Comments Thread For: Golovkin: I'm Ready To Trade Punches With Canelo Until The End

[aboutfkntime]

Canelo simply got outsmarted and bullied in the ring. He had to back off because of his poor stamina, Golovkin's punches and because he couldn't neutralize Golivkin's jab. He did beat Golovkin in the category of effective non agression but they don't award points for that.

no..... but they do award points for defence, and Plodkin missed a TON of punches.....

Clean punching: “Clean” punches are punches that land on the face/side of the head and the front/side of the torso

Effective aggressiveness: A boxer demonstrates this trait when he consistently and successfully moves forward in a controlled manner

Ring generalship: The judges favor the fighter who controls the pace and style of the bout

Defense: Boxers that skillfully incorporate defensive maneuvers receive credit in this area

of the 4 scoring criteria mentioned above..... Canelo won clean punching, ring generalship, and defence

I need to update my list.....

the reasons why " the overwhelming majority " think that Golovkin won that fight easy.....

1) they blindly scored for the guy going forward
2) they only watched one fighter
3) they do not score for defence

NONE of the three judges did that

[TonyGe]

no..... but they do award points for defence, and Plodkin missed a TON of punches.....




of the 4 scoring criteria mentioned above..... Canelo won clean punching, ring generalship, and defence

I need to update my list.....

the reasons why " the overwhelming majority " think that Golovkin won that fight easy.....

Over all Golovkin landed only 2 percent less punches than Canelo a fighter who was primarily concerned with defense.
Ring generalship. Golovkin controlled where the fight took place. All the ring behind Golovkin was cut off from Canelo because he could not force Golovkin backwards or put Golovkin on the ropes. Golovkin was never trapped on the ropes.
Missed punches. Canelo landed a higher percentage of power punches but landed a lower percentage of jabs.
Effective agression. Canelos best punches had little effect on Golovkin. They could not stop him from consistantly advancing or hurt Golovkin. Canelo was not effectively agressive.


https://www.boxingscene.com/sanchez-...weather--97624

[fernandtg]

because the " majority " are casual fans who would not have a clue

1) they blindly scored for the guy going forward, and have no real understanding what the word "effective" means when it comes to 'effective aggression'

put it this way..... if Golovkin's aggression was so effective then why was he unable to work the body, and why was he unable to work Canelo over on the ropes?..... actually fk that, why was Golovkin unable to hurt Canelo even once?

2) they only watched one fighter..... THEIR fighter..... which is extremely common

If Golovkin won " easily "..... like the " majority " that you are referring to..... then why did the judge who scored for Golovkin only award him that fight by 1 solitary point?

you can tell from the silly excuses that the " majority " have no idea what happened in that fight

the excuses in September are going to be hilarious

So the majority of the boxing press and fighters are also casual fans? Nice

[aboutfkntime]

So the majority of the boxing press and fighters are also casual fans? Nice

have you heard some of the questions those muppets ask professional fighters?

have you heard some of the INSANE excuses those guys accept..... without question?

have you ever seen a pressure fighter evaluate a close fight between a pressure fighter and a boxer, and award the win to the boxer?

that is exactly what I am saying..... the bloggers you are referring to do not have much credibility with me..... certainly not as much as 3 professional judges

the 3 judges got it right.....

most smart insiders agree that fight was close..... most smart fans either agree, or wonder what the judges saw, so have since reassessed the fight..... and YEP, a LOT of punters who thought Golovkin won now admit that fight was very close

but most casuals decided to argue with the 3 experts who got it right lol

[aboutfkntime]

Over all Golovkin landed only 2 percent less punches than Canelo a fighter who was primarily concerned with defense.
Ring generalship. Golovkin controlled where the fight took place. All the ring behind Golovkin was cut off from Canelo because he could not force Golovkin backwards or put Golovkin on the ropes. Golovkin was never trapped on the ropes.
Missed punches. Canelo landed a higher percentage of power punches but landed a lower percentage of jabs.
Effective agression. Canelos best punches had little effect on Golovkin. They could not stop him from consistantly advancing or hurt Golovkin. Canelo was not effectively agressive.


https://www.boxingscene.com/sanchez-...weather--97624

I like your other excuse better.....

when Golovkin said " anyone from 154-168 ".....
..... he meant, AT 160 loooool

[aboutfkntime]

in 5 of those rounds..... ALL 3 judges awarded those rounds to Canelo

in most of those 5 rounds Canelo won CLEARLY..... whereas some of Golovkin's rounds were nip and tuck that he edged

despite that..... " the majority " think that Golovkin won CLEARLY lol

people see what they want to see

fcuk casual fans..... they can actually invest some time in this sport before they DEMAND that their opinion be respected lol

[fernandtg]

have you heard some of the questions those muppets ask professional fighters?

have you heard some of the INSANE excuses those guys accept..... without question?

have you ever seen a pressure fighter evaluate a close fight between a pressure fighter and a boxer, and award the win to the boxer?

that is exactly what I am saying..... the bloggers you are referring to do not have much credibility with me..... certainly not as much as 3 professional judges

the 3 judges got it right.....

most smart insiders agree that fight was close..... most smart fans either agree, or wonder what the judges saw, so have since reassessed the fight..... and YEP, a LOT of punters who thought Golovkin won now admit that fight was very close

but most casuals decided to argue with the 3 experts who got it right lol

Yup, because professional boxing judges are universally known for how unbiased and incorruptible they tend to be.

Heck, you even went as far as including all 3 of them. In your eyes, most boxing journalists are less credible than Byrd's 118-110 card. Yup, the 3 experts got it right buddy.

[aboutfkntime]

Yup, because professional boxing judges are universally known for how unbiased and incorruptible they tend to be.

Heck, you even went as far as including all 3 of them. In your eyes, most boxing journalists are less credible than Byrd's 118-110 card. Yup, the 3 experts got it right buddy.

i would take ANY professional judge, over ANY nose-picking casual fan

in 5 of those rounds, ALL three judges awarded those rounds to Canelo

ALL of them