Ggg v Nelo2/Lara v Nelo,lets score this fight once & 4 all

[daggum]

I said BOXERS and trainers not FAT media bastards!

Round 5 was close so don't know what smoking on that one??? So was round 9

Canelo won rounds 1-3

10-12 ALL three judges had Canelo

Thats 6

Like I said YOU gave EVERY possible round you COULD to GGG. And there was NO robbery in a close fight...

i wonder if he even notices...

[kushking]

I just re-watched Canelo-Lara and here is my round-by-round scorecard:

1. Lara
2. Canelo
3. Lara
4. Canelo
5. Canelo
6. Lara
7. Canelo
8. Canelo
9. Canelo
10. Lara
11. Lara
12. Lara

Draw

I had rounds 2, 3, 5, 9, and 11 as swing rounds so I could easily see 115-113 either way (like two of the three official judges). This fight was close and competitive but it certainly wasn't a robbery. If anything I believe Lara could have won it if he had stopped to engage a little more.

Ok now this card I think you're counting landed punches as winning the rd,but Lara imo lost the majority of rds in that fight when you ask yourself which 4 of the criteria did lara win in each rd,& when you do that combined with counting clean powerful punches as worth more than 1 point & jabs off the backfoot while being in complete survival mode are like a pt which lara demonstrated to be doing because the entire fight he literally did nothing but avoid fighting at all cost,look at his punches landed in those rds,they were virtually all while avoiding engaging at all cost,then look at Canelos punches in those rds,he was landing haymakers/combos to laras tumtum 90% of the time because lara was trying to "run" at all costs & he did like 70% jab,30% evasive power shots,

Canelo was the one throughout the fight who imo: controlled the fight, was never hurt in any way,he was never not the agressor,he kept center of the ring entire time,he made the other fighter try to get a win which consisted only of stinking up the joint & anti fighting imo,you can't win a pro title fight by avoiding fighting at all costs.

I still give you props for taking the challenge & rescoring the fight even if we disagree.

I think Lara only won 2-3 rds tops because of everything I described,each round is a seperate fight & I only seen Lara impose his will kn Canelo in any regard in 2-3 rds generously(remember in pros a fighter who maintains center of the ring & demonstrates that every time both fighters engage,

Canelo did all the damage & was the fighter who was landing clean shots, without really getting anything coming back at him.

[daggum]

Ok now this card I think you're counting landed punches as winning the rd,but Lara imo lost the majority of rds in that fight when you ask yourself which 4 of the criteria did lara win in each rd,& when you do that combined with counting clean powerful punches as worth more than 1 point & jabs off the backfoot while being in complete survival mode are like a pt which lara demonstrated to be doing because the entire fight he literally did nothing but avoid fighting at all cost,look at his punches landed in those rds,they were virtually all while avoiding engaging at all cost,then look at Canelos punches in those rds,he was landing haymakers/combos to laras tumtum 90% of the time because lara was trying to "run" at all costs & he did like 70% jab,30% evasive power shots,

Canelo was the one throughout the fight who imo: controlled the fight, was never hurt in any way,he was never not the agressor,he kept center of the ring entire time,he made the other fighter try to get a win which consisted only of stinking up the joint & anti fighting imo,you can't win a pro title fight by avoiding fighting at all costs.

I still give you props for taking the challenge & rescoring the fight even if we disagree.

I think Lara only won 2-3 rds tops because of everything I described,each round is a seperate fight & I only seen Lara impose his will kn Canelo in any regard in 2-3 rds generously(remember in pros a fighter who maintains center of the ring & demonstrates that every time both fighters engage,

Canelo did all the damage & was the fighter who was landing clean shots, without really getting anything coming back at him.

great breakdown and detailed analysis. now your floyd-pac card?

[NORMNEALON]

I think even tho it was a draw that ggg def deserved to win the first fight , no questions asked . But that's just my 2 cents

[emceetns]

Ok now this card I think you're counting landed punches as winning the rd,but Lara imo lost the majority of rds in that fight when you ask yourself which 4 of the criteria did lara win in each rd,& when you do that combined with counting clean powerful punches as worth more than 1 point & jabs off the backfoot while being in complete survival mode are like a pt which lara demonstrated to be doing because the entire fight he literally did nothing but avoid fighting at all cost,look at his punches landed in those rds,they were virtually all while avoiding engaging at all cost,then look at Canelos punches in those rds,he was landing haymakers/combos to laras tumtum 90% of the time because lara was trying to "run" at all costs & he did like 70% jab,30% evasive power shots,

Canelo was the one throughout the fight who imo: controlled the fight, was never hurt in any way,he was never not the agressor,he kept center of the ring entire time,he made the other fighter try to get a win which consisted only of stinking up the joint & anti fighting imo,you can't win a pro title fight by avoiding fighting at all costs.

I still give you props for taking the challenge & rescoring the fight even if we disagree.

I think Lara only won 2-3 rds tops because of everything I described,each round is a seperate fight & I only seen Lara impose his will kn Canelo in any regard in 2-3 rds generously(remember in pros a fighter who maintains center of the ring & demonstrates that every time both fighters engage,

Canelo did all the damage & was the fighter who was landing clean shots, without really getting anything coming back at him.

I certainly appreciate the breakdown and your view is in line with the judge who scored the fight 117-111 for Canelo. Mine is more in line with the other two who scored it 115-113 each way. I understand what you're saying as far as Canelo pressing the issue, however Lara did do damage with his straight left and he made Nelo miss a great deal. Now with that being said, Canelo did consistent work to the body and the rounds I scored for Alvarez were more conclusive. In other words, Canelo won his rounds by a lot while Lara won his by a little due to limited output. Lastly, i had a handful of swing rounds where Canelo was pressing and missing while Lara was moving (a lot) and landing solid lefts here and there. Those rounds were difficult to score.

[emceetns]

1st off anyone who says Canelo lost all these fights is not automatically anything, everyone is entitled to opinion & I won't begrudge anyone for their posts even if you call me everything in the book such as Canelo nuthugger etc.I will say this though anyone who daily says Canelo got gifts yet won't post scorecards will be ridiculed by me for it in future


Everyday I read internet forums I see Canelos haters saying what imho biased af such as"Canelo got gifts in Lara & ggg fights & some even say Trout got robbed too" but these are the same haters/fanbois whos cards are filled out before the fight as Canelo losing every decision, including dominated wins where IMHO he CLEARLY dominated such as Trout/Jacobs/Lara & to lesser extent Ggg2(the judges imo are so fearful of canelos haters they automatically score every fight of his very close now such as ggg2/Lara that was a CLEAR canelo win )
Post official scorecards rd by rd if possible
So anyways it's ok to disagree or think im fos,nows your time to prove once & for all your not just gggroupies/Canelo hating fangimps scorned by proving Canelos a thieving bastard using your scorecard,post your scorecards so I can lmao while explaining why I disagree w whoever thinks Canelo lost any of those 4 fights or didn't win CLEARLY in all 4. I am of course scoring the fights with same 4 criteria as pro judges score with:effective aggression,clean & hard punches,ring generalship & defense.And please turn off commentary so you're not influenced by Dougie Fischer,Lampleys bs cards


This link goes further into pro scoring for the novice who obviously never learned how to score a fight
So anyone up for the challenge put your card where your mouth is.https://coolmaterial.com/feature/how...-boxing-match/

Anyone who I consider a gggroupie/nelohater gets an automatic green k from me for having the balls to stand by your convictions in the face of my opposition. So anyone brave enough to step into the danger zone?





Extra credit Trout cards


Extra extra credit score ggg vs deryevchenko

Ok I just rewatched Canelo-GGG 1 and here is my scorecard (I also included swing rounds):

1. Canelo (swing)
2. Canelo
3. Canelo
4. Golovkin
5. Golovkin
6. Golovkin (swing)
7. Canelo (swing)
8. Golovkin
9. Golovkin
10. Golovkin
11. Golovkin (swing)
12. Canelo

Golovkin wins 115-113

This fight was extremely close and the draw verdict was certainly reasonable. Canelo landed the more eye-catching shots but Golovkin had a more consistent workrate. This was certainly not a robbery and you could make a case for either guy winning. One thing that I noticed was Golovkin's response to getting hit with big shots. By marching forward regardless it gives the impression that he is in control, even when he might be getting outboxed. Great fight that was tough to score.

[bojangles1987]

**** like this completely misses the point of what people mean when we saw Canelo gets gifts in all his fights. It's not that we think he lost them all. It's that in every single one of these fights, he has a clear judge bias. In almost all of them, he has at least one obviously corrupt judge who scores it wildly separated from reality.

For example, saying he got a gift against Trout isn't because Trout clearly won. Canelo got a gift there because, through 8 rounds of what was a very even fight, the open scoring had him up 8-0 and 6-2 on two cards, meaning that despite the fight being even Trout had no chance to win on the cards.

The awful scorecards in the Lara fight and first Golovkin fight speak for themselves.

He got a draw scorecard against Mayweather in a fight he didn't clearly win a single round in.

Kovalev couldn't have won on the scorecards even if he won the last two rounds.

Matter of fact, between the Mayweather fight and the first Golovkin fight, Alvarez has had two fights where a judge's scorecard was so bad that they were disciplined for it. How many fighters have two different fights where the judging in his favor was so obviously corrupt that the judges were punished for it?

That's what we mean when we say Alvarez gets gifts. He can't lose clean on the scorecards, even when he gets dominated for all 12 rounds against the best, most popular boxer of the past 20 years.

[kushking]

Ok I just rewatched Canelo-GGG 1 and here is my scorecard (I also included swing rounds):

1. Canelo (swing)
2. Canelo
3. Canelo
4. Golovkin
5. Golovkin
6. Golovkin (swing)
7. Canelo (swing)
8. Golovkin
9. Golovkin
10. Golovkin
11. Golovkin (swing)
12. Canelo

Golovkin wins 115-113

This fight was extremely close and the draw verdict was certainly reasonable. Canelo landed the more eye-catching shots but Golovkin had a more consistent workrate.

This was certainly not a robbery and you could make a case for either guy winning. One thing that I noticed was Golovkin's response to getting hit with big shots. By marching forward regardless it gives the impression that he is in control, even when he might be getting outboxed. Great fight that was tough to score.

Great scorecard,I am very happy to hear your opinion that matches with most nuetrals because it shows what I've been saying is not a unique perspective but rather the normal unbiased obvious in that a draw was a legit result in every imaginable way as much as a draw ever can be(iow when has a legit draw been considered a actual "draw" by the majority? Exactly,Never because thats why its a legit draw,a rd can have swung it depending on how you judge fights(style of judging)& usually fans/judges pick a winner .

It shows that you are trying to be objective not just saying you are as many often do about polarising fights(not saying your pov is the only legit one, but imho its the most reasonable & honest attempt at being objective imo,as ive heard)

As far as actual cards,mine is:

Canelo 1-3,7,9-12 , But as you said I can see almost any combination of a 7-5,or 6-6 card being fair. Imho it was the definition of a draw even though I thought Canelo edged it by accuracy & punch combinations while using his entire arsenal,if ggg won he won in the most 1 dimensional fashion as he ever has,with no punch variety he is known for nor body work,but rather just through sheer volume esp. of jabs,I do think Canelo was worried about gs power prior to 1st fight & came in more muscled because of it & therefore with worse stamina which allowed g to edge rds on many ppls cards through sheer activity/volume even though Canelos work was more clean & accurate & eye catching imo,so I think Canelo made that fight harder than it had to be & I think he is capable of combining his style from both fights & winning by landslide in the trilogy if there is 1.

[emceetns]

Great scorecard,I am very happy to hear your opinion that matches with most nuetrals because it shows what I've been saying is not a unique perspective but rather the normal unbiased obvious in that a draw was a legit result in every imaginable way as much as a draw ever can be(iow when has a legit draw been considered a actual "draw" by the majority? Exactly,Never because thats why its a legit draw,a rd can have swung it depending on how you judge fights(style of judging)& usually fans/judges pick a winner .

It shows that you are trying to be objective not just saying you are as many often do about polarising fights(not saying your pov is the only legit one, but imho its the most reasonable & honest attempt at being objective imo,as ive heard)

As far as actual cards,mine is:

Canelo 1-3,7,9-12 , But as you said I can see almost any combination of a 7-5,or 6-6 card being fair. Imho it was the definition of a draw even though I thought Canelo edged it by accuracy & punch combinations while using his entire arsenal,if ggg won he won in the most 1 dimensional fashion as he ever has,with no punch variety he is known for nor body work,but rather just through sheer volume esp. of jabs,I do think Canelo was worried about gs power prior to 1st fight & came in more muscled because of it & therefore with worse stamina which allowed g to edge rds on many ppls cards through sheer activity/volume even though Canelos work was more clean & accurate & eye catching imo,so I think Canelo made that fight harder than it had to be & I think he is capable of combining his style from both fights & winning by landslide in the trilogy if there is 1.

I appreciate that and yes I do my best to be objective. This has been a fun exercise and I will post my scorecard for Canelo-GGG 2 when i get a chance to watch it.

[UNBANNED]

Rd by rd scores if possible please (its ok if you don't score every fight rd by rd but at least do 1 or 2 esp. if you say Canelo lost unofficially

Fight 1

R1 toss up
R2-4 canelo
R5-9 GGg
R10 toss up
R11 and 12 canelo
**R4 and 6 could be tossups as well

Lara and Trout fights were okay

Ggg 2 was basically same but i don't remember rounds