BoxRec

The Good - it was a thrilling slugfest from 1 to 12. Canelo didn't run and demonstrated punch resistance and heart as great as Golovkin's.
Both fighters gave their all and its difficult to see what more they could do. This time the better footwork came from GGG who I felt gave Canelo a boxing lesson from mid fight onwards. The referee also seemed to have a good night, ie I didn't notice him too much.

The Bad - a great champion gets treated as the b side and has to take a draw and a loss against the favoured adversary in his back yard who has failed 2 drug rests.

It's clear to see Golovkin could only have made it this far in this 'business' because of his unprecedented knockout streak. But, as he likes to say, 'this is boxing'.

The Ugly - many argued that Golovkin would have to knock Canelo out in Las Vegas to win and that's exactly how it turned out to be. Golovkin cannot knock Canelo out and therefore cannot win in Las Vegas. It's as simple as that.

The Sin City cartel will no doubt be doubt be patting themselves on the back for another job well done. This time it was done cleaner. The media pundits who had Golovkin winning by 4/5 rounds will soon be quietly forgotten as preparations begin for a third money making operation, I mean fight.

Golovkin's talking about another rematch, but I wouldn't blame him for doing a Marvin Hagler and simply walking away in disgust. Or coming back for the money one more time, because that's all that's left now.

Great post Thomas. There was no need for a robbery as it turned out (even though I had it GGG 117-116) but I've little doubt the masked men with the dynamite and the bags marked 'swag' were hiding just out of sight.

It was a robbery alright, most rounds were close but IMO Canelo only won the first 2 rounds, remaining 10 he may have got a draw in 1 or 2 of them, the rest were all Golovkin.

I dont understand how anyone would score that fight to Canelo. That fcukwit Lederman gave him the 6th, are you kidding me?

This fukcwit did too. I gave him 2,6 and 12. GGG 1,4,5 and 9.

If I think a round could go either way I'll score it even instead of creating a two point swing just for sake of avoiding accusations of sitting on the fence, so 3,7,8,10 and 11, even.

Thomastearns wrote: ↑16 Sep 2018, 06:57 The Good - it was a thrilling slugfest from 1 to 12. Canelo didn't run and demonstrated punch resistance and heart as great as Golovkin's.
Both fighters gave their all and its difficult to see what more they could do. This time the better footwork came from GGG who I felt gave Canelo a boxing lesson from mid fight onwards. The referee also seemed to have a good night, ie I didn't notice him too much.

The Bad - a great champion gets treated as the b side and has to take a draw and a loss against the favoured adversary in his back yard who has failed 2 drug rests.

It's clear to see Golovkin could only have made it this far in this 'business' because of his unprecedented knockout streak. But, as he likes to say, 'this is boxing'.

The Ugly - many argued that Golovkin would have to knock Canelo out in Las Vegas to win and that's exactly how it turned out to be. Golovkin cannot knock Canelo out and therefore cannot win in Las Vegas. It's as simple as that.

The Sin City cartel will no doubt be doubt be patting themselves on the back for another job well done. This time it was done cleaner. The media pundits who had Golovkin winning by 4/5 rounds will soon be quietly forgotten as preparations begin for a third money making operation, I mean fight.

Golovkin's talking about another rematch, but I wouldn't blame him for doing a Marvin Hagler and simply walking away in disgust. Or coming back for the money one more time, because that's all that's left now.

A better post you won’t find here. This says it all. I’m sure that GGG did what he had to do for his family as they won’t have to worry about money ever again but this must be brutal on his pride...forever. Canelo vacated the belt to avoid fighting GGG and wait crucial years of an aging fighter to get a leg up. Then the robbery happened in first fight. Then Canelo gets popped for PEDS. More sand through the hourglass of GGG’s aging talents. We all knew that it would happen again. Canelo just had to finish the fight to win. I didn’t even need to hear decision.

Dave Moretti needs to be investigated. I see him as the ringleader with these scorecards. How does this guy continue to get every single big fight? It goes back to Floyd. No one was beating Floyd in Vegas. Canelo just took his place. Sad

candyslim wrote: ↑16 Sep 2018, 11:16 This fukcwit did too. I gave him 2,6 and 12. GGG 1,4,5 and 9.

If I think a round could go either way I'll score it even instead of creating a two point swing just for sake of avoiding accusations of sitting on the fence, so 3,7,8,10 and 11, even.

GGG dominated round 10!

This is what puzzles me, though. There is widespread outrage, and rightfully so, over yet another phony judge decision in LV, but phony judge decisions in high profile boxing matches are the rule rather than the exception, especially in LV! It was totally predictable. But i thought the Ortiz-Wilder fight in New York - the ring doctor & ref interefence in round eight when Wilder was in big trouble and rubber legged - and now they have scoured round eight off the internet! - was much more egregious, and much more indefensible, but nobody seems to care.

jezzamundo wrote: ↑16 Sep 2018, 23:07

candyslim wrote: ↑16 Sep 2018, 11:16 This fukcwit did too. I gave him 2,6 and 12. GGG 1,4,5 and 9.

If I think a round could go either way I'll score it even instead of creating a two point swing just for sake of avoiding accusations of sitting on the fence, so 3,7,8,10 and 11, even.

GGG dominated round 10!

I say he dominated round 9. Opinions eh?

While I'm a little bit gutted he had to lose to Alvarez, I think Golovkin set himself up for this the moment, post-drug fiasco, he signed for the rematch. I also think he's declined so much (which I was actually saying before the fight) that a result like this was almost inevitable against the younger guy, & will only get worse should they somehow get it on again.

Of course, he's now X million quid better off, so, you know.

I’ve reviewed the round-by-round scorecards of the official judges, as well as a few media scores, such as those submitted by Dougie Fischer (The RING), WBN, Dan Rafael, Alex Steedman (BT) and also Harold Lederman (HBO), which has led me to draw the following conclusions:

• The general consensus is that nearly all of those individuals agreed on the scoring of eight rounds: with the 1st, 4th, 10th & 11th rounds being awarded to Golovkin; and with the 2nd, 3rd, 5th & 6th going to Canelo.

• So, only the 7th, 8th, 9th and 12th were under question and up for debate. None of the media scores, as well as the official judges, were able to draw a unanimous verdict on the winner of those rounds.

• Dougie Fischer and Alex Steedman both awarded the first round to Canelo, disagreeing with the opinions of all three judges, as well as WBN, Dan Rafael & Harold Lederman.

• Harold Lederman & Alex Steedman also awarded the sixth round to GGG, disagreeing with all three official judges, as well as Dougie Fischer, WBN & Dan Rafael.

• Steedman & Lederman also awarded the eleventh round to Canelo, despite the fact that all three judges, as well as Dougie Fischer, WBN & Dan Rafael, awarding the round to GGG.

• Interestingly though, Alex Steedman (BT) and Harold Lederman (HBO) agreed with the official judges’ scorecards, by awarding the twelfth round to Canelo, despite both guys favouring a victory for Golovkin by a 116-112 margin. Abel Sanchez appeared to agree that Canelo won that round too, after claiming GGG “took it off”.

• The reason why Steedman & Lederman’s opinions are so important, is because any English-speaking person that watched the bout may have been strongly influenced by their commentary on BT or HBO, with their thoughts occasionally being at odds with other pundits and the judges.

Based on the above information, it seems that scores of 115-113 either way or a draw were easy conclusions to reach, meaning any talk of controversy is unwarranted.

I may receive a lot of criticism for saying this, but if those that wholeheartedly support a victory for GGG are unable to unanimously agree amongst themselves the rounds they claimed he won (i.e. 7th, 8th, 9th and 12th), then it’s not unreasonable to believe that each round (when scored in isolation) could have gone either way, meaning that the fight was very competitive and clearly no “robbery”.

everything you stated is reasonable and agreeable, except your last 3 words, instead of ..."& clearly no robbery" they should be "...& still a robbery!"

Having watched without commentary I had Golovkin winning by one round.

If I wasn't sure who won the round I called it even. That seems like commonsense and fair play to me and I've no qualms about scoring five rounds even.

If I scored them even, then it's reasonable to assume some will have scored for GGG and others for Canelo.

On that basis It wouldn't be too outrageous to score for Canelo overall.

That being the case there was no robbery.

Having said that, I feel fairly certain that if Canelo had needed a robbery to get the win, he'd have got one.

Sorry Gennady but you went into it with your eyes open. You must have suspected, if not known, that you needed a knockout to win and you must have known such an outcome was extremely unlikely. Still, it was a nice little earner wasn't it? Same again?

It was an amazing battle of two of the best middleweights of our time. Both true warriors left everything they had in that ring. I have zero issues with how anyone scores that fight, if you think canelo won the actual fight or you think gennady did, is up to anybodys personal opinion. Personally i think golovkin edged both fights, the second one by a hair. Takes nothing away from canelos outstanding performance, who's style as a boxer i like even more, he's a beautiful boxer at the beginning of his prime and will get even better with time.

That doesn't change the fact that Golovkin had no chance of leaving that night with his belts other than to knock out Alvarez.

In the first fight the judges were paid off by goldenboy to deliver a draw so a rematch was unavoidable. That's what they did.

In the second fight the judges were paid off by goldenboy to deliver scorecards in favor of canelo. That's what they did.

Those are facts. Call it how you want, a robbery or not. I call it corruption.

Was a close fight that could go either way but I'm satisfied with the outcome. Atleast it was not a draw which will hurt the sports badly because they have to face again for the 3rd time to settle the score.

For now, each fighter can take a stay busy fight before fighting for the 3rd time.

ezhmael wrote: ↑17 Sep 2018, 17:06 Was a close fight that could go either way but I'm satisfied with the outcome. Atleast it was not a draw which will hurt the sports badly because they have to face again for the 3rd time to settle the score.

For now, each fighter can take a stay busy fight before fighting for the 3rd time.

Logic of an idiot: it is better for the sport that a champion who won twice got zero wins than another rematch.

It's better to have 1 established champion than 2 with unfinished business.

ezhmael wrote: ↑17 Sep 2018, 18:20 It's better to have 1 established champion than 2 with unfinished business.

What the hell does that mean and why? It's better to say nothing when you got nothing to say!

adislav123 wrote: ↑17 Sep 2018, 18:43

ezhmael wrote: ↑17 Sep 2018, 18:20 It's better to have 1 established champion than 2 with unfinished business.

What the hell does that mean and why? It's better to say nothing when you got nothing to say!

fornicate you, I don't care what you say. Better not quote if you don't have anything good to say either.

Thank you. but for real, it was a genuine question to you: What should mean "it's better to have one established champion than 2 with unfinished business?please elaborate!