Comments Thread For: Linares: The Draw Was Best Decision For Canelo vs. Golovkin

[Ray*]

People saying that Golovkin won clearly is ****** as hell

I really don't get that too. He obviously didn't win clearly because a lot of the rounds could have gone either way.

[DuckAdonis]

Linares knows whatsup

[eternalfighter]

Maybe in Mexico, man. I'm in the UK and every single account I've read or heard saw Golovkin winning and many reports describe it as (to paraphrase) a travesty. I'm not trying to be biased merely reporting what I've seen. And why would the UK media favour a Kazakh over a Mexican?

I was refering to regular fight fans and boxing figures like fighters and coaches not the outlets especially in the UK I have seen the UK outlets and they are as full of crap as in the US, "travesty" gtfo of here with that garbage.

[Citizen Koba]

I was refering to regular fight fans and boxing figures like fighters and coaches not the outlets especially in the UK I have seen the UK outlets and they are as full of crap as in the US, "travesty" gtfo of here with that garbage.

I myself think 'travesty' is taking it a bit far also, but I still ain't seeing this equality of opinion you're talking about. Best I've been able to tell the overwhelming majority of pundits, fans and fighters saw the fight for Golovkin - but I'd be more than happy to admit my error if you'd just point me to some information which indicates otherwise.

Incidentally there is something that is puzzling me - I've seen a number of people suggest there's some kind of overwhelming media bias or conspiracy in favour of Golovkin (or maybe against Canelo) but I've yet to see any convincing explanation of why this should be the case. Intuitively one would have thought Canelo would be the one to get the backing: - K2 is a bit player in the US market and Golovkin was never a huge money maker and is anyway fast approaching the end of his career. Why, in your opinion would the media be so much against Canelo, and who would be backing such a campaign?

[Shadoww702]

GGG won round 1, rounds 4-9, and round 11. 2, 3, and 10 I need to watch again. So, I already have eight rounds for GGG, and maybe a 9th, I have to rewatch. Of course, you could give round 1 to Canelo, maybe. So I do think 8-4 GGG is probably the average score. Canelo barely won a clear round all night, while GGG had six pretty clear ones in a row in the middle. Canelo would not have gotten a draw if he wasn't a cash cow.

Round 4 was close also. So was round 10 and 11. If you try even harder you could probably give GGG all 12 rounds...

[eternalfighter]

I myself think 'travesty' is taking it a bit far also, but I still ain't seeing this equality of opinion you're talking about. Best I've been able to tell the overwhelming majority of pundits, fans and fighters saw the fight for Golovkin - but I'd be more than happy to admit my error if you'd just point me to some information which indicates otherwise.

Incidentally there is something that is puzzling me - I've seen a number of people suggest there's some kind of overwhelming media bias or conspiracy in favour of Golovkin (or maybe against Canelo) but I've yet to see any convincing explanation of why this should be the case. Intuitively one would have thought Canelo would be the one to get the backing: - K2 is a bit player in the US market and Golovkin was never a huge money maker and is anyway fast approaching the end of his career. Why, in your opinion would the media be so much against Canelo, and who would be backing such a campaign?

Thats the point you are influenced by the biased media...let me give you a few examples, you had Roach's opinion for ggg on this website but no Mayweather Sr for canelo. 95% of images plastered on US websites are of ggg throwing/connecting a punch few if any showing Canelo punches. On websites like this one you saw all opinions of fighters for ggg but few for canelo or draws. Morales, Mora, Foreman, Hearns, Porter had canelo or a draw and if you dig you find more. Santa Cruz vs Frampton 1 close fight one judge had a Byrd score for Frampton no outrage or crying just justification from this webstite and others like it. Their is a bias against Mexican fighters and certain black fighters and a bias in favor of Eastern European Russian type fighters ggg included from US outlets (this website included) not hard to see. But if you see regualar fight fans on youtube there are alot of people for canelo that actually detail their opinion and are of all races and backgrounds. You just have to look at facts not biases and think for yourself.

[Citizen Koba]

Thats the point you are influenced by the biased media...let me give you a few examples, you had Roach's opinion for ggg on this website but no Mayweather Sr for canelo. 95% of images plastered on US websites are of ggg throwing/connecting a punch few if any showing Canelo punches. On websites like this one you saw all opinions of fighters for ggg but few for canelo or draws. Morales, Mora, Foreman, Hearns, Porter had canelo or a draw and if you dig you find more. Santa Cruz vs Frampton 1 close fight one judge had a Byrd score for Frampton no outrage or crying just justification from this webstite and others like it. Their is a bias against Mexican fighters and certain black fighters and a bias in favor of Eastern European Russian type fighters ggg included from US outlets (this website included) not hard to see. But if you see regualar fight fans on youtube there are alot of people for canelo that actually detail their opinion and are of all races and backgrounds. You just have to look at facts not biases and think for yourself.

I'm noticing that you've not supplied a compelling reason why there should be bias against Mexican fighters - to me this simply doesn't add up - I think the phrase 'follow the money' springs to mind.... and the money lies with the Mexican in this case. Problem I'm getting I can't understand why I should think it's the media who's biased in this case and not you. Do you have some solid proof that you are objective and unbiased in this matter or I just gotta take your word that anyone who disagrees with you is a media led sheep or a racist?

[eternalfighter]

I'm noticing that you've not supplied a compelling reason why there should be bias against Mexican fighters - to me this simply doesn't add up - I think the phrase 'follow the money' springs to mind.... and the money lies with the Mexican in this case. Problem I'm getting I can't understand why I should think it's the media who's biased in this case and not you. Do you have some solid proof that you are objective and unbiased in this matter or I just gotta take your word that anyone who disagrees with you is a media led sheep or a racist?

You can disagree but dont be a voice recorder and repeat "robbery" "travesty" because hbo or "boxingscene" says so, it was not. Ill give you other examples of biased US media. Lomachenko vs Russell if you just repeat what you read on these websites or what the showtime crew was saying Vasyl smoked Gary. But that was actually a close fight...it was Gary's high activity vs Vasyl's effectiveness and there was outrage at a judge who scored it close because it didnt go with what everyone (bias US media) wants. Russell got no credit for his high activity rate unlike ggg and Lomachenko was highly praised for his lower but more effective output not so canelo. Kovalev got credit for "blanking" Hopknis no crtisism for why the 30 yr old destroyer could not ko a 50 yr old fighter. And there are countless more including rankings. I have my theories on this bias but it transcends boxing and I would veer of topic.

[Mexican_Puppet]

I really don't get that too. He obviously didn't win clearly because a lot of the rounds could have gone either way.

The fight was too competitive.

Both fighters had a very hard night, it was too close.

The rematch is necessary

[eternalfighter]

I'm noticing that you've not supplied a compelling reason why there should be bias against Mexican fighters - to me this simply doesn't add up - I think the phrase 'follow the money' springs to mind.... and the money lies with the Mexican in this case. Problem I'm getting I can't understand why I should think it's the media who's biased in this case and not you. Do you have some solid proof that you are objective and unbiased in this matter or I just gotta take your word that anyone who disagrees with you is a media led sheep or a racist?

Here is one more thing compubox listed canelo edging ggg in power shots which is nonsense, had ggg landed anything close to what canelo landed in power shots that fight does not go 12 rounds. Again you have to ignore what you hear and just go by what you see. Canelo outlanded ggg in power shots to the head and body by more than an edge.