BoxRec

I've always enjoyed watching Canelo fight and I used to think that he was a great shot in the arm for the sport of Boxing. Today, i'm not so sure about that. First he says that he's not afraid of GGG, asks GGG to climb into the ring after Canelo defeated Khan to show the public he's not afraid and then a couple of weeks later does the unthinkable for a Mexican. He vacates the belt cowardly to avoid GGG and instead goes after the weakest Junior Middleweight Champion to accumulate another low hanging fruit World Title Belt. But this doesn't concern me as much as something else I can't ignore any longer.

There's something extremely shady about Canelo's scorecards. There's a trending instance in which Canelo appears to have at least one judge in his pocket.

*It started with the Trout fight in which one judge somehow scored in favor of Canelo 118-109. Even with the knockdown, I had Trout winning that fight or at least pulling out draw. No way could you possibly score this one as lopsided as this.

*Then Canelo fights Floyd and gets absolutely embarrassed. You'd have to really try hard to give Canelo a half a round in this fight much less a full round. One judge inexplicably scores the fight a draw 114-114. Not possible. It's literally impossible to come remotely close to a draw.

*Canelo then fights Lara and again, gets outclassed by a skillful fighter. The punch stats were lopsided in Lara's favor. Even if you penalized Lara for his movement and running, you would still have a hard time awarding Canelo with a victory. One judge ruled in Canelo's favor 117-110. Ridiculous and impossible to come up with that score.

*I had Canelo the winner of Cotto but the scores were ridiculously lopsided in Canelo's favor. 119-109 in a fight where both guys landed roughly the same amount of punches is extremely shady to me. You won't see this type of delta in scoring in many fights that had as many evenly contested rounds as they had.

These scandalous examples already had me thinking that someone was on the take and then I had the chance to watch Canelo's brother Ramon fight Antonio Margarito last week. Margarito clearly won this fight easily in my mind and wouldn't you know it, when the scorecards were read one of the judges scored it in favor of Ramon Alvarez.

Something is extremely fishy about Canelo and something tells me that we are going to see some more examples of this in the coming fights.

caldo2025 wrote:First he says that he's not afraid of GGG, asks GGG to climb into the ring after Canelo defeated Khan to show the public he's not afraid and then a couple of weeks later does the unthinkable for a Mexican. He vacates the belt cowardly to avoid GGG and instead goes after the weakest Junior Middleweight Champion to accumulate another low hanging fruit World Title Belt.

Canelo is not in control over his own destiny.

Oscar De La Hoya wanted to agree the terms of a Canelo-GGG bout with Tom Loeffler without being dictated to by the WBC.

Since Alvarez is the A-side fighter, it makes sense for GBP to protect their investment, orchestrate the staging of the bout on their terms, whilst also delaying the contest for as long as possible to increase the public demand for the fight and consequently maximising revenue (as per the approached used for the Mayweather-Pacquiao bout).

You really shouldn’t associate derogatory words like “fear” and “cowardice” to fighters, simply because you don’t understand the entire situation.

caldo2025 wrote:There's something extremely shady about Canelo's scorecards. There's a trending instance in which Canelo appears to have at least one judge in his pocket.

As far as I’m concerned, one bad judge (CJ Ross) does not warrant accusations of corruption.

caldo2025 wrote:*It started with the Trout fight in which one judge somehow scored in favor of Canelo 118-109. Even with the knockdown, I had Trout winning that fight or at least pulling out draw. No way could you possibly score this one as lopsided as this.

Canelo clearly won this fight. The initial announcement of the WBC’s open scoring awarded the early set of rounds to Alvarez, when Austin appeared to be winning. So Trout felt compelled to abandon his gameplan and became the aggressor, which is not playing to his own strengths, as this led him to legitimately lose rounds.

In my mind, Canelo deserved to win the Trout fight, but the open scoring ruined Austin’s game-plan.

caldo2025 wrote:*Then Canelo fights Floyd and gets absolutely embarrassed. You'd have to really try hard to give Canelo a half a round in this fight much less a full round. One judge inexplicably scores the fight a draw 114-114. Not possible. It's literally impossible to come remotely close to a draw.

“Embarrassed” is a huge exaggeration. I don’t know why you always feel the need to embellish the situation, because all it achieves is to undermine your own argument, as it causes the reader to conclude that you're being dishonest somehow.

Canelo clearly lost the bout and CJ Ross scored the fight incorrectly. No one got “embarrassed”.

caldo2025 wrote:*Canelo then fights Lara and again, gets outclassed by a skillful fighter.

The majority of the media believed Canelo deserved the victory and so did I. Therefore, there was no “robbery” and no one got “outclassed”.

It was a close fight that could have gone either way, but in my mind, 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.

caldo2025 wrote:I had Canelo the winner of Cotto but the scores were ridiculously lopsided in Canelo's favor.

I had Canelo winning the bout 115-113, which was much closer than how the judges scored it. However, two rounds were difficult to score, so at least one of the judges were kind of in the right ball-park.

The right man won though.

caldo2025 wrote:These scandalous examples already had me thinking that someone was on the take and then I had the chance to watch Canelo's brother Ramon fight Antonio Margarito last week. Margarito clearly won this fight easily in my mind and wouldn't you know it, when the scorecards were read one of the judges scored it in favor of Ramon Alvarez.

I didn’t see this fight, but I think it’s wrong to jump to automatically assume bribery without any irrefutable evidence.

caldo2025 wrote:Something is extremely fishy about Canelo and something tells me that we are going to see some more examples of this in the coming fights.

Is it possible that Canelo is such a fan favourite that the noise from the crowd can unduly influence the judges' scoring of a bout? Isn’t that the reason why many fighters, like Andre Ward, typically insist on fighting on home turf?

Enlightened-One wrote:

caldo2025 wrote:First he says that he's not afraid of GGG, asks GGG to climb into the ring after Canelo defeated Khan to show the public he's not afraid and then a couple of weeks later does the unthinkable for a Mexican. He vacates the belt cowardly to avoid GGG and instead goes after the weakest Junior Middleweight Champion to accumulate another low hanging fruit World Title Belt.

Canelo is not in control over his own destiny.

Oscar De La Hoya wanted to agree the terms of a Canelo-GGG bout with Tom Loeffler without being dictated to by the WBC.

Since Alvarez is the A-side fighter, it makes sense for GBP to protect their investment, orchestrate the staging of the bout on their terms, whilst also delaying the contest for as long as possible to increase the public demand for the fight and consequently maximising revenue (as per the approached used for the Mayweather-Pacquiao bout).

You really shouldn’t associate derogatory words like “fear” and “cowardice” to fighters, simply because you don’t understand the entire situation.

caldo2025 wrote:There's something extremely shady about Canelo's scorecards. There's a trending instance in which Canelo appears to have at least one judge in his pocket.

As far as I’m concerned, one bad judge (CJ Ross) does not warrant accusations of corruption.

caldo2025 wrote:*It started with the Trout fight in which one judge somehow scored in favor of Canelo 118-109. Even with the knockdown, I had Trout winning that fight or at least pulling out draw. No way could you possibly score this one as lopsided as this.

Canelo clearly won this fight. The initial announcement of the WBC’s open scoring awarded the early set of rounds to Alvarez, when Austin appeared to be winning. So Trout felt compelled to abandon his gameplan and became the aggressor, which is not playing to his own strengths, as this led him to legitimately lose rounds.

In my mind, Canelo deserved to win the Trout fight, but the open scoring ruined Austin’s game-plan.

caldo2025 wrote:*Then Canelo fights Floyd and gets absolutely embarrassed. You'd have to really try hard to give Canelo a half a round in this fight much less a full round. One judge inexplicably scores the fight a draw 114-114. Not possible. It's literally impossible to come remotely close to a draw.

“Embarrassed” is a huge exaggeration. I don’t know why you always feel the need to embellish the situation, because all it achieves is to undermine your own argument, as it causes the reader to conclude that you're being dishonest somehow.

Canelo clearly lost the bout and CJ Ross scored the fight incorrectly. No one got “embarrassed”.

caldo2025 wrote:*Canelo then fights Lara and again, gets outclassed by a skillful fighter.

The majority of the media believed Canelo deserved the victory and so did I. Therefore, there was no “robbery” and no one got “outclassed”.

It was a close fight that could have gone either way, but in my mind, 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.

caldo2025 wrote:I had Canelo the winner of Cotto but the scores were ridiculously lopsided in Canelo's favor.

I had Canelo winning the bout 115-113, which was much closer than how the judges scored it. However, two rounds were difficult to score, so at least one of the judges were kind of in the right ball-park.

The right man won though.

caldo2025 wrote:These scandalous examples already had me thinking that someone was on the take and then I had the chance to watch Canelo's brother Ramon fight Antonio Margarito last week. Margarito clearly won this fight easily in my mind and wouldn't you know it, when the scorecards were read one of the judges scored it in favor of Ramon Alvarez.

I didn’t see this fight, but I think it’s wrong to jump to automatically assume bribery without any irrefutable evidence.

caldo2025 wrote:Something is extremely fishy about Canelo and something tells me that we are going to see some more examples of this in the coming fights.

Is it possible that Canelo is such a fan favourite that the noise from the crowd can unduly influence the judges' scoring of a bout? Isn’t that the reason why many fighters, like Andre Ward, typically insist on fighting on home turf?

You're allegiances are becoming more and more evident there Mr. Enlightened One. You come out with anti-GGG garbage as a defense mechanism for the cowardice of your hero, Canelo. It's all becoming clear now so thank you for responding and clearing things up.

Once again, you've missed the main point with your blind favoritism for Canelo. The point is that in every one of Canelo's big fights, one judge appears to see a completely different fight than the other judges. You seem semi-intelligent so hopefully you can get the basic mathematical advantages one gets when a fighter goes into the ring knowing that he's already won on one of the 3 judges cards. That means that you only need 1 of the 2 others to see it your way. It improves your odds of winning by at least 33% when there shouldn't be any advantage at all.

And Floyd did embarrass Canelo. He made him look pedestrian in every way and slow. I specifically remember in one round where Canelo missed so badly that he ending up punching the ropes seconds after Floyd had already danced away. It was pretty embarrassing and Floyd hammed it up after it making it worse. Yes. He was taken to school.

You are a Canelo rump swab and i'm glad that's out in the open. Only a Canelo rump swab would respond like you have above so now you've been declared and identified so i don't think anyone will read you anti-GGG dribble any longer. Bye

caldo2025 wrote:
You're allegiances are becoming more and more evident there Mr. Enlightened One. You come out with anti-GGG garbage as a defense mechanism for the cowardice of your hero, Canelo. It's all becoming clear now so thank you for responding and clearing things up.

Once again, you've missed the main point with your blind favoritism for Canelo. The point is that in every one of Canelo's big fights, one judge appears to see a completely different fight than the other judges. You seem semi-intelligent so hopefully you can get the basic mathematical advantages one gets when a fighter goes into the ring knowing that he's already won on one of the 3 judges cards. That means that you only need 1 of the 2 others to see it your way. It improves your odds of winning by at least 33% when there shouldn't be any advantage at all.

And Floyd did embarrass Canelo. He made him look pedestrian in every way and slow. I specifically remember in one round where Canelo missed so badly that he ending up punching the ropes seconds after Floyd had already danced away. It was pretty embarrassing and Floyd hammed it up after it making it worse. Yes. He was taken to school.

You are a Canelo rump swab and i'm glad that's out in the open. Only a Canelo rump swab would respond like you have above so now you've been declared and identified so i don't think anyone will read you anti-GGG dribble any longer. Bye

that's exemplary stuff

I do question the sanity of some of the people that frequent this place. FFS!

Caldo is right about Canelo. It would be different if it only happened once, but the corruption is obvious. And yes, Canelo did pull a coward-like move and avoid GGG. And yes, Floyd did embarass Canelo. I was almost waiting for a "no mas" from Canelo.

Something is rotten in the state of Nevada.

Counter-puncher wrote:

caldo2025 wrote:
You're allegiances are becoming more and more evident there Mr. Enlightened One. You come out with anti-GGG garbage as a defense mechanism for the cowardice of your hero, Canelo. It's all becoming clear now so thank you for responding and clearing things up.

Once again, you've missed the main point with your blind favoritism for Canelo. The point is that in every one of Canelo's big fights, one judge appears to see a completely different fight than the other judges. You seem semi-intelligent so hopefully you can get the basic mathematical advantages one gets when a fighter goes into the ring knowing that he's already won on one of the 3 judges cards. That means that you only need 1 of the 2 others to see it your way. It improves your odds of winning by at least 33% when there shouldn't be any advantage at all.

And Floyd did embarrass Canelo. He made him look pedestrian in every way and slow. I specifically remember in one round where Canelo missed so badly that he ending up punching the ropes seconds after Floyd had already danced away. It was pretty embarrassing and Floyd hammed it up after it making it worse. Yes. He was taken to school.

You are a Canelo rump swab and i'm glad that's out in the open. Only a Canelo rump swab would respond like you have above so now you've been declared and identified so i don't think anyone will read you anti-GGG dribble any longer. Bye

that's exemplary stuff

Agree My personal favourite was 'rump swab'

The CJ Ross card was dodgy (as was her Pac-Bradley card) but Canelo beat Trout.

Still haven't seen Canelo-Lara but concensus was a close fight thatcwasn't easy to score.


That leaves you with 1 corrupt card from 1 incompetent judge.

Ricky_ wrote:The CJ Ross card was dodgy (as was her Pac-Bradley card) but Canelo beat Trout.

Still haven't seen Canelo-Lara but concensus was a close fight thatcwasn't easy to score.


That leaves you with 1 corrupt card from 1 incompetent judge.

Canelo vs Lara wasn't easy to score, but it was clearly close. So was the Trout fight, so there is no way all those cards were honest mistakes.

boxing_rocks wrote:

Ricky_ wrote:The CJ Ross card was dodgy (as was her Pac-Bradley card) but Canelo beat Trout.

Still haven't seen Canelo-Lara but concensus was a close fight thatcwasn't easy to score.


That leaves you with 1 corrupt card from 1 incompetent judge.

Canelo vs Lara wasn't easy to score, but it was clearly close. So was the Trout fight, so there is no way all those cards were honest mistakes.

"Simple Mistakes"

It's simple. Canelo is deemed to be the next big thing and cash cow. The scoring against Floyd was terrible. I watched that in Mexico and the locals were booing the official scoring. Not because they thought their hero deserved it but because Floyd strolled to victory in a virtual shutout! The fix was definitely in that night. If Canelo had genuinely won 3 rounds he would have got the verdict

For the record i too had Trout beating Alvarez but at the time it seemed i was the only one

odlh and canelo need to stick to their guns regarding the ggg chat else peoples opinions of them will get less and less, not good for them.

i can see a may-pac situation all over again

terrible for boxing

[quote="Enlightened-One] {Lara-Canelo] was a close fight that could have gone either way, but in my mind, 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 [/quote]

Negative approach??? ...You're allowed to stick and move in a Boxing match... If both boxers score 9 equally effective punches, I'm going to give the round to the aggressor as a tie breaker... But if one boxer scores 8 clean, effective punches and the other scores 12 - whoever was more aggressive is immaterial.. Clean, effective punches landed is the dominant scoring criteria.. You're allowed to use the 400 sq ft of the ring surface to your advantage if you have the foot speed, reach, range, and boxing ability to dominate a tougher and harder punching opponent from the outside... At times Lara stood right in front of Canelo and let him tee off... Canelo landed very few legal punches that were effective, but landed a lot of low blows and punches on the back that I guess 2 blind judges scored. The referee ignored Canelo's low blows except for a few hand gestures and verbal warnings, WITHOUT ever stopping the fight to issue a formal warning.

Canelo landed a left uppercut that slit open a cut on Lara's right eyelid -- but he couldn't target the cut, which was soon controlled by Lara's corner and was not a problem because Lara protected it well.. I scored the fight 117-111 for Lara.. I have no doubt that all 3 judges were biased in favor of Canelo on the ridiculous SD... Canelo's face was badly beaten up and Lara didn't have a mark on him except for the cut... There was 1 round where he got cut and it's a 12-round fight.. Commentators Malignaggi and Farhood both scored it for Lara, but they seemed almost scared and embarrassed to say they had Lara winning.. Such is the intimidation factor and special interests that are pushing Canelo as Boxing's biggest star -- and silently saying "Are you for us or against us?" ... Commentators and judges might be fearful of getting assignments if they don't say the fight was close and "could have gone either way" or score it close, or for Canelo.

But the fact is, when you score more and clean and effective punches in more rounds -- and you don't get the decision??? ... You've been robbed.

That's old news. It's not just Canelo, other valuable assets like Chavez Jr have judges on their side, though I agree Canelo is one of the worst here. But what's really starting to stink is:

GBPs Gomez: we have VADA testing for this fight!
VADA: no you don't
Gomez: honest mistake
Canelo: maybe I'm not moving up after all, body not ready

caldo2025 wrote:Canelo & Corruption: Something's Starting to Stink: Canelo then fights Lara and again, gets outclassed...

Kalan wrote:[Lara's] been robbed.

In my opinion, the Canelo-Lara bout was highly-competitive… and even though I believe the Mexican deserved the victory, the fight was close and the result could have gone either way. That being said, there was almost certainly no robbery... there was no travesity!

There is an article that gathered 89 media scorecards and only 33% of them thought that Lara deserved the win:
• 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.

Badhusker wrote:Caldo is right about Canelo. It would be different if it only happened once, but the corruption is obvious. And yes, Canelo did pull a coward-like move and avoid GGG. And yes, Floyd did embarass Canelo. I was almost waiting for a "no mas" from Canelo.

Crossed my mind when watching the fight. At one point he looked absolutely lost, feeling very sorry for himself.

The OP makes an interesting case. Not even the staunchest Canelo fan or the most sycophantic member of his entourage could've scored the Mayweather fight a draw.

The mayweather card may be the worst I have seen in a decade or more

CAnelo Khan too. Khan clearly should've been ahead on points.

Smith has zero chances to win on cards, so his overall chance to win is under 5%.

Counter-puncher wrote:The mayweather card may be the worst I have seen in a decade or more

It was a bad day at the office for the one scorekeeper who called it 114-114.

Why all the hatred to Canelo?

boxing_rocks wrote:Smith has zero chances to win on cards, so his overall chance to win is under 5%.

Agreed. Canelo's chin is solid so KO is the only way Smith comes home with his belt. Sad but true.

jewboypgh wrote:Why all the hatred to Canelo?

Its actually not at all about the hatred of Canelo, it is boxing fans calling it as it is. The fact is that Canelo has too much $love$ when it comes to the scorecards. I thought Lara edged their fight, and thought Trout deserved a draw. The open scoring caused Trout to change his tactics, or he would have won imo.
Either way, I'm not going to bitch if they give Canelo the win, but let the score cards honestly reflect the close fight. CJ Ross scoring 114-114 for the Floyd fight was downright criminal. What a stupid bitch. Probably a retired rich bitch now.