He's 21 years old, it's simply too early to tell. Some guys that age, you just know he's going to be a star. Canelo isn't one of them. Not to say he won't have a good career, but it isn't obvious like a 21 year old Floyd was.
Canelo has to answer a lot of questions, mainly his stamina, before we can put him in the "real deal" category.
Not to complain, but why is this in the US and why is Gary Shaw promoting this? Only Europeans and hard core US fans would give a **** about this fight.
Tommy could put a hammer on just about any chin he landed solid on and if he landed on Ray early who knows , the point I was trying to make is those old fighters were just top fighters of their day like the the Hearns and Haglers were of their day , I dont believe they were above them just precursors to next guys that learn from them , if you look at the old fights they were wild as hell and not near the science of the modern greats , Im a believer in everything gets better over the generations , last years champs evolve into next years champs , human nature creates larger than life personas over time , with the equipment today you can analyze old fights and time punches to a 100th of a second and I think people would be surprised how fast the modern fighter gets power to the target .
Very well said. Few people have this opinion concerning old heroes and modern stars. That being said, I still think Ray Robinson would stop Tommy Hearns.
There are only a few things sweeter than watching a beautiful, perfect one-two. For me, the only thing that tops it in aesthetic value is a left hook to the liver.
I just stick to your criteria:
1. Ring Generalship
2. Clean Effective Punching
3. Effective Agression
4. Defense
If #2 and 3 are too close to call you have to look at "who is fighting whos fight"
Defense is the overlooked criteria in scoring rounds though. You rarely here announcers and boxing fans give a fighter around for effective defense.
This is the best and only correct answer in this thread. Of course, judges naturally have personal tendencies, but in order to promote consistency across the board, this criteria should be followed.
They used to do this, but not anymore. Just peruse boxrec of any old-time fighter and you'll see that the ref was also the 3rd judge.
Ask any referee out there now and they'll all say the same thing ... their #1 job is fighter safety. By asking them to also judge the round, would further increase the risk of someone getting hurt. In my opinion, it's not a wise trade-off.
you cant bet like that in vegas once the fight starts, there are no more bets
it keeps currption dwn
I believe they have in game betting at the M Resort