What happens when Canelo tests CLEAN & BEATS Golovkin?

Full credit given to the better fighter that night.

 

He also has the benefit of any combination he throws getting OOH!!! from the pro Alvarez crowd. ODLH got the same thing. It's flash over substance.

 

Any fight that is competitive you're going to say Canelo lost because you're simply rooting against him.
Every close fight you're going to claim robbery.

 

You're point doesn't hold water when it relates to the first Canelo-Golovkin fight, as even most of those who scored it for Golovkin admitted that Canelo landed the harder most effective shots.
There goes your flash over substance theory.

 

You also described the same with the canelo fanboys here. Fact is, 90% of the world saw him lose to 3G...yet, here we are. With the same scenario you just described. Too many of you canelo fans are side takers. As if it's impossible to be fans of multiple fighters who face one another.

 

Why beef so much about it though when the final result reflected what the fight was, extremely competitive.
I have no problem when someone states that Byrd's scorecard was out of line, just don't claim that Golovkin was robbed when that was not the case.

 

Yeah, i've read how you guys say he landed the harder shots over and over. Yet no reaction from 3G actually confirms that, other than what you are desperate to believe. 3G brushed off canelo's best punches. But sure, lets take thew word of posters who can't ever speak in an unbiased manner w/ 3G. Because YOU GUYS are the real experts...

 

No, you're right. In this case, the minority is totally equal to the majority who saw otherwise.

 

Wow. So a fighter is given a fair shake if 2 of 3 judges are fair??? I really can't believe you just typed that. Silly me, here I thought a fight should expect a fair shake with all 3 judges.

You know shadow, I've been pretty reasonable with you. I haven't resorted to name calling Canelo or his fans. I have conceeded several points..it was a close fight, 7-5 either way is reasonable, Canelo landed the harder shots, Canelo performed beyond what was expected with his footwork and movement. It's more than any other GGG fan here. Surely you can conceed that the Byrd card was not in anyway fair or reasonable to GGG. Surely you can conceed that no reasonable, intelligent, knowledgeable boxing judge could score that fight 10-2 without some sort of pre fight bias toward one fighter.

 

GGG was given a fair shake overall with the result of a draw in a fight that he arguably lost. GGG was given rounds for pretty much being the aggressor and throwing more punches, when as you've admitted Canelo was landing the better harder punches.

divac summed it up perfectly with this post :

It's the claims that GGG was robbed or wasn't a given a fair shake that comes off as biased. As you conceeded joey the final result reflected what the fight was, which was extremely competitive and close.

As far as whether the Byrd card was fair / reasonable to GGG / proof of a pre fight bias to Canelo, to make that determination you really need to go over the key rounds that Byrd scored to Canelo that the other judges didn't (i.e. rounds 5, 6, 8 and 9) and ask yourself "how close was that round" and "is it reasonable to give that round to Canelo"?

Now if you don't want to take a look at these rounds and make a judgement about how reasonable it would be in your mind to score these rounds for Canelo, then that's your prerogative. But that's what you need to do for your question to be answered.

Where I differ with you joey is that you are alleging that Byrd had a pre-fight bias in favor of Canelo because she had it 10 rounds to 2 in favor of Canelo. I personally didn't have it that wide, I gave some of those rounds to GGG, however I'm not willing to go as far as you to make such a claim. I don't think there's anything to indicate that she had a bias towards a specific fighter, in this case Canelo. It's more reasonable to say that she may have a style preference.

Byrd is known for scoring bouts in favor of the boxer / counter puncher instead of the aggressor. She appreciates skilled fighters who display defense, movement, etc more than most judges. We seen it with Canelo vs Khan. Byrd was the only judge who had Khan winning that fight at the time of the stoppage. In that fight Canelo was the aggressor and Khan was the guy using more footwork, getting in and out, etc.

Why don't we meet halfway here and agree that Byrd may not have had a bias in favor of Canelo, but rather just appreciates the sweet science more than other judges and gives more credit to fighters that display defense and skilled well timed counter punches, fighters that make their opponents miss, fighters that land by far the hardest shots in a round, etc. It seems to me that Byrd is just not a judge who gives fighters rounds for moving forward throwing a lot of shots if they don't land clean and aren't that effective like GGG was doing in many of the rounds. Can you agree with that joey?

Lets not just dumb this down and say "Byrd just liked Canelo" and decided to give him rounds because he was Canelo. Frankly that kind of thinking is extremely insulting to the sport of boxing. (not saying that's what you're saying joey, but plenty of other GGG fans have tried to dumb it down like that)

 

the world ends or testing is exposed as bs.

 

I think its funny how you think you're unbias.

No reaction from Golovkin? You really think that?

You're just going to prentend GGG didn't have his best performance?

No KDs
No body attack
Landed less power punches than Canelo
Missed nearly 70% of his punches

 

Golovkin was poisoned

 

ODLH stuck a finger up his azz before the fight