Comments Thread For: Canelo Alvarez once again undisputed after defeating mobile William Scull

[Rockenator]

Congratulations to Scull for picking up an easy paycheck at the Disco last night. I can’t wait to see his next fight. Was it just me or was the song “Jive Talkin” playing each round? Wait a minute, maybe it was that 60’s classic “Runaway.”

[kiaba360]

I went to sleep during Canelo's entrance. Never planned on watching it because I knew what sort of fight it was going to be. I also don't care about Canelo/Crawford. Hopefully they both retire afterwards.

[Greenfield02]

Boxers running around like it's a track meet and thinking they won, is nothing new to boxing. It's how Mayweather, Lara, amongst others recently in boxing made a living.

What's funny it's there's boxing fans out there who actually buy into that non-sense....

[Thatmanox]

Boxers running around like it's a track meet and thinking they won, is nothing new to boxing. It's how Mayweather, Lara, amongst others recently in boxing made a living.

What's funny it's there's boxing fans out there who actually buy into that non-sense....

What’s funny is fans out there who actually buy into the nonsense that Canelo is still a good fighter. They just make a living off their name even if they’re a has been.

[SweetPbfAli]

Canelo has had to change up his attack with his advancing age. This is true, but that said, I saw a Canelo who effectively cut off the ring and forced Scull to reset constantly. Now, cutting off the ring does not result in punches landed all the time. WHY? Because the fighter being cut off has options in response: either stand and fight your way out, or retreat and reset. Scull elected the latter for just about the entire fight. Yes, he landed scoring shots against Canelo, but they were completely ineffective. Canelo was the entire ring general, forcing Scull to constantly move. Canelo landed the more telling shots (to the body).

And look, I'm not a fanboy for Canelo, but I do detest negative fighters. And that is what the definition of a pure boxer has morphed into in these past 5 - 10 years. A pure boxer is now accepted as a fighter who fight negatively.

I know, I know...it's "Hit and not get hit." But the entire thing is "Hit and not get hit, while remaining within range to do it again."
A person who fight negatively will hit, move to avoid being hit, but have to then reset in order to hit again (because they are out of range). This is not what a pure boxer does by previous definition.

If this weekend has shown us anything it is that the current "Pure Boxer" is boring and really ineffective. Haney / Ramirez was almost as bad, but unfortunately, Ramirez was not able to cut off the ring. Otherwise, it would have looked exactly like tonight's fight.

I'll be glad when this sugarfooting style goes out of fashion. A pure boxer, like Pernell Whittaker, would never run so much. Bring back those types of boxers and that version of a pure boxer, and I can guarantee you'll have more appreciation for what really is the sweet science.

This is the best post I’ve read on this forum in years. Thank you

[SweetPbfAli]

Boxers running around like it's a track meet and thinking they won, is nothing new to boxing. It's how Mayweather, Lara, amongst others recently in boxing made a living.

What's funny it's there's boxing fans out there who actually buy into that non-sense....

Mayweather and Lara fight nothing alike. If you’re not a fan of those guys, just say that but they should never be in the same sentence if you understand boxing.

[Dorrian_Grey]

It means catching your opponent long enough to land significant punches on him. If you only landed 55 punches on an opponent over 12 rounds, how the hell did you cut off the ring effectively??

I know its hard to cut off the ring sometimes, but you never heard that excuse for other fighters like Benavidez who just get trashed when they struggle to find Plant for 6 rounds, but when its Canelo, you are all so understanding.

That’s not what cutting the ring off means. You’re confusing it with setting up offence off of closing the gap between yourself and your opponent. Cutting off the ring is an offensive tool, but it is not the same as offence. Cutting off the ring is a footwork technique in much the same way the L-step or pendulum step is. You can set up offence off of any of these techniques, but they are not inherently offensive. If someone bounces on their toes like Bivol does, they are pendulum stepping, even if they don’t throw jabs and crosses while they bounce. If a fighter is moving forward and mirroring the lateral movement of their opponent to pressure them and force them onto the ropes, then they are cutting off the ring. You are mad at Canelo for not establishing consistent offence off of cutting off the ring, not for his inability to cut off the ring, since he was cutting off the ring for the whole fight.

[Badboy9]

This is more proof that canelo would rather beat a no name fighter for a gimmie belt to Pat his own stats. He won’t fight fighters like morel or Benavides. He’s too scared to get his a$$ beat.

[PNUT901]

You should probably spend less time on the internet then.

It does seem Canelo is confused about what he wants in an opponent now though. Scull runs too much but Benavidez is too big and aggressive. So what does he want?

He wants the easiest night possible for the most money that he can get.

[PNUT901]

So basically these Riyadh season shows are hurting boxing

It gives a really bad impression for casuals and people not really into boxing to see these big name fighters in supposedly important fights fighting in empty arenas. It makes it look like boxing is dying. I'm surprised that Turki hasn't figured that out and made attendance compulsory for enough people to fill the arenas. It's not like anyone is going to stop him from doing that.