced having Canelo winning. This was a competitive fight, not close. There were very few who thought the draw was fair....it's just even less thought Alvarez won. Even if you combined the group together of those who agreed with the draw and those who scored the fight for Alvarez don't make up more than 15% of the overall audience who watched the fight. That's a pretty overwhelming statistic.

You are confusing a clear victory which this fight was in favor of GGG with a non-competitive fight. Alvarez was competitive...he won a few rounds but GGG won more. The rounds won were clear so the "swing rounds" argument don't really hold water. Swing rounds are in relation to close fights where there wasn't a clear winner.

You're over thinking your own analogy and struggling to argue it's merit. Partially because you have weak points or false points altogether. Like saying one fighter was landing clean effective punches....both landed clean effective punches...GGG just landed more of them. Also, making a claim that Alvarez was more accurate....He was slightly more accurate but that is a moot point considering Nelo landed at a 33% connect percentage vs GGG who landed at a 31% connect percentage....not to mention Alvarez was hit more and out worked by a considerable amount.

If Canelo was able to land at will two things would have been true...his connect percentage would have been a lot higher and Alvarez wouldn't have chose to back peddle the majority of the fight because his success offensively would have allowed him to move forward on Golovkin. Alvarez participated in Golovkins fight...hence winning your interesting "participation award".

The flashy punches are great and do make it easy to see but that just reaffirms the point that Alvarez didn't do enough to win considering how many people felt he lost the fight. His punches look great and would be given credit for them had he landed more of them....since he chose to back peddle, retreat and keep as much space in between himself and GGG it reflected in how the masses saw the fight.

You're reaching to claim the fans who were mostly Alvarez fans were booing Max's questions. That's a ridiculous claim that is a bit embarrassing. There's a video of interviews with a slew of Mexican fans outside of the venue post fight who were saying how GGG got robbed and beat their guy. Most of the fans were wearing Alvarez t-shirts which made it even more interesting getting that level of feedback from the crowd who were there live. Ask yourself why when GGG was being interviewed why the same fans were heard cheering? It's common sense....the pro Alvarez crowd were won over by GGG by the end of the fight because they overwhelmingly knew he won and Alvarez was given a draw.

Clean Effective punches and effective aggression are two separate things. There's nothing confusing about it. Both landed clean effective punches but only one was the effective aggressor...that was GGG. You are confusing flashy punches as being the only offense that is effective. If that were true Alvarez wouldn't have been in retreat mode most of the fight with GGG. He would have fought the way he did against Khan, Liam and Kirkland. Alvarez wasn't back peddling that much against GGG because he needed the extra road work or because he wanted to play keep away in a championship fight. He strategically opted to fight that way because the offense from GGG was affecting him, hence....GGG was effective with his offense.

This is a bit of a quality vs quantity arguement....But the fact is both had success with quality offense output....but only one had the consistency and work rate that easily had the quantity bucket checked off. Which is why we see the overwhelming number of fans who had GGG as the clear winner. If there was one thing Alvarez did more of in that fight it would be body punching....oh...and back peddling. But his body punches like the rest of his offense wasn't sustained or consistent enough to win the fight. Had he punched half as much as he back peddled he may have been able to actually beat Golovkin. Let's hope he makes that adjustment next go round

 

Lol Shadow my friend you are defending the indefensible in Adelaide Byrd,name me another boxer who has one judge in their pocket at all times?
It's quite simple Golden Boy cannot lose Canelo and will go to any lengths to keep him from losing another fight.

 

Canelo really lost to both Lara & Trouty& GGG he really should have 4 losses

 

All his other fights besides Mayweather were close, but this one with Golovkin it was obviously clear who the winner was, and he still got a gift draw. Too much corruption in boxing.

 

Yeah sure infact I had no probs with Lara fight but again like the Floyd and GGG it's always that one corrupt scorecard that shows up how bad this team are,why not have it looking legit like l?

 

They dont even bother showing subtle score cards, thats how invasive corruption is in boxing

 

As to the bolded part, I made the point that a lot of people were more inclinded to say they had G winning after hearing the Byrd card. I suspect that more peole would have stated they had Alvarez winning, had Byrd's card not been so one sided. A lot of people protest things that they don't agree with by viscerally disagreeing with something in the strongest way possible. A good portion of people psychologically heard that score and immediately became upset at Canelo and thus when asked who won stated G won because they were so upset at Canelo from that card. I'm guessing that it would have been more balanced (more people saying Canelo won) had Byrd's card not been so one-sided in favor of Canelo. But regardless, we're talking about a very small percentage of the "overall audience who watched the fight" The overall audience who watched the fight is in the millions. The handful (100-200) media people and fighters that have stated who they thought won the fight is 0.000001% of the actual "overall audience" who watched the fight worldwide.

It's a fallacy to cite the 100 some odd media or fighters who have spoken out and act like that's an accurate representation of the millions of people who watched the fight. Even the number of fans on here who have voted on who they thought won is less than 0.000001% of the total fans that watched the fight worldwide. So even saying "only 15%" thought Canelo won or it was a draw or whatever that's only based on a very select "elite" group of people that you're basing that off of. What I stated was that even of that 100 some off media / fighters who have stated most of them thought G won, the vast majority of those people had the fight close even though they thought G won. So it's a huge stretch for you to argue that most people thought it was a clear win for G. First off, we're talking about less than 0.000001% of the total audience who watched the fight. And of that 0.00000001% or whatever a hundred people out of millions is, still you had the majority of them have it 7-5 or 8-4 G, which is pretty much as close as you can have it for any one fighter other than a draw.

I'm not confusing anything lol, you're trying to "argue" that the fight was a clear victory for G. I'm stating the reality that it was a very close 50/50 fight, which it was, and the draw confirms it. The rounds won were not clear, because I've watched rounds 4, 5, and 9 individually rounds that people have argued were clear G rounds and I found each of those rounds extremely close and arguable either way. Round 4 I gave to Canelo, Round 5 I gave to G barely for that one big punch, the first two minutes were all Canelo. Round 9 I'm currently waiting for BCS8 to post his assessment of who landed the harder punches for which he's been stalling on because he doesn't want to admit that Canelo landed the better harder punches.

You're trying really hard to twist things but it's not working. You, in your response, questioned my analogy, put your own spin on it, and then acted like I didn't understand my own analogy because you were able to use the word "participate" in a different way which wasn't as concise and direct as my analogy. Here you are saying "both landed clean effective punches". That may be true, the fact is that Canelo landed "more clean effective punches" which is central to the theme of G getting the participation award. You need to throw more punches to "stay in rounds" when you're not landing the effective punches, when you're not landing the best punches of the round, round after round. And for you to then cite the Compubox %s just goes to show how influenced you are with those numbers. It's not just a 2% advantage for Canelo. Out of those 31% for G, a lot of the punches he's getting credit for are punches that Canelo partly slipped, partly blocked or rolled with and took the sting off of. Canelo didn't have nearly as many punches like that as G had. So that 31% is highly inflated. Also we know about the round 5 discrepancy with Canelo leading the punch stats 14-9 in the final 15 seconds, only to have the numbers after the fight state G won outlanded him magically 18-14. That's about 8 more punches right there, would surely drop that 31% down a bit just based on that alone. So you need to use your eyes more, and not just cite Compubox numbers which really shows that you're not paying attention to the fight, but you're reacting to numbers which somebody else counted that are not reliable in any way. Anyone can plainly observe that Canelo landed at a higher accuracy. CA was more efficient than Triple G. CA made his punches count, whereas Triple G threw a lot of punches and missed a lot punches. That's what happened, if you can't accept that or don't want to accept that, then you’re not being real about what happened.

 

Not necessarily true, the punch stat compubox are not gospel, there's just one person's guessing as to what's landing in real-time, and there's also been evidence that those numbers have been padded to give G more landed punches at least in regard to round 5. You're use of the word "participation" here just sounds so silly and forced, and it's really a bad attempt to try to act like you're using the word better than me. It just comes across as desperate for you to use the word participation like that. The way I used it was much more direct and effective.

We don't know how the masses saw the fight since 99% of the public that saw the fight isn't on youtube, isn't on TV, isn't being interviewed, etc. We're only getting a small percentage of the total people who watched the fight. Now I agree of those people, the majority had G winning. I'll give you that, but that doesn't prove anything. That's just people's opinions, and many of those people stated they were impressed my Canelo, they were OK with the draw, etc. Look, there's no doubt that in the middle rounds Canelo's output dropped at times. If he were more consistent, he may have won, but the same could be said about G and his lack of body punches, or his inaccurate. We can find faults with both fighters, that's what a draw does, it forces us to examine the fight in great detail and point out the strengths and weaknesses of each fighter. I'm all for that, I'm just keeping it real that the fight was a 50/50 "could go either way" fight. You're highly biased towards G because you're acting like the only person who could be argued to win is Triple G. It's insulting to me as a fan, as someone who knows boxing and is tryng to keep it real and be unbiased. I'm respectful of anyone who seriously thinks G won the fight. I'm here to talk about it, but to not get the same respect as someone who had Canelo winning is disapointing. We can agree or disagree on who we thought won, but it's important to respect each other and our difference. I've demonstrated that I can intelligently and effectively talk about this, and make salient points to justify my view of the fight. That's all I ask anybody to do, but most of what you're offering here comes off as a twisting of reality which really doesn't promote a healthy discussion about the fight.

Look I fully admit that i don't know who was booing what. I heard the boos just like you. Neither of us can pinpoint who exactly was booing. But my best guess was that it was the loud boisterous Triple G fans that were cheering him when G was being interviewed. That seems to be a reasonable guess as to who was booing. It's also possible that some Canelo fans may have been booing Max's question, like the one who asked Canelo if he should fight different, or "stand still" in the rematch. If I was a Canelo fan there, I would have booed Max for asking that question as a way to say "no Canelo shouldn't stand still or fight different in a rematch".

I think it's a real stretch to state in no uncertain terms that Canelo's own Mexican fans were booing him or his performance. I mean that really sounds like a huge stretch, and it's almost laughable to hear you make that argument. You're saying "it's common sense" that the pro Alvarez crowd was "won over by G" lol. Cool story lol.

Some of what you say here is true, like how Canelo strategically opted to fight that way, to backpedal at times, etc. However that wasn't the entire fight. Canelo spent a good portion of the fight pretty much standing his ground. If you look at the first 3 rounds, Canelo didn't do much backpedaling. In the middle rounds, sure he backpedal, and you're right it was strategic, but you're a little bit all over the place when it comes to what you're saying I'm confused about, which doesn't make any sense frankly. You were descrbing "effective aggression". I was talking about "clean effective punches". I was just pointing out that we were talking about two different things. I fully admit that G was the aggressor. Was his aggresion effective? Sometimes yes, other times no. Like in the final minute of the 5th round, G was effectively aggressive. In the 6th round, G was effective with his aggression. But other rounds, he wasn't effeftive with his aggression, like in the last 3 rounds G got lazy and was just walking into big punches. So, you've gotta really break it down into a round by round analysis. Just making blanket statements void of nuance acting like the entire 36 minutes were the same just shows that you're just glossing over the details of what happened in the fight. I'm here to get into specifics. I challegened BCS8 and many others to look at specific rounds and that's how you score a fight. Saying Canelo backpeddled the entire fight is a huge exaggeration. He only did in some of the rounds, and of course it was strategic. But that strategic decision to backpedal at times doesn't translate to what you're saying it translates to.

It's more than a bit of quality vs quantity. You're underselling that. Both had success with quality offense output, but Canelo had more success with quality offense output than G did. In some rounds, Canelo had better consistency and work rate. In the sense that G threw more punches, and was consistent in "coming forward" more than Canelo, OK. But he wasn't as consistent in landing punches as you'd like to believe. And if you want to debate, I'm willing to go through it round by round. Both fighters may be inclined to make adjustments, and it's debable who has to adjust more since it was a draw. In my view, G has a lot more room for adjustments. He hardly landed any body shots, which was one thing his fans lauded him for saying he was a great body puncher. Canelo landed plenty of body punches. And asking Canelo to throw more punches per round may not be a smart decision. I mean surely that's what G wants him to do, to stand still and trade with him. I think Canelo needs to do things to make G uncomfortable, to continue with his head and upper body movement and tight defense to prevent G from landing clean punches. G may press the pace even more wanting to make a statement, and he could fall right into Canelo's traps. I think Canelo all things considered fought a pretty smart tactical fight, and he should do a lot of things he did well in the first fight in the rematch.

 

As to what you bolded about how the Byrd card somehow swayed the masses into giving the fight to GGG is pure speculation and absolutely ridiculous. The atrocious score card on highlighted the obvious that this was going to be a controversial outcome. How the masses viewed the fight had nothing to do with the score cards. It had to do with what took place inside the ring by the two combatants. To poll the millions who actually saw the fight would be impossible for obvious reasons. The reason for "polling" is to get an accurate reading on the broad population without having to actually interview every individual. Polling uses statistical analysis, hard numbers to tell compelling stories about elections, politics, sports, science, economics etc. So it's safe to say the if there were a possible way to get the feedback from every last person who saw the fight, the percentages would hold up. Polling is a science based measument that's been proven so when polls "trend" a certain way, there's evidence to support the overall "consensus".

The reality of the majority or overall consensus is not the same as the reality you operate with. That's obvious. Your reality places your view on the fight in the minority which is a very, very isolated group with very few like minded individuals. Regardless, there's still a group that share your perspective. A small group, but a "group" none the less.

The one thing I'm not doing is "trying hard". This is simple....easy....common sense. It's like breathing...no effort at all other than the physical aspect of having to use my fingers to type. The truth is Canelo did not land more clean effective punches. The punch stats prove that. GGG is a pressure fighter. His fight is and has always been to throw more punches than his opponents. That is his fight. Canelo is more of a boxer/puncher who counters well, typically. His work rate is not as high as GGG but it was his job to impose his style over GGG to impact and decrease his punch output. That didn't happen. Regarding the punch stats....I knew they were off. I saw independent recalculation that were done subsequently that showed the numbers were off...that proved not only were the judges partial to Alvarez....but so were the operators of compu box. GGG landed more than he was given credit for and Alvarez was given credit for landing more than he actually scored. So the connect percentage are actually closer and more even which only reinforces the fact that GGG clearly won.

I've already accepted what actually happened in the fight. There's no arguement on this end. There are facts, stats and an overwhelming number of fans, writers, pro boxers and analysts who all see it the same way....so I have no reservations or hesitation on what I saw. GGG won clearly. The conflict and struggle you have is the fact that there's nothing tangible that supports your theory that Alvarez won....other than your "visceral" or emotional feelings that have shaped your reality as such.