[PLEASE HELP!] WHY Is IT THAT ONLY 🇲🇽 FANS ARE OK WITH THE FIGHT BEING A DRAW???

[Redd Foxx]

you see double squares?

are you on mobile or something? apple device?

it's supposed to be a Mexican flag. I see it on my screen.

Chrome. It's just double squares. Now that it's explained though, I see what you mean. Well, he's a national hero there so I honestly haven't put any energy into wondering why they would support their guy. I'm not justifying their bias, just saying that it's one of those things...

[Ray*]

Someone get me a Mexican passport quick.

[WesternChamp]

"it was a close fight", "i had canelo winning"..

what happen to the "challenger must take the belt away from the champion"?? canelo sure didnt take the belt from ggg. canelo fought to survive not to win.

[Mr.Fantastic]

Mexican-American here, I thought Golovkin won the fight all 3 times I watched the fight.

I always knew one day that Canelo's diva attitude was going to catch up to him. Even stopped being a fan of his.

[FrankieClutch]

I don't know if I'm double squares or not but I saw Golovkin winning. That said, I'm mature enough to understand that not everyone sees a fight the same way and I can respect a draw. If you can't respect that not everyone sees things your way, then don't expect to ever understand boxing.

Should I act like you guys and be childish and hard-headed about Jacobs beating Golovkin because that's the way I saw it? Or, can I continue to respect Golovkin's W in that fight?

Am I a double square?

And I was completely fine with the draw. Way too many swing rounds in that fight to act like one guy dominated. I had it 7-5 Canelo, but with that many swing rounds I wasn't confident at all.

I plan on rewatching and rescoring, but no way was this anything but a 7-5 fight either way

[FrankieClutch]

"it was a close fight", "i had canelo winning"..

what happen to the "challenger must take the belt away from the champion"?? canelo sure didnt take the belt from ggg. canelo fought to survive not to win.

I hate that cliche. All the challenger has to do is take more rounds from the champ to win. A championship fight is scored the same way as a non-championship fight

[WesternChamp]

I hate that cliche. All the challenger has to do is take more rounds from the champ to win. A championship fight is scored the same way as a non-championship fight

but people is saying this was a close fight with lots of close rounds. so in this case, close rounds has to go to the champion, correct? nobody dominated anyone here.

[Boxfan83]

I've noticed this trend, that only 🇲🇽 boxing fans are the ones claiming it was really a "draw" and that Golovkin didn't dominate that fight like 90% of the boxing world saw.

lol, look at all the posters answers u lil turd. Not just Mexicans think it was a close F'n fight. Besides my true opinion is I thought GGG had won but it was close enough to be a damn draw. I gave Canelo 2-3 and 10-12 but I was skeptical on 1 until I rewatched it, HBO and compubox were giving GGG shots he didnt land so after rewatching I gave it to Canelo for landing 2 cleaner punches. Ive seen robberies and this was far from 1. Had Canelo won right after the fight I wouldve been skeptical but a draw was fair!!!

[Redd Foxx]

I hate that cliche. All the challenger has to do is take more rounds from the champ to win. A championship fight is scored the same way as a non-championship fight

Same. With the scoring criteria being hazy enough as is, are we supposed to factor in an advantage for the belt holder? How much advantage do we factor in? Does he win every 10/10 round? Or, does he get an extra 5 punches of credit in ea round? What are we talking about here? People say that chiche when looking back on a fight, but it just doesn't work with the 10 point must system.

Scoring is already such a hot button issue, blurring the criteria even more is not what we need.

[bigdunny1]

Not Mexican still had canelo winning 7-5. But I'm cool with a draw. It was a close fight that could of went either way.