So what exactly won Canelo the fight???

[techliam]

They both won... in a way.

People who score fights based on activity and take account of a jab, and realise power isn't necessary, then Trout won a close fight.

If you feel power is everything, low output is fine, harder shots count more than numerous unpowerful shots, then Canelo won a close fight.

Depends how you look at fighters. NEITHER is wrong, it's ALL subjective.

It's much like Calzaghe v Hopkins, there's a pretty clear equal split between those who thought Trout won, and those for Canelo.

I personally feel you have an agenda if you argue that either fighter DEFINITIVELY won this fight. Either that, or incompetence.

But obviously due to the nature of this board, official record often means everything.

Canelo was going to win either way. If Trout had a clear dominant fight winning 8 to 4 rounds, he would have still lost on the score cards.

[The Evil 1-2]

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argument made personally against an opponent instead of against their argument.

Stop with personal attacks and stick to the topic at hand.

[The Evil 1-2]

I'll put it like this, for the third time. Don't ever mention Hopkins name, or anything Hopkins does in the ring in a post in defense of Trout.

Especially not some crap like this:



I'm not sure what you are "mysteriously" insinuating with this post when you mention Hopkins. Like "Man, Hopkins exhibit's ring generalship all the time and you can not see Trout doing it tooooo?".

Is it that?

If it is, refer to my previous replies to you.

My goodness, your dedication to straw man arguments is very admirable.

I never stated that Trout had the same virtuosity and skills as B-Hop. No one in this thread has said that. Stop with the straw man arguments.

Ring Generalship is multi-faceted and I brought up points in this thread in regards to it that you and others have conveniently ignored...

[-Kev-]

It just baffles me how any one would bring up Hopkins for anything related to Trout.

Use Paulie Malignaggi, and I would not be so offended by it.

Yes I am dedicated to stop you from further implementing Bernard Hopkins in to this topic. It is irritating. Just mentioning the name.

If there was any one in that ring who's performance, in any aspect, was comparable to something B-Hop does was actually Canelo.

[thuggery]

Uh oh, someone's upset.

Canelo won 8-4, deal with it. Trout fans bitter.

[cupocity303]

They both won... in a way.

People who score fights based on activity and take account of a jab, and realise power isn't necessary, then Trout won a close fight.

If you feel power is everything, low output is fine, harder shots count more than numerous unpowerful shots, then Canelo won a close fight.

Depends how you look at fighters. NEITHER is wrong, it's ALL subjective.

It's much like Calzaghe v Hopkins, there's a pretty clear equal split between those who thought Trout won, and those for Canelo.

I personally feel you have an agenda if you argue that either fighter DEFINITIVELY won this fight. Either that, or incompetence.

But obviously due to the nature of this board, official record often means everything.

Canelo was going to win either way. If Trout had a clear dominant fight winning 8 to 4 rounds, he would have still lost on the score cards.

And this is officially ends the thread. I agree to an extent.

[-Kev-]

They both won... in a way.

People who score fights based on activity and take account of a jab, and realise power isn't necessary, then Trout won a close fight.

If you feel power is everything, low output is fine, harder shots count more than numerous unpowerful shots, then Canelo won a close fight.

Depends how you look at fighters. NEITHER is wrong, it's ALL subjective.

It's much like Calzaghe v Hopkins, there's a pretty clear equal split between those who thought Trout won, and those for Canelo.

I personally feel you have an agenda if you argue that either fighter DEFINITIVELY won this fight. Either that, or incompetence.

But obviously due to the nature of this board, official record often means everything.

Canelo was going to win either way. If Trout had a clear dominant fight winning 8 to 4 rounds, he would have still lost on the score cards.

I probably would have been accused of being biased to Haymon fighters/not wanting Mayweather vs Canelo, if I had Trout winning and went along with the 'Trout-Canelo was a robbery' parade.

So I don't know what agenda do I have no that I have Canelo winning. Maybe that I am biased to red heads?

Is it incompetence? I had Canelo winning 117-111. I am happily incompetent then. I don't think Trout deserved more than 3 rounds.

[viperz007]

Canelo is more marketable for GBP why would they choose trout?

[The Comic DON]

I kind of feel that Trout just wasn't expecting that type of fight from Canelo. I guess you can assume Trout thought he was going to get robbed after hearing the scorecards in the 4th round, but he's a Al Haymon fighter and they almost never get robbed.

Trout was pretty much outbox but a less athletic boxer. Canelo controlled the pace for the most part. People on here claim Trout pushed him to the ropes but i just didn't see that. When Canelo wanted to stand in the center he did. And on the ropes, must of the exchanges would end with Canelo landing a nasty uppercut. In the center he easily rolled and just out right slipped Trout punches.

Trout lost pretty clearly, the only thing he could land was the jab, but he threw it without much conviction and many of them did miss. And sometimes he did throw it, Canelo would throw a harder jab over that connected a good amount of the times.

I think a lot of the fans on this site are just ticked off at the fact that Canelo is the real deal and might just be the best 154lb fighter right now. Very good defense, good offense, power in both hands, ring IQ, and still young. He has lots to learn but for now I think the only two who will give him a problems at 154 is Mayweather and Lara.

[thuggery]

Austin Trout admitted he got beat up by the better man. I'm not sure why his fans can't do the same.