Lederman scorecard, what was it?

I think Canelo clearly won round 1. Agreed. I don't even think there's a questuon about that. As soon as Lederman gave that rd to GGG, I knew his scorecard was going to be S H I T.

He had the best scorecard presented during the HBO broadcast, 8-4 for Golovkin.

They seemed biased towards Canelo especially Max, kinda surprised. I thought Max was fairly balanced in his approach. He gave credit to Canelo for his work at the beginning of the fight but as soon as GGG started coming on he acknowledged that. In fact he thought Golovkin made it his kind of fight and that he deserved the win. Lampley was riding GGG's c0ck from the beginning til the end of the fight. Roy seemed biased towards Canelo a bit, but he acknowledged that GGG did good work at times. PS. Lampley is senile.

Lederman seems to be the only straight shooter at HBO, he's usually on point and doesn't care about politics. Kellerman and Lampley were unbearable, they are becoming the worst set of boxing commentators in the sport. They seemed biased towards Canelo especially Max, kinda surprised.

I thought Canelo won the first 4 rounds easy and then I gave him the last 2. He could've won round 10 as well. But I must admit I was watching the USC vs Texas game on my phone so I was really only watching the fight between plays. I'll have a better account for the fight when I rewatch it next week.

Lederman was so biased it's shameful

116-112 for GGG. I had it the same. I could see 115-113 for GGG, but not a draw and definitely not a Canelo victory. Same here. Lederman was right on the money.

Because there were so many close rds I could see the judges going either way. My personal card had Canelo winning but I can see how a judge would have GGG winning. It was a close fight. Nobody on either side can say it wasn't a close fight. And in close fights the card can go either way. Just like you saw GGG winning I saw Canelo winning. The 3 judges saw it different from each other. You put a lot of stock into GGG coming forward. I put more stock into Canelo's defense and landing cleaner punches. That's how I can see it going either way, it depends on what you value more. Golovkin was landing as he was coming forward. He missed a lot but he also landed and it wasn't one shot at a time. I don't have a problem with you having it for Canelo. When you say that you could also see it for Golovkin it raises an eye brow for me. For you to see it for Canelo, you would have to ignore or not take into account what Golovkin was doing. It's possible because he didn't land consistently, but he did land, and when he did, it was more when you added it up. In other words, he would land a series of punches, then Canelo landed one or two, the crowd go crazy, and Golovkin would land some more. If you only saw Canelo's punches that's fine, but based on your "either/or" scenario, you saw them both but didn't value them as much as Canelo's one or two punches. If that's the case you should have it clearly for Canelo, but not Golovkin. I understand the fight went back and forth but at the end of the night, only one did better than the other.

Lederman seems to be the only straight shooter at HBO, he's usually on point and doesn't care about politics. Kellerman and Lampley were unbearable, they are becoming the worst set of boxing commentators in the sport.

Anything from 8-4 to a draw is a good card in that type of fight where there were so many swing rds. I didn't have a problem with the results and even though I had Canelo winning I wouldn't have had a problem with GGG winning 8-4 How could you have all 3 as a possible outcome? It's either a draw or one fighter was clearly better. You can't make a case for both being deserving of the win. I thought Golovkin did enough to win. A draw would be the next possible outcome. A Canelo win was the LEAST possible outcome and didn't even enter my mind. I get it if one of the judges scores his one or two punches per round as more effective but you also have to ignore everything Golovkin was doing. Backing into the ropes consistently is not effectively aggression. His defense was solid but he was hardly doing anything in return for long stretches each round.

Anything from 8-4 to a draw is a good card in that type of fight where there were so many swing rds. I didn't have a problem with the results and even though I had Canelo winning I wouldn't have had a problem with GGG winning 8-4 Good post. I am curious though, how did you score the fight? Was it like 7 to 5 Canelo or thereabouts? I had it 7 to 5 for GGG but could also live with 8 to 4. Peace.

So you could see 115-113 (GGG winning by one round) but you can't see a draw in a fight with that many swing rds? I had it 116-112 Canelo or 115-113 but I can definitely see a draw. Overall I saw GGG as the aggressor. Canelo only fight one minute of each round. That extra muscle weight affected his stamina. Neither fighter did anything spectacular. But I saw GGG bringing the fight to Canelo from round 4 onward.

The general consensus seem to be 8-4 for GGG, which is how i had it too.

I think Canelo clearly won round 1. I gave Canelo round 1 as well.

It was 8-4 for Golovkin. He gave Canelo rounds 2,3,11 and 12. I think Canelo clearly won round 1.

116-112 was it. I say it was a good score.

116-112 for GGG. I had it the same. I could see 115-113 for GGG, but not a draw and definitely not a Canelo victory.

It was 8-4 for Golovkin. He gave Canelo rounds 2,3,11 and 12.

I think it was 116-112 Golovkin. I think HBO needs to do what Showtime did and get 3 random scorecards from the press ringside.