Lets see if boxrec changed for the good

[RonnyJ]

8 years ago, a lot of boxrec member were stubborn about the quality and record theme. Harry greb and sam langford had to be amongs the 4 best boxers ever and sugar ray leonard or roy jones jr werent as good as them, so both out of the top 10 p4p ever.

Back than a lot of boxing enthusiasts didnt understand the difference between quality and record and how irritating a great record can be.

Let me give you an example. Canelo, just looking at his record, with names like kovalev, GGG, mayweather, mosley on it, you would think he is amongs the greatest boxer ever, the by far best boxer right now on the planet.
What is the reality, he is a very good boxer, who is slow, heavy handed and improved on his defence and if you compare p4p other top boxers, than canelo is around 4-6 p4p, with boxer with inferior record ahead of him like inoue, crawford or lomachenko. Why? Because all 3 are faster, have better footwork, are more agile and just overall boxer better than canelo, quality > record!!!

the problem with the record is, you have to look very closely. Prime of opponents, age etc.. kovalev was old at the end of his career and got paid out, it wasnt normal, he rarly punched. GGG was also entering the past prime stage and mosley was old himself. Only floyd was still in great shape and beat him 11 out of 12 rounds.

Want another example. X legs. He fought an old wlad and an athletic football player, a man who has nothing to do with boxing except a atg punching power. So based on this people now say fury is the best heavyweight ever. Hahahahahahahaha....laughing my a&/ off. Had he beat current version of joshua, vitaly, lewis or 80s tyson, now thats a completly different ball game.

[Evander]

Ronny mate I like you, but your talking bollocks let it go.

[RonnyJ]

Ronny mate I like you, but your talking bollocks let it go.

i make sense

[Enlightened-One]

There’s an old saying…

"Talent" is useless unless it’s proven…. And "potential" is useless unless it’s fulfilled!”

You’re evaluating the pound-for-pound credentials and in-ring fighting ability of Canelo’s peers based (in most cases) purely on the proverbial eyeball test.

Whereas Canelo has “proven” his “talent” time-and-time again… and also “fulfilled” his “potential!”

Put it this way, would the likes of Crawford and Lomachenko be as dominant against the calibre of guys Canelo keeps facing? Probably not.

Their flaws would be exposed also if they kept facing top-notch opposition.

And that’s not a criticism either, because like every single human being on the planet, they have flaws… and they might not be unveiled until they’re matched against elite talent.

[RonnyJ]

There’s an old saying…

"Talent" is useless unless it’s proven…. And "potential" is useless unless it’s fulfilled!”

You’re evaluating the pound-for-pound credentials and in-ring fighting ability of Canelo’s peers based (in most cases) purely on the proverbial eyeball test.

Whereas Canelo has “proven” his “talent” time-and-time again… and also “fulfilled” his “potential!”

Put it this way, would the likes of Crawford and Lomachenko be as dominant against the calibre of guys Canelo keeps facing? Probably not.

Their flaws would be exposed also if they kept facing top-notch opposition.

And that’s not a criticism either, because like every single human being on the planet, they have flaws… and they might not be unveiled until they’re matched against elite talent.

crawford not, but lomachenko is close of fighting as many as good opponents as canelo. canelos flaws were exposed as he cant deal with fast athletic boxer like lara or mayweather. at lh he just looked slow staionary, bertebiev would crush him. also was exposed that he needs gifts, like in the GGG fights.

well loma fight top opponent and not old past prime opponents, prime rigondeaux, prime russel jr, prime linares and loma doesnt need gifts. in so many fights of canelo there is a debating if he actualy won his fights. with loma there is no debating. they stay on the chair and quit.

sure, every boxer has his flaws, but there is a persentage of flaws and some have a higher one than others.

[Enlightened-One]

There’s an old saying…

"Talent" is useless unless it’s proven…. And "potential" is useless unless it’s fulfilled!”

You’re evaluating the pound-for-pound credentials and in-ring fighting ability of Canelo’s peers based (in most cases) purely on the proverbial eyeball test.

Whereas Canelo has “proven” his “talent” time-and-time again… and also “fulfilled” his “potential!”

Put it this way, would the likes of Crawford and Lomachenko be as dominant against the calibre of guys Canelo keeps facing? Probably not.

Their flaws would be exposed also if they kept facing top-notch opposition.

And that’s not a criticism either, because like every single human being on the planet, they have flaws… and they might not be unveiled until they’re matched against elite talent.

crawford not, but lomachenko is close of fighting as many as good opponents as canelo. canelos flaws were exposed as he cant deal with fast athletic boxer like lara or mayweather. at lh he just looked slow staionary, bertebiev would crush him. also was exposed that he needs gifts, like in the GGG fights.

well loma fight top opponent and not old past prime opponents, prime rigondeaux, prime russel jr, prime linares and loma doesnt need gifts. in so many fights of canelo there is a debating if he actualy won his fights. with loma there is no debating. they stay on the chair and quit.

sure, every boxer has his flaws, but there is a persentage of flaws and some have a higher one than others.

I’m sorry, but I can’t take your comments seriously.

I feel that this is one of those occasions where everyone should remain silent and allow you to believe whatever you want to believe, because your opinions are far too extreme for my liking… and your interpretation of reality is incompatible with the events that I witnessed.

[RonnyJ]

crawford not, but lomachenko is close of fighting as many as good opponents as canelo. canelos flaws were exposed as he cant deal with fast athletic boxer like lara or mayweather. at lh he just looked slow staionary, bertebiev would crush him. also was exposed that he needs gifts, like in the GGG fights.

well loma fight top opponent and not old past prime opponents, prime rigondeaux, prime russel jr, prime linares and loma doesnt need gifts. in so many fights of canelo there is a debating if he actualy won his fights. with loma there is no debating. they stay on the chair and quit.

sure, every boxer has his flaws, but there is a persentage of flaws and some have a higher one than others.

I’m sorry, but I can’t take your comments seriously.

I feel that this is one of those occasions where everyone should remain silent and allow you to believe whatever you want to believe, because your opinions are far too extreme for my liking… and your interpretation of reality is incompatible with the events that I witnessed.

If u think canelo won against lara and didnt have questionable fights with GGG than u delusional.

[Enlightened-One]

I’m sorry, but I can’t take your comments seriously.

I feel that this is one of those occasions where everyone should remain silent and allow you to believe whatever you want to believe, because your opinions are far too extreme for my liking… and your interpretation of reality is incompatible with the events that I witnessed.

If u think canelo won against lara and didnt have questionable fights with GGG than u delusional.

I understand the controversies for the GGG bouts, but not for his contest over Lara.

For sure, his fight against the Cuban was close, but the Mexican deserved the victory. It was a close fight though, but certainly no robbery.

Lara was employing effective defence during the first five rounds, such as making Canelo miss and then making him pay. However, from round six onwards, he was being too defensive and simply didn’t let his hands go often enough. Erislandy was responsible for his own downfall, because he had the capability to win, but he forfeited too many rounds due to his own negative approach.

[Thomastearns]

The only meaningful fights for assessing legacies should be those fought on level or near level footing.

So many things to consider but as you'd expect quite a few Boxrec members know their boxing history. I think we should at least consider the following before passing judgement.

Were both fighters non PED users?
Both at their peak or inexperienced v fading?
Optimum weight division, no weight draining?
No prohibitive rehydration clauses
Reasonable refereeing and judging
Activity v lay off/ring rust
Deliberate avoidances/careful selections
and no doubt other contibuting factors.

Boxing's inability to arrange matchups (Pacquiao/Mayweather Canelo/Golovkin Joshua/Wilder Crawford/Spence all obvious examples of our time), and the fighters careful selection and waiting out of
fading opposition (Mayweather and Canelo) must skewer their records for the history books somewhat.

Add in the numerous sanctioning bodies and what you get is a right mess for the fans and a multi channelled revenue machine for the money men and hidden cartels.

Fighters from the past fought more frequently and I believe were largely immune from such contrivances mainly through lack of choice and opportunity.

Rocky Marciano never pretended his victory over Joe Louis meant a great deal, so I don't see why anyone else should either.

Muhammad Ali fought everyone who was willing to fight him. No one seriously thought Liston was fading before their first, or even second fight.

He forced the boxing world to reassess their opinions. Even today, over 50 years on, some still regard those results difficult to accept.

Long may that search for 'the truth' continue.

[RonnyJ]

If u think canelo won against lara and didnt have questionable fights with GGG than u delusional.

I understand the controversies for the GGG bouts, but not for his contest over Lara.

For sure, his fight against the Cuban was close, but the Mexican deserved the victory. It was a close fight though, but certainly no robbery.

Lara was employing effective defence during the first five rounds, such as making Canelo miss and then making him pay. However, from round six onwards, he was being too defensive and simply didn’t let his hands go often enough. Erislandy was responsible for his own downfall, because he had the capability to win, but he forfeited too many rounds due to his own negative approach.

mayeather won most of his fights with low punch output just like lara did. its because he was no star and cuban, thats the reason.

[Enlightened-One]

I understand the controversies for the GGG bouts, but not for his contest over Lara.

For sure, his fight against the Cuban was close, but the Mexican deserved the victory. It was a close fight though, but certainly no robbery.

Lara was employing effective defence during the first five rounds, such as making Canelo miss and then making him pay. However, from round six onwards, he was being too defensive and simply didn’t let his hands go often enough. Erislandy was responsible for his own downfall, because he had the capability to win, but he forfeited too many rounds due to his own negative approach.

mayeather won most of his fights with low punch output just like lara did. its because he was no star and cuban, thats the reason.

Nope. Canelo landed lots of punches on Lara, especially bodyshots. Very few opponents connected on Mayweather. Floyd holds the plus/minus ratio CompuBox record for his career average.

Don't compare Lara to Mayweather!

[Enlightened-One]

If u think canelo won against lara ... then u delusional.

• Ryan Burton (BS) : 116-112 Canelo
• All About Boxing : 115-113 Canelo
• Phil D Jay (WorldBoxingNews) : 116-112 Canelo
• The Boxing Expert : 115-113 Canelo
• Danny Flexen (Boxing News) : 117-113 Canelo
• Adam Abramowitz (Saturday Night Boxing) : 115-113 Canelo
• David Greisman (BS) : 115-113 Canelo
• Lance Pugmire (LA Times) : 115-113 Canelo
• Daniel Vano (Checkhookboxing) : 115-114 Canelo
• Steve Bunce (allegedly TV) : 115-113 Canelo
• Matt Knowles (3MoreRounds) : 116-112 Canelo
• Rich Marotta (KFI Radio) : 115-113 Canelo
• Pro Boxing Fans Jake : 115-113 Canelo
• Dan Rafael (ESPN) : 116-112 Canelo
• Martin Gallegas (The Boxing Channel) : 115-113 Canelo
• Ryan Bivins (Sweetboxing) : 115-113 Canelo
• FightersRated : 115-114 Canelo
• Doug Fischer (Ring Magazine) : 115-113 Canelo
• Kevin McRae (Bleacher Report) : 115-113 Canelo
• Fightnews : 115-113 Canelo
• Max Kellerman (HBO) : 115-113 Canelo
• Fight Ghost : 115-113 Canelo
• Boxing Chat : 116-114 Canelo
• Ernest Gabion (Everlast) : 115-113 Canelo
• Stephen St John (Sports Radio 810 WHB) : 115-113 Canelo
• Graham Houston (Boxing Monthly) : 116-112 Canelo
• Tom Gray (Ring Magazine) : 116-113 Canelo
• The Sweet Science : 115-113 Canelo
• Mario Mungia (ThaBoxingVoice) : 115-114 Canelo
• Iconic Boxing : 115-113 Canelo
• John Evans (LiveFight) : 115-113 Canelo
• Bryan Kenny (Showtime TV) : 116-112 Canelo
• Steve Adams Jnr (Punchperfectpugilism) : 116-113 Canelo
• Ciaran Shanks (Irvine Times) :115-113 Canelo
• Norm Frauenheim (Ring Magazine) : 116-114 Canelo
• Jeffrey Freeman (KODigest.TV) : 115-113 Canelo
• Andreas Hale (KnockoutNation.com) : 115-113 Canelo
• Diego Morilla (XN Sports) : 115-113 Canelo
• Kenny Porter (Trainer) : 116-112 Canelo
• Abel Sanchez (Trainer) : 115-113 Canelo
• Anson Wainwright (Ring Magazine) : 115-113 Canelo

Also, if you aggregate all three official judge’s round-by-round scorecards for the Canelo-Lara bout, they concur with Steve Farhood’s (Showtime) scores for ten of the twelve rounds.

The official judges awarded rounds nine and eleven to Canelo, whereas the Showtime broadcaster gave them to Lara. And if you watch those rounds, they’re difficult to score.

[RonnyJ]

They all have it wrong

[candyslim]

They all have it wrong

Well that's cleared that up then, thanks Ronny.

You never cease to amaze me EO. Just how do you go about collating that info. I woulldn't know where to start. You gotta admire the spirit of our young friend. He reminds me of the green knight from Monty python and the Holy Grail

[margaret thatcher]

They all have it wrong

Well that's cleared that up then, thanks Ronny.

You never cease to amaze me EO. Just how do you go about collating that info. I woulldn't know where to start. You gotta admire the spirit of our young friend. He reminds me of the green knight from Monty python and the Holy Grail

Here's some more for you, no compliments needed http://www.boxingnewsonline.net/opinion ... -showdown/

[Enlightened-One]

Well that's cleared that up then, thanks Ronny.

You never cease to amaze me EO. Just how do you go about collating that info. I woulldn't know where to start. You gotta admire the spirit of our young friend. He reminds me of the green knight from Monty python and the Holy Grail

Here's some more for you, no compliments needed http://www.boxingnewsonline.net/opinion ... -showdown/

Based on the article you quoted, from the 89 media scorecards listed, only 33% of them thought that Lara deserved the win!

Thank-you for supporting my claim.

[Enlightened-One]

They all have it wrong

Well that's cleared that up then, thanks Ronny.

You never cease to amaze me EO. Just how do you go about collating that info. I woulldn't know where to start. You gotta admire the spirit of our young friend. He reminds me of the green knight from Monty python and the Holy Grail

Thank you for the compliment, but all I'm doing is resubmitting my old posts.

When you perform as much research as the likes of Ruthless-RKO and myself, constantly posting articles to this forum, there's really no need to reinvent the wheel.

I just recycle old posts time-and-time again, because people seem to need a constant reminder that historical reality takes precedence over creatively-imagined fictional opinions.

[margaret thatcher]

Here's some more for you, no compliments needed http://www.boxingnewsonline.net/opinion ... -showdown/

Based on the article you quoted, from the 89 media scorecards listed, only 33% of them thought that Lara deserved the win!

Thank-you for supporting my claim.

TBH I wasn't reading your claim and haven't been following this thread's back and forth much, I just saw that you posted a bunch of press scores from that fight and that candy seemed to like the info, so I posted more of the press scores. Enjoy and use however you'd like

34 Canelo (38.2 percent)
30 Lara (33.7 percent)
25 Draw (28.1 percent)

89 total

[Enlightened-One]

Based on the article you quoted, from the 89 media scorecards listed, only 33% of them thought that Lara deserved the win!

Thank-you for supporting my claim.

TBH I wasn't reading your claim and haven't been following this thread's back and forth much, I just saw that you posted a bunch of press scores from that fight and that candy seemed to like the info, so I posted more of the press scores. Enjoy and use however you'd like

34 Canelo (38.2 percent)
30 Lara (33.7 percent)
25 Draw (28.1 percent)

89 total

Thank-you again for kindly supporting the stats I’ve already previously conveyed.

[margaret thatcher]

You're very welcome mate, I'm glad I could be of such help

[lazboy]

Personally I had Canelo winning in a very close fight. I can't reward Lara rounds for burning up the clock.

However, it remains controversial. Based on the article quoted (above), from the 89 media scorecards listed, only 38.2% of them thought that Canelo deserved the win.

[lazboy]

You're very welcome mate, I'm glad I could be of such help

I'm glad you two are getting along. If feel that you are the ying to EO's yang. EO posts skewed stats, then you are able to provide a more complete picture. Then EO is able to acquiesce. It just makes things go smoothy. We should be paying you.

[oogiebe]

Based on the article you quoted, from the 89 media scorecards listed, only 33% of them thought that Lara deserved the win!

Thank-you for supporting my claim.

TBH I wasn't reading your claim and haven't been following this thread's back and forth much, I just saw that you posted a bunch of press scores from that fight and that candy seemed to like the info, so I posted more of the press scores. Enjoy and use however you'd like

34 Canelo (38.2 percent)
30 Lara (33.7 percent)
25 Draw (28.1 percent)

89 total

Gee Golly. ONLY 33% scored it for Lara. And look at that! Only 38% scored it for Canelo. Hmmm....LMFAO!

[Enlightened-One]

Gee Golly. ONLY 33% scored it for Lara. And look at that! Only 38% scored it for Canelo. Hmmm....LMFAO!

If u think canelo won against lara ... then u delusional.

[oogiebe]

Gee Golly. ONLY 33% scored it for Lara. And look at that! Only 38% scored it for Canelo. Hmmm....LMFAO!

If u think canelo won against lara ... then u delusional.

Are we being passive/aggressive wee one?