Did your opinion change after watching the replay?

[Mr Objecitivity]

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.

'Skills' are subjective. I think Golovkin is more 'skilled' in many departments and vice versa. That wasn't the point! The point was, which pressure fighter at age 35 or beyond beat an opponent who is of the same caliber as Canelo Alvarez, whilst being 8 years older than that particular opponent? Duran beating Barkley doesn't count because Barkley was nowhere close to the caliber of Canelo Alvarez. As I stated, his record of 5 losses is still inferior to David Lemieux who also has a higher KO percentage. So that example isn't good enough.

If anything, Golovkin should've been the underdog in the first fight against Canelo Alvarez and should be one in the second fight as well if they have a rematch. Why? Because history is against Golovkin. Very few, if any pressure fighter has ever beaten an opponent who is at Canelo Alvarez's level at age 35 whilst also being 8 years older. If Canelo fails to beat Golovkin, it affects Canelo more than Golovkin because Canelo has more of the advantages and subsequently has more reasons to win.

[IronDanHamza]

It seems quite a lot of people had Canelo winning.

If this thread is anything to go by atleast.

[Santa_]

I've watched it a couple times since Saturday trying to give Canelo 6 rounds but I couldn't. Close but clear win for Golovkin IMO.

[TOBYLEE1]

Re-enforced what I saw the first time, 7-5 triple G

[Robbie Barrett]

'Skills' are subjective. I think Golovkin is more 'skilled' in many departments and vice versa. That wasn't the point! The point was, which pressure fighter at age 35 or beyond beat an opponent who is of the same caliber as Canelo Alvarez, whilst being 8 years older than that particular opponent? Duran beating Barkley doesn't count because Barkley was nowhere close to the caliber of Canelo Alvarez. As I stated, his record of 5 losses is still inferior to David Lemieux who also has a higher KO percentage. So that example isn't good enough.

If anything, Golovkin should've been the underdog in the first fight against Canelo Alvarez and should be one in the second fight as well if they have a rematch. Why? Because history is against Golovkin. Very few, if any pressure fighter has ever beaten an opponent who is at Canelo Alvarez's level at age 35 whilst also being 8 years older. If Canelo fails to beat Golovkin, it affects Canelo more than Golovkin because Canelo has more of the advantages and subsequently has more reasons to win.

Barkley was coming off a win over Hearns. WTF has Lemieux done that's anywhere near close to that?

[Lomadeaux]

Lomasexual says most people saw Golovkin win clearly. You and him must be in the DKSAB group then.

15-20% of biased people thought Canelo won.... What are you talking about?

[TonyGe]

'Skills' are subjective. I think Golovkin is more 'skilled' in many departments and vice versa. That wasn't the point! The point was, which pressure fighter at age 35 or beyond beat an opponent who is of the same caliber as Canelo Alvarez, whilst being 8 years older than that particular opponent? Duran beating Barkley doesn't count because Barkley was nowhere close to the caliber of Canelo Alvarez. As I stated, his record of 5 losses is still inferior to David Lemieux who also has a higher KO percentage. So that example isn't good enough.

If anything, Golovkin should've been the underdog in the first fight against Canelo Alvarez and should be one in the second fight as well if they have a rematch. Why? Because history is against Golovkin. Very few, if any pressure fighter has ever beaten an opponent who is at Canelo Alvarez's level at age 35 whilst also being 8 years older. If Canelo fails to beat Golovkin, it affects Canelo more than Golovkin because Canelo has more of the advantages and subsequently has more reasons to win.

I named you one like you asked. If you don't want to accept it fine.

[Diego Rodriguez]

Close and also clear. Not many people were happy with it being a draw. Even less thought Canelo won.

Since that makes you part of the small minority, it is much more likely - statistically speaking - that you are the one trying to convince yourself.

I saw exactly like you did close but clear.

[muslimer12]

It seems quite a lot of people had Canelo winning.

If this thread is anything to go by atleast.

Since when is a boxing scene thread anything to go by lmao

[Bjl12]

8-4 canelo.

whether you respect lederman or not can somebody pls explain to me the purpose of an unofficial scorecard being shown to viewers. i mean his card is just as valuable as mines. none determine the winner.

i wish there was an option to order a fight with no commentary. just crowd noise and sound of punches. I'll pay for that.

Ya I had it 8-4 Canelo. Lederman might reward missing 70% of your punches (as long as you're coming forward), but that is not a "good thing" to me.

Also, 60-65% of ALL the clean work in the fight was done by Canelo and his defense was smooth.

Ca$h should've got the nod the first time around...honestly a shame :/