Will the scoring of GGG/Canelo be shady? Will GGG need a KO to win?

[Redd Foxx]

So are we going to act like Canelo didn't have a sketchy ass judge scorecard against Floyd & Lara, and the scorecards against Khan and Cotto weren't a joke?

Let's not pretend like Texas is going to be neutral here (assuming Dallas wins the bid), and that's coming from a native Texan.

You're going to strain yourself reaching like that. Your whole argument is weak.
The Mayweather thing was one judge that had to take a leave afterward.
Lara was a close fight and it was also 3 fking years ago.
Khan and Cotto?? You're lost.

They also haven't even selected TX yet but here you go crying about that. You insecure types just might as well jump off the train now if you can't handle your boy being in a competitive fight.

[DinoCop]

Do you know why Canelo's head is red? Because his head is filled with tomato paste. GGG will prove it when he breaks that in two and that tomato paste spills all over the canvas.

[UNBIASED BOXING]

You're going to strain yourself reaching like that. Your whole argument is weak.
The Mayweather thing was one judge that had to take a leave afterward.
Lara was a close fight and it was also 3 fking years ago.
Khan and Cotto?? You're lost.

They also haven't even selected TX yet but here you go crying about that. You insecure types just might as well jump off the train now if you can't handle your boy being in a competitive fight.

#1 It was one judge, but the fact is it still happened in a fight he easily lost. Why are you trying to act like it is irrelevant?
#2 Here you go again, making a completely ridiculous scoring seem irrelevant despite the fact that it happened in a competitive fight.
#3 Lol, dismissing Khan and Cotto. The point in mentioning those fights was how biased the scoring was. Canelo shouldn't have been ahead against Khan, and he definitely wasn't beating Cotto 119-108.
#4 of course they haven't, all I did was make an observation of how poorly fights in Texas can be.

If you can't handle observations/opinions/whatever, maybe you should develop thicker skin or let go that people will not always agree with you instead of being so dismissive. Same thing happened in the Trout fight. The point being wasn't necessarily that a judge will be paid off, just that Canelo gets highly favorable scores in ridiculous circumstances often. Not once or twice, but really at least 5 times in the past 3-4 years doesn't sound messed up to you? We're just going to look the other way and pretend it didn't happen? Let me guess: when you don't like a fighter who cares?


I like how you try to act like your a reasonable guy/fair and unbiased . You're really not. You're clearly on a certain side of the fence.

[Redd Foxx]

#1 It was one judge, but the fact is it still happened in a fight he easily lost. Why are you trying to act like it is irrelevant?
#2 Here you go again, making a completely ridiculous scoring seem irrelevant despite the fact that it happened in a competitive fight.
#3 Lol, dismissing Khan and Cotto. The point in mentioning those fights was how biased the scoring was. Canelo shouldn't have been ahead against Khan, and he definitely wasn't beating Cotto 119-108.
#4 of course they haven't, all I did was make an observation of how poorly fights in Texas can be.

If you can't handle observations/opinions/whatever, maybe you should develop thicker skin or let go that people will not always agree with you instead of being so dismissive. Same thing happened in the Trout fight. The point being wasn't necessarily that a judge will be paid off, just that Canelo gets highly favorable scores, and it happens often. Not once or twice, but really? We're just going to look the other way and pretend it didn't happen? Why does that bug you when it's the truth?


I like how you try to act like your a reasonable guy/fair and unbiased . You're really not. You're clearly on a certain side of the fence.

Was reading until you had an emotional breakdown. You have no credibility because you're not even trying to be reasonable. You're taking every single fight and crying wolf. Try being honest and people won't be so dismissive.

[Citizen Koba]

Bad scoring happens all the time, often it benefits the local favourite or the money guy, but not always. Problem is there's absolutely no point making a fuss about it now - if some **** happens, it happens... start a petition or something - but pre-empting it with this kinda thread achieves nothing.

To be honest every fighter should be looking to take it out of the judges' hands anyway so unless we're gonna start a discussion about overhauling the scoring system I can see why some folk are talking about 'getting the excuses ready' even though I fully appreciate where the TS is coming from.

[La Kueef]

The point went right over your head...

Your point was extremely stupid, that was apparent to everyone.

[_Maxi]

Why are people scrambling to come up with preemptive excuses for Golovkin?? When was he ever robbed? The dude got VERY favorable scores when facing Jacobs in Danny's own backyard.

Very favorable scores? 7-5 and 6-6... which is what most people saw.

The question is not when was Golovkin robbed, but when was Canelo gifted rounds... 114-114 with Mayweather? lol. wake up. You're not so bad.

[Check_hooks]

I saw the odds posted somewhere and GGG was actually the favorite and Canelo was the underdog

That is saying something when Canelo is by far the more popular fighter so Vegas is anticipating more bets on him and he is still the underdog

Having said that, if the judges and promoters want to rob a fighter, it doesn't matter if GGG wins every round. They will find a way to rob him

[stuff jones]

GGG is supposed to kill Canelo according to ya'll so why worry about the cards?

You're a broken record Larry. We get it - Canelo looking good makes Floyd look good so you like Canelo

[Redd Foxx]

Very favorable scores? 7-5 and 6-6... which is what most people saw.

The question is not when was Golovkin robbed, but when was Canelo gifted rounds... 114-114 with Mayweather? lol. wake up. You're not so bad.

You're talking about a rogue judge who also had Bradley beatic Pac and has since retired (read; forced to quit). You guys that want to take an anomaly and fly a banner with it are not convincing anyone because your argument's foundation is in sand.