Heard so many people talking about Canelo not being able to hurt kovalev because he’s smaller. Does that very real knockout prove that weight doesn’t matter as much as people think?
Wrong. I can probably beat George Foreman today but that doesn't mean I wouldn't get my ass kicked by Anthony Joshua. You can make your argument about size when Canelo fights Beterbiev or Bivol and ko's them with ease
are you g-strings totally forgetting that was an actual fight... and concentrating on furiously counting pitty-pat jabs again... like you all did after the Canelo rematch? :lol1:
Wrong, jabs add up in terms of damage, as we saw with Jacobs and Lemueix. Sure, one jab doesn't mean much but it will win you the round if all the other guy did was punch your shoulders and arms all round. When you combine the power punches and jabs for both fighters and ignore the ineffective aggressive mostly from SD and his pitty patt shots when clenching, GGG won most of the rounds pretty convincingly. Only two rounds close for me were 2 and 9 and that's because there was almost equal damage done. I ignored agression from both.
No offense, but this is precisely why your scorecards probably suck most of the time. If a round is fought evenly, then the proper score actually is 10-10. It's not weak, indecisive or wishy-washy to call an evenly-contested round even. Your mentality leads to controversial scorecards.
What are you talking about? I don't know if it was done in the past but judges don't give 10 - 10 rounds. They have to pick someone to win the round. And surely there are times they'd love the benefit of rewatching a round to provide a more accurate score. Rewatching would not reduce the accuracy of your call
wtf ? :thinking:
of course there is... they do not sit there counting jabs on their fingers, they evaluate the round based on the 4 official criteria and score accordingly
sometimes they watch one fighter more than the other, what can I say
* clean HARD punching
which is why compubox is totally irrelevant
the judges use a professional scoring system, and they only value/score effective punches... compubox is just a tally of activity that is often inaccurate
activity is not official scoring criteria
after the Golovkin/Canelo rematch:
" but, all of the fans think... "
after the Golovkin/Derevy fight:
" fcuk the fans, the judges think... "
it all sounds a bit convenient
the fighters know... there is a reason why Golovkin said it was Sergiys night, not his night
I'm curious, when or for which fight have you seen these sections on the judges official scorecard? I have never seen them. Furthermore, if these sections were on a scorecard and then assigned a number, then you'd have to average each number according a particular weight to see who won the round. I wouldn't mind scoring according to this criteria as long as judges were doing this officially and i knew what weighted averages they were using.
You're other statements are in agreement with mine. I only score the clean effective punches, which includes jabs. I also don't place much meaning on compubox and do not score on activity, especially all the ineffective activity from SD for this fight.
Also I'm not sure about others but i thought the judges got it right in the rematch with GGG vs Canelo. In the first fight one judge had GGG losing 10 rounds. Such examples do merit comparison to other scores to demonstrate that they're too much of an outlier to be accepted as true actually suggest corruption like with Conlan in this case of AIBA.
so you guys ARE concentrating on furiously counting pitty-pat jabs again... like you all did after the Canelo rematch LMAO
* clean hard punching
* effective aggression
* defence
* ring generalship
the judges are not even gonna look at some of that shlt you are tallying up bro
Not pitty pat jabs but actually jabs. 5 clean jabs to the face for example, does more damage than a flush power shot. So it depends, if there are a lot of jabs from one guy and a few power shots from the other, you must always task yourself with deciding who did more damage. You cannot simply give the round to the power shot guy because one power shot does more damage than one jab. That was the case with GGG vs Jacobs. GGG landed jabs all night and a few power shots. Canelo i thought won the rematch by one round, round 12 specifically. But SD was getting jabbed and hit with power shots in about half the fight and not landing much outside of the rounds he won.
And to be fair my scoring system is different but i think each judge is a bit different in how they score. I have never cared about ring generalship for example. All that matters to me is who appears to have landed to better shots taking in to account both quantity and quality. Those other things only matter they both did equal damage, which is rare.
Nah, GGG was always a special fighter. You don't just decimate lower level fighters like that and then give a "prime" P4P fighter like Canelo the kind of difficulty he did in two fights when you're declining due to age if you're just a decent average guy. Look at Canelo vs Jacobs? Canelo basically played with him. Jacobs is an example of a fighter that's decent but has never been special. If it were that easy to do what GGG did, then every decent fighter would decimate lower level opponents easily like he did. But that rarely is the case, which is why there was so much hype around GGG in the first during his come up.
GGG is 37 and clearly had broken confidence and still managed beat Derevychenko the way he did. Most fighters in that scenario would have been washed. Does anyone really think the 33 year old version Golovkin would have fought the same way tonight as against Derevychenko? No way. Which basically means that SD, who is 33 and probably on the tail end peak of his prime, with full confidence still couldn't beat a 37 y o GGG on the decline and with broken confidence. Imo that says more about GGG than it does SD.
style makes fight... if ggg were to fight canelo again it will end in a tko/ko in canelo's favor.
True and I do think ko is in the realm of possibility if they fight again but not because of skill, simply because of age. And while it can happen that great fighters have trouble with lower level fighters do to style, it is rare and the good fighter usually still wins decently. And even then those lower level fighters are not consistent in performance. But none of those conditions apply to GGG. He's been consistent his entire career and gave Canelo, who's in his prime, hell twice. He's proven more than just a good fighter.
New acct making a long thread about GG. Sounds legit.
Actually for whatever reason my previous account seems to have been deleted, which i only noticed when my login wasn't working. But i also use to post under the same exact name. Presumably my post should still be in the history. I was posting around the last fight with Canelo and GGG. When i realized my account wasn't working i just said whatever. But i remade it now to respond to all this ridiculousness about Dereveychenko winning, it was too silly to stay quiet.
then, your scorecard is irrelevant
Wrong, because, as i said, judges tend to score differently. There's no section on their scorecard for ring generalship agression and things like that. So it's very subjective and they don't particularly have to defend their scores either so at least you can hear why they gave the score they gave. But for the most part, their scores are generally consistent with mine as they were in the Jacobs fight and this fight.
Lol, i noticed that too man... All these new accounts swinging off triple g's nutts like George of the jungle....
Lol...do you not remember arguing with me on my previous account which had the exact same name? I said it was that time of the month for you and you challenged me to a meet. Still trying to fight people online and having those anger management issues?
Damn, this guys worse than roach after Pac's loss to Horn. Gave GGG no motivational speech during the fight either, what's he good for? GGG needs to go back to Sanchez
Just to be clear. Abel told GGG he was losing the fight. And banks in his own words too. Surprised GGG won.
Age,. Canelos body shots or GGG was never elite. Sadly he never faced real opposition in his prime for us boxing fans to really know how good he really WAS*
But that's a different situation. As a trainer you want motivate your fighter. So saying he's losing the fight is fine because you want to motivate him to fight better for the rest of the fight. Lots of trainers have said things like that during the fight. But saying you basically thought your fighter lost after he won the fight serves no motivational purpose. I've never heard a boxing trainer allude to such a thing before.
But Pvssy-G looks the same :lol1: Don't go blaming the trainer if the tiger can't change his strips :rofl:
But he looks clearly different. He has a much lower volume and was far more hesitant vs Derevychenko and seemed to have his confidence broken. He never looked like that in other close fights like with Jacobs and Canelo and Canelo landed more bombs than Derevychenko.
And the trainer is exactly who you should blame. GGG got to where he is by focusing on what he does well. The trainer should focus on those things and maintain them or get GGG to be even better at them. If he looks worse following the trainers advice, than yea, it's the trainers fault.
You can not be lied to in the fight game. You can lie to yourself, but the people you put around you need to be able to tell you what you need to hear. It's not about what you want to hear. Banks is there to train Golovkin on how to deal with the upcoming bout and to get out of the ring the same way he walked in. Everybody screaming for Abel Sanchez to come back are ridiculous. Johnathan Banks can not be fake about Golovkins performance because it is a direct reflection on his training. Banks said he never like GGG being matched up with Derevyanchenko, and I believe that. After a hard fought contest, it's back to the drawing board. Confidence and ego boosting mean nothing if it will end up getting you seriously hurt in the long run.
My problem with Banks isn't that he told the truth to GGG. The problem is that he broadcasted his lack of confidence in his own fighter to the world. What possible benefit is there to degrade your own fighter publicly? I mean just imagine that at GGG's next press conference his opponent says you really lost to SD! Your own trainer said so! And this time you won't get a gift win!!!. How's he supposed to respond to something like that and maintain confidence?
If you want to tell GGG the truth about the fight, fine you tell him in private. Speaking to the media has nothing to do with that, it's entirely different function and serves a different purpose which is why Hearn and Loeffler aren't trainers. Most trainers understand that and sell their fighter to the media in a reasonable way. It's not like GGG got knocked down 4 times, was bloodied up and had no chance of winning. It was a close fight in the eyes of most. And even with a fight as close as it was, he basically admitted to world that he gave up hope on GGG and that he really lost even tho he won. That's a terrible state of mind for your own trainer to have and is an unnecessary attack on a fighters confidence. It's also just plain disrespectful as a prominent member of GGG's brand to say that publicly in a fight that close. It would be like family members telling the world that you're still a loser even after you've won.
Confidence and ego boosting mean nothing if it will end up getting you seriously hurt in the long run.
But it wouldn't in the context I'm referring to. As stated the issue here is what he said publicly. But still no one is asking Banks to blindly lie to GGG in private and make him think he's better than he is. However, confidence in yourself has a direct effect on bringing out your full potential and ability. Lack of confidence can actually be damaging and can also get you hurt in the long run. Which is why you must have a healthy amount of confidence. And Banks basically telling the world GGG lost, when it was so close in mosts eyes, is a potential confidence killer and just becomes an unnecessary obstacle to overcome when getting GGG's confidence back. So it doesn't even make any sense if you're thinking as a trainer and not public spokes person, which is why most trainers don't say things like that publicly, least of all Sanchez.
And people aren't just asking Sanchez to come back because of that btw. GGG has shown no improvement under Banks and in fact looks worse. A bad matchup is one thing, but losing confidence and becoming hesitant in a fight is another. He's never done that with Sanchez not even with Jacobs or Canelo. Is it possible Banks had nothing to do with that? It is, but so far Banks is the only obvious change ftom before. And don't get me started on his weak in between rounds advice for GGG.
Let's be real, the trainer isn't at fought here! GGG is 37 years old and trying to break a guy from bad habits who has been getting away with things due to his power is a very hard thing to accomplish in 2 camps especially when he's fighting another seasoned strong fighter whom also is just as determined to win. Jonathan remained calm and told him simple things not to much, but it's up to the fighter to apply the teaching so once again I must say;
Most People Don't Know **** About Boxing!
Please actually read a person's argument before arguing against it, otherwise you will be creating strawman arguments all day. It would also be nice if you elaborated on your previous comment to me.
Second, GGG is not some upstart in training who has time to find out his best boxing style. Boxing is a business and he has brand now and can't afford to lose or even look bad. And not every fighter has an aptitude for even some basic things. Could Floyd Mayweather Sr really train Lemeuix to fight like Mayweather Jr if he tries hard enough?
Each fighter just has to find out what they do well and use their physical and mental gifts to the best of their ability and see how far it takes them. It would be silly to have Golovkin fight practicing things that disrupts his natural fighting ability rather than adding to it. I mean what good are all these new tricks if it gets GGG ko'ed because he can't do them right in an actually boxing fight and then his stock goes down and legacy destroyed? Should he spend the rest of career losing fights or looking terrible in an effort to master these new tricks? Let's say he does all these new tricks well, but he loses the other risky techniques which made him successful and now he's just average fighter? It's not as simple "just do this" and a good trainer would know that. If GGG is not doing something, there's a reason for it. Instead of training Lemeuix to fight with a ring IQ like Mayweather, just train him to rely more on his power because he's able to use it well. If he doesn't fight well backing up, look for an alternative he can do well.
Changing GGG style could end up making him a much better fighter but it could also make him way more average. You just never know. That kind of experimentation is fine for upstarts fighting in a gym. But it's way too late in GGG's career to go experimenting with radically different styles because you never know if it's gonna hold up in an actual fight against an opponent of a particular style. And once again GGG clearly became hesitant and loss confidence, sonething he never did with Abel Sanchez. It may make sense to you for him to just keep doing that, even if he takes a beating and starts losing fights, until he masters whatever the new guy is teaching him but that doesn't make sense to me. I say do what gives you confidence and what got you this far. That will be the best version of you.
He definitely does and can. Age has nothing to do with it. And you are always growing as a fighter if you are smart.
True but not everyone has an aptitude or the body for every fighting style. For example a low stamina guy like Broner could never fight like Pacquiao no matter how hard he tries because he doesn't have the stamina or agility. A low ring IQ guy like Lemeuix could never fight like Mayweather which is why he relies on power. What got Golovkin to where he is a fighting style that benefits his natural physical gifts. To change his style now learning new stuff he may not have an aptitude for could ruin him. And i highly doubt he got to where he is without unloading the majority of his boxing potential.
GGG should fire him for being real?? LOL
What good are you as a trainer if you can't be honest to your fighter and tell him there are things to improve?
Because you must always show confidence in your fighter to help build there's. After a fight like that, no doubt GGG is questioning his performance. So the more voices you hear insist that you did well, especially when you might be too hard on yourself, the better chance you have at rebuilding your confidence which will make you a better fighter.
How's he supposed to rebuild confidence when even his own trainer is basically broadcasting to the world that he lost and performed badly. That's embarrasing and kills any argument in favor of his performance. The trainers job is to make sure GGG has peak tactical ability and conditioning for a fight, not to tell his honest feelings to media. If he felt GGG didn't do things well, than you have that discussion with him in private and focus on the great things he did when talking to media, which is what Hearn and Loeffler did and what Sanchez used to do. This new guy hasn't seemed to help GGG at all, he needs to be cut loose