Comments Thread For: Frank Warren Discusses Canelo-Golovkin Outcome, Scoring

[kushking]

Yup everyone is ignoring the fact the other 2 judges basically had it a pick em fight. 1 had it deadlocked the other had GGG by the slightest margin you could win the fight. This notion that somehow GGG dominated and clearly won is BS. Take Byrd card away for a second and the other judges saw it a close fight that could go either way. Byrd had it too wide nobody won 10 rounds on either side. But if she scores 7-5 canelo or 6-6 you get the same result a draw.

It's obvious that most the gggtards are the most vocal loudmouth group of 170k boxing fans on earth. They were getting in excuses in early & followed through exactly as predicted. Even euro ggg nutthuggers like warren & other american sportscasters were getting excuses in early.

If canelo was named fmj he would be being lauded 4 his "masterful defensive display of outboxing the bigger guy,& barely winning" but as its canelo were supposed to believe it was a robbery despite the most anyone with sense could possibly score 4 ggg was 7 rds to 5. As breadman said "Defense is part of scoring criteria" I think if most people watch it again without commentary theyd see it was easily a draw or a canelo win by 7-5.

You just have to actually use the true scoring criteria of defense,ring generalship, effective aggression, & accuracy. Just because ggg won middle rds doesn't mean he won when canelo owned 1st 3 of 4 & last 3 with a rd in middle like 7th or 8th.

If people used same scoring criteria judges use they'd see that canelo won in 3 of the 4 areas fights are judged on. He only might've barely lost in effective aggression because even though ggg was way more aggressive he was the opposite of effective missing 500 punches ffs.

[True That]

Ah, another Frank Warren love letter, you got to love them. Lol

[Sickmerch1990]

The corrupt leading the corrupt warren clearly as moody as golden boy no one could of given canelo 20 2 without being bias to canelo or in oscars pocket she was clearly making sure canelo won on her scorecard triple G is the beast

[MDPopescu]

1 had it deadlocked the other had GGG by the slightest margin you could win the fight.

... that's what I like... one judge having a fight like 112-108 and the other two having it at 114-114 and 113-115... That's what I call a judgement... One of three say "Earth is flat" and even has arguments for his/hers judgement...

[dannychains]

canelo said " he didnt win, but in the next fight, ill win again.. " LOL what an idiot

[hilltophustla4]

It's obvious that most the gggtards are the most vocal loudmouth group of 170k boxing fans on earth. They were getting in excuses in early & followed through exactly as predicted. Even euro ggg nutthuggers like warren & other american sportscasters were getting excuses in early.

If canelo was named fmj he would be being lauded 4 his "masterful defensive display of outboxing the bigger guy,& barely winning" but as its canelo were supposed to believe it was a robbery despite the most anyone with sense could possibly score 4 ggg was 7 rds to 5. As breadman said "Defense is part of scoring criteria" I think if most people watch it again without commentary theyd see it was easily a draw or a canelo win by 7-5.

You just have to actually use the true scoring criteria of defense,ring generalship, effective aggression, & accuracy. Just because ggg won middle rds doesn't mean he won when canelo owned 1st 3 of 4 & last 3 with a rd in middle like 7th or 8th.

If people used same scoring criteria judges use they'd see that canelo won in 3 of the 4 areas fights are judged on. He only might've barely lost in effective aggression because even though ggg was way more aggressive he was the opposite of effective missing 500 punches ffs.

This is what I've been thinking. Very close fight. I had it a draw. Just because 1 fighter comes forward doesn't mean it's effective. Canelo's defense was better than I've ever seen from him. GGG Double and triple jab was his best weapon that night. I felt Canelo landed the more effective shots fighting off the back foot. Both fighters were great. It was a draw if you didn't have a dog in the fight.

[VatoMulatto]

The fight was competitive but I can't see a draw. I had it 8-4 GGG

[licketysplityu]

Nonsense judging.
Vegas is an Oscar/Mayweather town and they rule the boxing.
The fix was in: GGG won atleast 7 rounds to 5, and more likely, 8-4.
He'll knock him out next time.

As for corruption, look at what happened with the Ward/Kovalov fights. Kovalov outright won the first fight;
and the referee brazenly allowed Ward to hit Kovalov low atleast 3 times in a row. Bull****. Vegas is rigged
against outsiders. Look at the first Bradley/Pac fight--Mayweather rigged the judges...

[Mr_Forte]

It's obvious that most the gggtards are the most vocal loudmouth group of 170k boxing fans on earth. They were getting in excuses in early & followed through exactly as predicted. Even euro ggg nutthuggers like warren & other american sportscasters were getting excuses in early.

If canelo was named fmj he would be being lauded 4 his "masterful defensive display of outboxing the bigger guy,& barely winning" but as its canelo were supposed to believe it was a robbery despite the most anyone with sense could possibly score 4 ggg was 7 rds to 5. As breadman said "Defense is part of scoring criteria" I think if most people watch it again without commentary theyd see it was easily a draw or a canelo win by 7-5.

You just have to actually use the true scoring criteria of defense,ring generalship, effective aggression, & accuracy. Just because ggg won middle rds doesn't mean he won when canelo owned 1st 3 of 4 & last 3 with a rd in middle like 7th or 8th.

If people used same scoring criteria judges use they'd see that canelo won in 3 of the 4 areas fights are judged on. He only might've barely lost in effective aggression because even though ggg was way more aggressive he was the opposite of effective missing 500 punches ffs.

You know Breadman scored it for GGG right?