Did your opinion change after watching the replay?

[koolkc107]

You don't, and if people want to use activity vs Canelo only fighting in spurts and call it even? I'm completely fine with that.

Activity-golovkin
CLEAN EFFECTIVE punching-Canelo
Defense-Canelo
Aggressor-more golovkin, but not effective
Ring generalship? I don't think either was able to establish dominance in that area- Draw

I gave Golovkin Ring Generalship since he was the one who dictated the pace of the fight and controlled things often with his jab, even if it was missing at a record rate.

No one got Effective Aggression since G wasn't effective and canelo wasn't aggressive.

But Defense and Clean Punching went to Canelo...by a lot.

Again, I like to bring up the PWill/ Lara fight.

Paul got the decision but we all know Lara deserved it.

And, what probably got Williams the nod is his activity, but it was not effective.

[Gate keeper]

You mean a poll on a English language forum that mostly saw the American/English versions of the fight doesn't represent the opinion of the whole world?

Not sure which poll you're referring to but in general no, not for the whole world. But even still you'd have to determine if there's a general trend of a similar opinion among demographic groups and how strong that trend is. For example political views trend strongly with demographic groups making them easier to sample for political questions. Asking one's favorite color doesn't trend at all. How an opinion of a boxing fight trends among different nationalities? Hard to say.

That's why I don't reference polls much. It's hard to know much science went in to a poll if it's not by a major reputable polling firm. But your goal of representing the whole world in a poll is rather high. A statement is not necessarily meaningless if it doesn't represent the whole world. A poster posted preciously the most people representing major websites, who we generally accept as unbias, had GGG winning or draw. Most major boxers also had GGG winning. What that says is that the general trend among two meaningful demographic groups is that GGG didn't lose but Canelo might have. You can take that however you'd like. I think if you're not bias, that's enough to accept that the general consensus is Canelo probably lost.

[Lomasexual]

Your buddy did, and the bum beater was also made to look ******...hardly landed a flush shot in the whole fight.

Well, most of the boxing world agrees with what I am saying, including most boxing experts.

But since we have already established that you aren't very bright, and you don't know shit about boxing, then I am comfortable in my position.

[DuckAdonis]

I have it the same as you do

[hugh grant]

Nope. I, like almost everyone else on the planet, scored it correctly for GGG.

I'm not saying Canelo did badly. He did pretty good. He didn't get exposed or humiliated or demolished.

But he clearly lost.

There argument nello won was basically he had better defender skills? Well, he needed them to survive the fight. Surviving the fight don't mean you win fight. You don't kill 2 birds with one stone.
Nello is lucky to get a draw. You know you are getting greedy when you want even more than you deserve

[Chrismart]

I had GGG both times i watched it. 8-4, maybe 7-5.

[koolkc107]

Lol most the guys saying "Canelo 7-5" have a post history that is highly negative of GGG. Any unbiased fan score it for Canelo?

Me I didnt score the fight round by round but it was a close fight. Was not surprised by the decision except for that one card

My problem with Golovkin was the hype he was given for beating less than elite competition.

This year, he is fighting guys who can actually beat him.

Which is why I have stopped using derogatory names for him since he finally merits respect for stepping his game up.

He has an official win and a draw in those fights.

I had him losing both.

What is no longer in dispute though is that he IS Elite level.

And, I don't let what I feel about a fighter's resume influence how I score a fight.

[Derranged]

Golovkin won either 8-4 or 7-5. A draw would also be somewhat acceptable but in my opinion, Canelo did not win more than six rounds.

Part of the problem for Canelo was his stamina. He'd start out strong then burn out in the second half of the round and I believe that it cost him a few rounds.

[SkillspayBills]

Nope. Was a close competitive fight between two high level combatants. Some rounds were really tough to score because Nelo landed the more telling blows while GGG landed more blows. I'm fine wit anywhere from 7-5 Canelo to 8-4 GGG. Great high level fight.

[TonyGe]

Barkley has 19 LOSSES. Let that sink in! 19 LOSSES out of 63 bouts. That's as close as one can get to being a 'BUM' without being one. In other words, David Lemieux is even a better boxer with a better record than Iran Barkley. So Barkley doesn't even qualify as someone who is anywhere near the quality of a boxer like Canelo Alvarez.

Yet, Duran had to go 12 rounds against Barkley who he failed to KO and had to settle for a split decision. Whereas Golovkin demolished and stopped a far better quality opponent in David Lemieux. So I doubt Duran was 'more of a boxer' than Golovkin.

BARKLEY WAS 25-5 when he fought Duran. It's not a perfect record but you have to factor in the age and size difference. Duran beating Barkley was a huge upset In the opinion of knowledgeable boxing analysts. Golovkin beating Lemieux was a forgone conclusion. As far as skill levels go up size Duran to Golovkin and Duran would be the favorite. Look I'm a huge Golovkin fan but you have to admit Duran has a better all round game than Golovkin.