BoxRec

gilgamesh wrote: ↑26 Jun 2019, 15:46 The damage is essentially equal. That's not a destroyed face. They're both cut, both bruised.

Thats fu.cking false

Canelo landed better punches, landed most power shots, had a better defense in both fights. GGG was most.of the time using his jab that is good and powerful but its not comparable to power shots of canelo

Canelo was in a party and fought 3 months later against a top-10 168 pounds (soft fight, but better than Rolls).

Of fact, GGG missed 1000 punches in both fights.

But well... you live in another world.

GGG took a lot of punishment

Susej_SOG wrote: ↑26 Jun 2019, 15:50 Thats fu.cking false

Canelo landed better punches, landed most power shots, had a better defense in both fights. GGG was most.of the time using his jab that is good and powerful but its not comparable to power shots of canelo

Canelo was in a party and fought 3 months later against a top-10 168 pounds (soft fight, but better than Rolls).

Of fact, GGG missed 1000 punches in both fights.

But well... you live in another world.

GGG took a lot of punishment

They both did. It was a hard fight.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑26 Jun 2019, 15:51 They both did. It was a hard fight.

They did not, Golovkin clearly took more punishment.

Canelo landed better and most powerful shots, thats another fact.

Susej_SOG wrote: ↑26 Jun 2019, 16:08 They did not, Golovkin clearly took more punishment.

Canelo landed better and most powerful shots, thats another fact.

He landed better power punches, I'll grant you that. The damage was essentially equal at the end of the fight. Some guys bruise more noticeably than others, but the damage was the same.

The subject here is Canelo vs Callum Smith though. He'll beat Callum Smith.

Carry on everybody. Ignore this little back and forth.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑26 Jun 2019, 14:23 Every now and again you gotta mix up the corruption to throw people off the scent.

A conspiracy to conceal the conspiracy.

It all makes sense now.

SenorPipino wrote: ↑26 Jun 2019, 16:27 A conspiracy to conceal the conspiracy.

It all makes sense now.

In the case of Bradley getting the decision on Manny it actually makes perfect sense. Bob Arum who promoted 'em both got 3 PPV fights out of it instead of just 1 by Bradley getting the decision he didn't deserve.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑26 Jun 2019, 16:28 In the case of Bradley getting the decision on Manny it actually makes perfect sense. Bob Arum who promoted 'em both got 3 PPV fights out of it instead of just 1 by Bradley getting the decision he didn't deserve.

And I recall that before the fight, everyone ranted that Bradley was pretty good but had no power and wouldn't be able to win a decision over Cash Cow Pacquiao.

Of course he did win a very disputed decision, so everyone did a 180 and predictably claimed that Arum set it up for a lucrative rematch.

That rematch didn't come off for several years and by then no one cared anymore. I'm not sure it was all that lucrative either. Bradley was never a PPV attraction.

Same with the 3rd go-around. Just a throw away fight.

The judges just scored that first bout for Bradley. Sometimes you agree with them, sometimes you don't. But corruption is hardly at the root of all these verdicts.

Tired excuses for unpopular decisions are really getting out of hand.

SenorPipino wrote: ↑26 Jun 2019, 16:37 And I recall that before the fight, everyone ranted that Bradley was pretty good but had no power and wouldn't be able to win a decision over Cash Cow Pacquiao.

Of course he did win a very disputed decision, so everyone did a 180 and predictably claimed that Arum set it up for a lucrative rematch.

That rematch didn't come off for several years and by then no one cared anymore. I'm not sure it was all that lucrative either. Bradley was never a PPV attraction.

Same with the 3rd go-around. Just a throw away fight.

The judges just scored that first bout for Bradley. Sometimes you agree with them, sometimes you don't. But corruption is hardly at the root of all these verdicts.

Tired excuses for unpopular decisions are really getting out of hand.

Some fights are robberies, and some ain't.

Canelo vs GGG 2 wasn't a robbery. It was a close fight I disagreed with, but it wasn't a robbery.

Pac vs Bradley 1 was an outright robbery. No way Bradley won that fight. Pac won the 1st fight just as clearly as he won the 2nd.

To me you're getting into robbery territory when one guy won at least 8 rounds clear. In fights where you got a lot of "could go either way" rounds. The word robbery is definitely thrown around too easily.