Scoring fights: GGG's style makes his work underestimated

What the punch accomplishes? Lol That's what I said. Your response is a perfect illustration if what I mean. No points scored.

I also think GGG won. But idc about the decision. cuz i wanna watch them fight again :)

Trella and Moretti were criticized for being wrong? Bummelo owning fiction too ?????? Who the heck is Bummelo??

Those performance were nothing alike. Bumelo lost. You still haven’t clarified the way Moretti or Trella scored? Nobody focuses on them because it’s more fun to make fun of Byrd. Did Moretti rob Tripple Gee? Byrd alone didn’t have the power to have Bummelo win, so how was it a robbery when Trella was responsible as well? Trella's and Moretti's card were wrong. In fact it's been mentioned often in press accounts of the fight. You must know that their cards have been critisized also. If you don't know you haven't been paying attention.

It's important for you to learn how to score fights and realise how Canelo has iften received scores that are disconnected with reality. For example the Mayweather fight. No joke. I couldn't find a round to give him, much less 6! These folks are ridiculous. And for everyone reading, Canelo was credited for landing like 4 more power shots than GGG. Even though I know that number is way, way off, how does that make up for being hit with like 50 more jabs when those power shots had no effect. I couldn't even see GGG flinch at any shot Canelo landed. Stop trying to act like this fight was close when everyone knows Byrd is blind or paid off. What a joke.

thinking back on it i had murray beating ggg. he just got caught when he had a big lead ^ lol, nice! Me too

I said it was Draw continually on the board. You cried “robbery.” It’s important for you to understand the concept of scoring and robberies and the amount of judges it requires, as well as the scoring for theoretical robberies. It's important for you to learn how to score fights and realise how Canelo has iften received scores that are disconnected with reality. For example the Mayweather fight.

So when Crawford would rehydrate to 153 he is a Super Welterweight? Is there a new culture of rehydrating weights that suggests boxers are classed at their fight night weight? If that’s the case, Triple Gee has always been a Light Heavyweight topping over 168+ on every fight, and when it came time to fight Bummelo, low and behold, he was bigger than the Mexican Bum. How does that work? http://cdn1.sbnation.com/assets/4105933/canelo-angulo-sd.jpg I dunno, I never called them lHW. My point is he was GGG's weight on fight night when he was fighting at 154, even heavier, and so he never was smaller.

I agree they have improved but don't necessarily agree that they were green. Canelo had 43 fights, won 42 and no losses. Jacobs had a good amateur background and stood out as someone with great potential. I also take into account that he was diagnosed with cancer soon after and the loss of his grandmother. Both Canelo and Jacobs are good fighters but these were winnable fights for Golovkin. Like I said, I picked him to beat Jacobs and I picked him to beat Canelo. I think he lost to one and I don't think he won so convincingly against the other to spear him getting the fight draw. I certainly don't agree that it's his style why he wasn't seen as the clear winner in the two fights. I can see Lomachenko picking off punches all the time. I don't see the same with Golovkin. I disagree and like most people I thought he won both fights.

Pretty much. Bummelo is now in his third fight above 160. Triple Gee gains more than 10lbs for every fight. This is why Floyd, who throughout his career wasn’t exposed for significant gains on fight night. Triple Gee fans don’t like to focus that Bummelo would not have grown in height after 20 years of age. They said Bummelo was a LHW. If that’s the case, then what’s is every 154 fighter rehydrating to? Trout, Lara... How much bigger is Hurd or Charlo compared to Trout? Or Jacobs to those mentioned. The reality is that Jacobs and Triple Gee would already be fighting at 168 comfortably, especially if Triple Gee was weighing at 173 in the Rubio fight. What is the need for 13 pounds over Middleweight? Water weight vs muscle mass is also never discussed. In any instance, why is Hurd, Charlo, Jacobs, or Golovkin still bigger than Bummelo on fight night? Agendas. Bummelo is a bum. https://i.ytimg.com/vi/EIoyZrR3lrg/maxresdefault.jpg Canelo weighed 174 vs angulo on fight night wich is even more than GGG vs Rubio, and that's why they call him a LHW.

Yeah, they both clearly lost once. Jacobs to Pyrog and Nelo to Floyd. But if you ask me, they were both green and not as good as they are by now. To be fair to Nelo and Danny who are quite good fighters and genuine guys: Jacobs probably already had his cancer weakening him (I think he had the diagnostic 6 months later), Nelo who already drained hardcore to make 154 had to make 152 to fight Floyd, and Floyd was just too good anyway. I do believe at 160 Nelo is a better fighter since he doesn't have to lose 20 pounds for the weigh in anymore. I agree they have improved but don't necessarily agree that they were green. Canelo had 43 fights, won 42 and no losses. Jacobs had a good amateur background and stood out as someone with great potential. I also take into account that he was diagnosed with cancer soon after and the loss of his grandmother. Both Canelo and Jacobs are good fighters but these were winnable fights for Golovkin. Like I said, I picked him to beat Jacobs and I picked him to beat Canelo. I think he lost to one and I don't think he won so convincingly against the other to spear him getting the fight draw. I certainly don't agree that it's his style why he wasn't seen as the clear winner in the two fights. I can see Lomachenko picking off punches all the time. I don't see the same with Golovkin.

Jacobs fight was a very close, but clear decision for GGG. (I was there) Canelo fight was a CLEAR victory for GGG.

Yes he's a monster puncher but his flaws don't make him as good as people make him out to be. And just like the others you mention, if you take away his monster punch he has little to fall back on. He's the most accomplished in the division but he struggled with 2 fighters that other fighters had much better performances against. If he's the best then the division is not that good. He doesn't get any props from me for beating Canelo because he had the opportunity before and didn't do it convincingly. Jacobs isn't easy to deal with but we've seen someone else do it before. I picked him to beat Jacobs and he didn't do it in my opinion. Yeah, they both clearly lost once. Jacobs to Pyrog and Nelo to Floyd. But if you ask me, they were both green and not as good as they are by now. To be fair to Nelo and Danny who are quite good fighters and genuine guys: Jacobs probably already had his cancer weakening him (I think he had the diagnostic 6 months later), Nelo who already drained hardcore to make 154 had to make 152 to fight Floyd, and Floyd was just too good anyway. I do believe at 160 Nelo is a better fighter since he doesn't have to lose 20 pounds for the weigh in anymore.

Golovkin is a monster puncher but not unbeatable, people get carried away by power, it happened with Tyson, Tua, Kovalev, Shavers, GGG, G McClellan. They finally were far from unbeatable and often disappointed a lot. I wish you could understand that, or maybe you started watching boxing last year? Right now he's in the best division and he is old, he's gonna have some tough close fights. If he beats Canelo then he deserves major props. Canelo ain't smaller, I bet he was at least 5 pounds heavier than triple fight night. He beat Jacobs, Jacobs is far from being easy to deal with. He destroyed Quillin in one round, schooled Truax who just beat De Gale for the 168 WBC title. Jacobs would beat most 168 pounders champ. And he's better than Charlo, quicker and better skillset, more proven at 160. Yes he's a monster puncher but his flaws don't make him as good as people make him out to be. And just like the others you mention, if you take away his monster punch he has little to fall back on. He's the most accomplished in the division but he struggled with 2 fighters that other fighters had much better performances against. If he's the best then the division is not that good. He doesn't get any props from me for beating Canelo because he had the opportunity before and didn't do it convincingly. Jacobs isn't easy to deal with but we've seen someone else do it before. I picked him to beat Jacobs and he didn't do it in my opinion.

Lol. You said it was a robbery, so I helped you out in understanding what a robbery is. If you follow boxing, a robbery is ideally all wide cards from all judges favoring a fighter that looked to have lost undoubtedly. It doesn’t even have to be wide, they could all be close. I just showed you who Don Trella is. There’s no spin in anything. He scored it for whatever reason. You can’t cry “robbery” in a debate and then accuse another of “spinning” something when your premise is revised to rational thinking. And by you saying “if you want to say the judges...”. No my friend, YOU cried “robbery,” hence you brought up scoring. That’s all you. If you feel Canelo lost that’s your opinion. Is that related to a “robbery?” This is why the board mocks the usage of robberies when the causal fans fighter loses. Your the guy who mentioned kickbacks to the judges to explain why your guy didn't win.

So if you say the draw was a farce then you acknowledge that Don Trella can be bout to the highest bidder. Which means Loeffler had more money to bribe Trella in Jacobs vs GGG correct? Again, you don’t know what a robbery is. If anything, Trella robbed both Oscar and Loeffler correct, cause he was supposed to favor the fighter for whom he was paid to favor. I don't care what spin you want to put on it. Canelo lost the fight. If you want to say the judges were paid off by Loefler that's your opinion. My opinion and the majority of experienced and knowledgable observers is he list the fight.

The performance has already been explained. It’s impossible to justify any dominance from either one. Triple Gee fans hate to hear it. They’re so mad that they say “robbed” not even knowing the logic of a robbery. Two judges had it close. Even if Byrd had it 115-113 it’s still a draw. If she scored it a draw, it would still be a draw, and thus two judges would be accused of bribery for the draw. One judge drawing who had Triple Gee beating Jacobs, yes, the New York judge. Triple Gee fans will enjoy the Draw while it lasts. This is Triple Gee in the rematch. https://cbswrch2.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/b764215.jpg?w=640&h=360&crop=1 The draw was a farce. Yes I know the logic of a robbery. That was a robbery. Golovkin's won the fight 8 rounds to 4. Canelo showed poor ring savey. He could win the rematch but not if he doesn't make significant changes.

Maybe not you but a lot of people made him out to be unbeatable. Exactly! He looked great against mediocre opponents... Unbeatable! Unstoppable! Monster! He didn't look great against better opponents... He's old... Boxing fans underestimate his work because of his style. If Golovkin was as a good as some people made him out to be (98% of boxing media and an entire television network), he would've KO'd Jacobs in less than 8 and he would've walked down the smaller Canelo and either stop him or dominate him. Golovkin is a monster puncher but not unbeatable, people get carried away by power, it happened with Tyson, Tua, Kovalev, Shavers, GGG, G McClellan. They finally were far from unbeatable and often disappointed a lot. I wish you could understand that, or maybe you started watching boxing last year? Right now he's in the best division and he is old, he's gonna have some tough close fights. If he beats Canelo then he deserves major props. Canelo ain't smaller, I bet he was at least 5 pounds heavier than triple fight night. He beat Jacobs, Jacobs is far from being easy to deal with. He destroyed Quillin in one round, schooled Truax who just beat De Gale for the 168 WBC title. Jacobs would beat most 168 pounders champ. And he's better than Charlo, quicker and better skillset, more proven at 160.

I never said he was unbeatable, nobody is.Maybe not you but a lot of people made him out to be unbeatable. Maybe because those fights were not competitive? Exactly! He looked great against mediocre opponents... Unbeatable! Unstoppable! Monster! He didn't look great against better opponents... He's old... Boxing fans underestimate his work because of his style. If Golovkin was as a good as some people made him out to be (98% of boxing media and an entire television network), he would've KO'd Jacobs in less than 8 and he would've walked down the smaller Canelo and either stop him or dominated him.

But everything revolves around compubox. That’s the whole premise as to why Triple Gee fans claim he beat Bummelo. The only other angle is that Bummelo ran. It’s either one or those two things to Triple Gee fans. Therefore, 40 more punches over Bummelo isn’t a “dominant” win. Like I said, 3 punches more per round to Triple Gee. So which infamous punches were these? Jabs? Whatever reason, Bummelo can easily match Triple Gees ratio. Notice nobody ever dissected Triple Gee’s 40 more punches in detail. Why?! The DRAW was fair. People should focus on what both fighters will do differently No the draw was not fair. No Golovkin fans don't look at only punch stats. Golovkin got robbed. He controlled the fight. He forced Canello to the ropes. He was more active and won more minutes of each round. Canello could not hold the center of the ring for very long. He got schooled by Golovkin.