Comments Thread For: Canelo-Golovkin Judges Will Also Face a Test on September 15

[BIGPOPPAPUMP]

By Michael Rosenthal - Gennady Golovkin and Canelo Alvarez won't be the only ones facing intense scrutiny on September 15 in Las Vegas. The judges also will be under a microscope. The reason is obvious: The decision in the fighters' first meeting a split draw was met with derision by most of those who watched the fight. The score of Adalaide Byrd an absurd 118-110 (10-2 in rounds) for Alvarez was particularly egregious, as even Alvarez's camp acknowledged...
[Click Here To Read More]

[Beercules]

Has this been done before?

[Hatesrats]

It's not going the distance... Fable is throwing in the towel

[Madison Boxing]

They were under scrutinity the first time and still they robbed ggg. This is boxing they don't care about hiding corruption, a lot of 'fans' didn't care about the decision either cause it meant ggg didn't get a win

[Lemonhead_Jeff]

They really should have Byrd back to judge the rematch.
Everyone knows the Byrds eye view is usually the best perspective.

[Progrssive_Jedi]

There is little evidence so far that is a likely outcome. Canelo is not a hard hitter and I do not know if a smaller version can hurt GGG. A lucky punch that hits just right, maybe. But I doubt it is a throw in the towel fight from GGG>

[juandabomb]

There is little evidence so far that is a likely outcome. Canelo is not a hard hitter and I do not know if a smaller version can hurt GGG. A lucky punch that hits just right, maybe. But I doubt it is a throw in the towel fight from GGG>

first of all you should be banned for using the words "lucky punch" ..smh

[techdude69]

Byrd should be never used to judgr a boxing event again. She has zero credibility and plus its a male combat sport. Wtf! When has she ever laced up gloves. She looks like a ****en librarian!

[Clegg]

The judges in Tito-DLH were paid off. People are entitled to believe whatever, but the logic that the judges thought everyone expected them to favour DLH so they subconsciously were all biased for Tito...why did this only happen in that fight? And with all 3 judges? But in virtually every other close fight judges favour the A side or the hometown fighter? King and Arum are both corrupt enough to bribe judges, King just outbid him that time.

I can see a case for saying that after a disputed first fight, judges will score close rounds for the guy who lost/was robbed first time around, based upon Lewis-Holyfield II scores being wider than most fans had it. But that's the only case I can think of where that happened, most rematches have a decisive outcome, Pac-JMM II+III went to the A side. I'm sure I'm forgetting some though.

[Bjl12]

2 of 3 judges had it 7-5 and 6-6, but the author says their guy got "screwed".

How does that make any sense whatsoever????