Why aren't GBP/Canelo getting more backlash regarding Byrd's scorecard?

[A.K]

where did you read that?

Multiple people saw them togather in vegas including teddy atlas, she didn't get suspended for no reason.. Oscar should be punished too but the sport is twisted in politics.

[Mammoth]

Multiple people saw them togather in vegas including teddy atlas, she didn't get suspended for no reason.. Oscar should be punished too but the sport is twisted in politics.

You got links?

[Larry the boss]

Multiple people saw them togather in vegas including teddy atlas, she didn't get suspended for no reason.. Oscar should be punished too but the sport is twisted in politics.

would love to see a link

[Loque-san]

The answer to your question is in your post.

This is like the 5th time that Canelo receives a completely strange scorecard on his favour.

Every Canelo fight that goes the distance and is not a complete blowout in his favor has at least one highly questionable scorecard. Boxing fans are used to it.

[Mammoth]

On second thought violence and vandalism might not be a good idea.

[RL_GMA]

The Byrd scorecard overall just signaled that there was some definite foul play. At least for me, I feel as if a Draw is giving Canelo a pat on the back for not getting knocked out. The 118-110 card was atrocious but I'd also argue 115-113 for Canelo is a borderline **** card too. I saw the fight like 98% of the public (8-4 / 7-5 GGG) in a fight that wasn't very hard to score at all and we've seen several fights just like this without having any bias towards or against either guy (which is really what this all boils down to). GGG vs Jacobs BY FAR is a greater case for a draw or even a 1 point swing for Jacobs. GGG beat Canelo in a moderately competitive fight.

[koolkc107]

I just don't know if this is corruption as much as it is either bad judging, bad eyesight, alcohol, or someone influenced by a promoter treating her with perks.

A judge that was truly paid off- and obviously trying to conceal that fact- would have a much closer scorecard.

And it would be that close scorecard that was outrageously off.

Here, you had a close fight that could be seen either way.

I had it 7-5 Canelo and frankly I still can't find more than 5 rounds to give to Golovkin after several viewings.

But, I get that others saw it close the other way and had it a draw or 7-5 GGG.

I think more than that (ie any 8-4 card or higher) and there is something going on that has nothing to do with what actually happened.

[killakali]

Cuz ultimately saying Oscar paid off a judge is a bridge too far for most people.

And I think Byrd has shown a sketchy enough history that her being corrupt doesn't fit occums razor version of what most likely happened. Although I think it is a thought in peoples mind that there is a lot of sketchiness with Canelo & one judge being highly favoring him in many of his fights which is odd if nothing else more dark is going on.

I'd love for there to be some more evidence that promoters are paying off or having some sort of quid pro quo thing with judges doe, but I haven't seen that in this case or most cases (believe there was one case awhile back that had some sh^t like that). You need that sorta evidence to go anywhere real with this sorta stuff doe.

Byrd is just a shizity judge and has a history in both boxing and ufc of being incompetent about 50% of the time

[Eff Pandas]

A judge that was truly paid off- and obviously trying to conceal that fact- would have a much closer scorecard.

Yea there is something to be said for subtly in your corruption if you are doing some corrupt sh^t lol. You would think someone doing some f#cked up sh^t wouldn't wanna make it such a obvious blatant scoring for the guy their working for.

So that's also something making the fault of this being about Byrd and not some darker level of deceit going on.

[_Maxi]

I just don't know if this is corruption as much as it is either bad judging, bad eyesight, alcohol, or someone influenced by a promoter treating her with perks.

A judge that was truly paid off- and obviously trying to conceal that fact- would have a much closer scorecard.

And it would be that close scorecard that was outrageously off.

Here, you had a close fight that could be seen either way.

I had it 7-5 Canelo and frankly I still can't find more than 5 rounds to give to Golovkin after several viewings.

But, I get that others saw it close the other way and had it a draw or 7-5 GGG.

I think more than that (ie any 8-4 card or higher) and there is something going on that has nothing to do with what actually happened.

It's because you have a huge anti-ggg bias.

Virgil Hunter, Ward's trainer had it 8-4 GGG. Can he be biased towards GGG?

I had Golovkin winning the fight. If I’m not mistaken, I had it 116-112. I thought Alvarez fought well but I thought he fought in spurts. I thought Golovkin pretty much made the fight.