GGG vs Canelo

First topic message reminder :

Now that the sideshow is out of the way, we have a serious fight just around the corner.

I have been watching both guys in their workouts and they are looking insane!

I said I find it hard to pick a winner. I still do, but I am leaning to GGG. Canelo is looking like a beast, but he might be too fired up. GGG just looks much more at ease, at least when he is being interviewed. No matter what I have said about Gennady, he is a very hard fighter to beat and he is obviously very focused for the biggest fight of his career.

Both guys are brilliant boxers and both guys have serious power. I just think GGG's experience and aura at 160 will give him a slight edge. Canelo is very tough, but I expect GGG to come from behind on the scorecards and stop a tiring Canelo very late.

Can't wait for this now and no doubt by the time this fight comes round, I could be leaning to Canelo. It's a great fight!

Yeah I was just thinking that after 10, you'd have Canelo 8-2 up. Throw GGG a bone and give him the last two, you get to 116-112 and that looks a little less obviously messed up. Anyway, I imagine this sets up a Cinco de Mayo rematch. Canelo will probably only get better and GGG will be six months older.

All 3 judges scored the final 3 rounds to Alvarez...again one has to question the motives behind it; it made a huge difference in the case of the 114-114 card and I don't think you would find many who gave all 3 to Canelo either ringside or watching at home...the whole thing smacks of corruption..

Teddy Atlas and Stephen A Smith saying it how it is over on sports center, the former is properly laying into the sport and centering on the fact certain names run the sport (although he hasn't grown a set and actually said who he means)..

Max Kellerman was sucking Canelo's balls again, typical of the bloke....gave no credit to GGG in post fight interview and didn't even mention the horrendous scorecard. The fact he didn't points to him either being far to embarassed to mention it...or him being told not to mention by the powers that be..either way it's just as terrible a reflection on the sport as the scorecard itself.

Between Ward vs Kovalev (especially the 1st one), the piss poor drug testing & subsequent penalties regarding failed drugs, the pathetic definition of what constitues as PPV and now this I'm washing my hands of boxing...just not worth my time, effort or money any longer.

King - I hope GGG sticks two fingers up and goes and fights Saunders and then perhaps takes a fight at Super Middle before retiring. Don't even bother giving Canelo a rematch.

You know where the loyalty of the governing bodies and promoters lie when the man holding no titles in the division is announced as the 'lineal middleweight champion of the world' before the bout begins!

On that showing, Im not sure de la Hoya would be thrilled about an immediate rematch. Alvarez basically lost that fight and would probably lose a rematch without more help from the judges.

I wouldnt be surprised if they look to wait Golovkin out a little longer. Go off and fight another middleweight (Saunders maybe) and let Golovkin age some more and let the rematch "marinate" as de la Hoya likes to say.

In a years time they might be able to turn the tables on Golovkin, who I do think looks like hes fading now and no longer able to pull the trigger on his punching as effectively as before.

to be fair I gave Canelo the 10th and 12th. Thought the 11th was clearly GGG though.

I have no arguments if people wanted to give him 10th or 12th...most certainly not the 11th...the fact however that everyone would debate all 3 and that just here alone you would struggle to find anyone give Canelo all 3 tells you that it's either a minor miracle to have 3 judges see it that way or corruption was at play..

Just caught some extracts from post fight conference...De La Hoya & the gentleman who oversees the decision for who judges on the night have both called Byrd an usually competent judge....WTF? They do realise she has been in the news almost a dozen times for controversial decisions...

Slept through the alarm, did I miss anything?

milkyboy wrote:Slept through the alarm, did I miss anything?

Just boxing shooting itself in the foot yet again

I gave Canelo.....1..2..10..12...

Thought 3..6 .and at least one other round.was GGG by a slight margin.

I had it 8-4.

Problem with fights like this though is Golovkin won his rounds more clearly and dominated the fight but you still only get 10/9 a round.

I've seen much worse guys.....Did GGG deserve to win...Sure.

But you can get Canelo to a draw...Which is more than say a Whittaker v Chavez...

Good fight.

I lost a fair amount but at the last minute I did put a little on a draw. Boxing annoys the F out of me some times.

Disgraceful decision.

GGG dominated more rounds and more importantly won more.

Also I don't think Golovkin is past it. Maybe slightly because of age.

He has just stepped up his competition the last two fights and can't steam roll the best guys in the world.

Gennady is the best middle in the world, but not by a huge distance.

Canelo put up a much better fight against GGG than he did against a 36 year old Floyd.

I thought if GGG caught Canelo after 6 it was going to be over but I also thought he'd win due to pressure, workrate, activity and the fact that Canelo wouldn't be able to deter him or fight for enough whole rounds for the whole fight. I didn't think GGG would need to stop Canelo to get the win. I was wrong. The result annoys me.

I had it 8 rounds to 4, GGG. I can see a case for a draw of you are Mexican. Ten rounds for Canelo??
The bookies make a fortune on a draw and Boxing shoots itself in the foot again. There is no doubt this fight would of had causal and carryover fans from MMA after the Mayweather fight.
The fight itself was a great fight, But it's impossible to talk about anything but the judging. Causal and carryover fans have just went "see ya".

Like I said you can dominate a round or edge a round and it is 10-9.

At least 2 close rounds in 8-4...The guy that scored for GGG had it 115-113 and Moretti is one of the more respected...

Hard for GGG fans to swallow....Just as it easy for those that dislike Ward to remember it was a big right hand that had Kovo out on his feet half dead....

8-4 GGG for me but disgrace is overused and unwarranted.

Boxing hurts when your favorite doesn't win (Holmes v Spinks 2 comes to mind) but you will get over it.

I think GGG should be disappointed....But..

My card....Canelo 1...2...10....12

The Guardian's card...Canelo 1....2....3....9...

Kevin mitchell's card...Canelo...1...2...3...9 (10-10)

I thought the 6th was close too..

Have a good day guys and chin up....Let the emotion die down..

I just do not understand how Adalaide Byrd is even allowed to judge given the history of dubious scoring...

Just want to hold my hand up and say I got this wrong

Canelo was tremendous and boxed very well

But he didn't win that fight He landed some amazing shots but he just didn't do enough

He took large breaks and ggg just bullied him

I had it 8 4

Gave canelo 1 2 10 12

12 might have been debatable

Great fight but I just can't deal with this bs anymore

How the hell do you score than 10 2 to canelo

That's a prefilled scorecard there is just no way

I think in some ways a close Majority decision or split decision loss would have helped the Alvarez brand more than this. I mean, I've rarely seen a more universal viewpoint on the result of a not completely one sided fight, and then of course the lasting image of the night is him being booed while the the Mexican national anthem played out on Mexican Independence Day. Not good.

I scored if 116-113 to Golovkin. Gave him the fourth through to the eighth, the tenth and the eleventh. Gave Alvarez the first two, the ninth and the twelfth, with the third round even.

A couple of rounds could be quibbled over either way, but I have no doubt that no matter how many times I watched it I'd be coming to the same conclusion; Golovkin, while not totally running away with it, won a close-ish but still clear enough fight. I've seen some people (not on here, but elsewhere) trying to equivocate for the verdict with the usual old straw man arguments of 'Well, there have been worse decisions', or 'Golovkin should have made sure he won by more, he only has himself to blame' etc. Drives me mad. That other fighters might have been ripped off worse, or that Golovkin could have won by six or seven points instead of three or four (which seems to be the going rate) are both totally irrelevant. The verdict leaves a stench and Alvarez has been a very lucky boy.

I thought Golovkin was a little slow out of the blocks, and took a lot of leather in the closing stages as he tried to get a stoppage (which never really looked likely, to be honest), but in the middle stages he moved Canelo around the ring whenever and wherever he wanted. Alvarez started and finished the fight well enough, but in the middle stages was running like a rabbit, reverting back to his habit of fighting in spurts, eating the jab etc. Golovkin had complete control for that stretch.

As for Adelaide Byrd's 118-110 card for Canelo....I don't know, I could throw around the usual words like disgrace, fixed, incompetent etc., but it just seems a pointless waste of time to do so. It says much about the dire straits boxing is in that this card, after the initial big talk, will just be met with a shrug of the shoulders. Nothing will come of it and Byrd will be back at ringside to judge another big fight in no time at all. I couldn't care less about defaming her character and suchlike - she clearly either decided beforehand that she was going to score the fight to Alvarez in the event of the fight going the full twelve, or she was instructed by Canelo's handlers to score the fight in his favour. Everyone knows this.

As others have said, the whole thing just make you want to say 'F**k off boxing' for good. No wonder the sport is on its arse.

The problem is that it has caused such an issue for what was otherwise a fantastic night of and for boxing

I actually feel sorry for Canelo somewhat, like he is protected by judges and has had a fairly decent run of things but seeing him booed by his own people was sad!! I realise most people, including myself, that GGG won but the 118-110 score is a joke and it makes canelo look bad

He has always fought the best, sometimes fighters that people said he would never face and when he did face them (GGG, Lara, Trout) everyone said he would be schooled or exposed etc but while it's always close he's never been dominated

I'm not sure how things change in the rematch though (if it happens) unless GGG ages horribly over 6 months to a year or whenver it happens

Canelo can't punch any harder, box any better and while it's easy saying he slowed down too much in the middle rounds under that type of pressure him slowing down is no shock and he actually finished the better imo winning 2 of the last 3 rounds

GGG probably has lost a bit of the fear factor, think hes past his prime still and will only regress, I don't think he can throw anymore or apply more pressure and he isn;t going to one shot Canelo whos chin is as impressive as GGG's

Love to see a rematch but don't see the fight going any other way unless as I said GGG regresses a lot

I think overall, as far as poor decisions go, GGG hasnt gotten it too badly. He still has his '0', still has his belts, and most people see through the facade (ringside scoring was 16 journos in favour of GGG and three in favour of the draw, with about 16000 fans also thinking that Canelo probably didnt win).

Haven't seen the fight yet, hopefully will see it later this week. Not surprised that there is controversy with the decision, scoring fights is way too subjective.

Just from reading online comments the decision was either close or a daylight robbery. A couple of comments that I read even seem to think that Canelo won (like I said, just a couple).

My main beef with all this is that it will happen again and again and nothing will change. Every time someone suggest a new idea for boxing, people spend all their time coming up with reasons why it will not work so in the end, we stick with the same old sheet.

If GGG can afford it, he should retire. If he fights Canelo a second time and this time loses a fair decision, there will be some saying how he never proved himself the better man and that Canelo is some sort of great fighter while ignoring the fact that many think he got his donkey handed to him last night.

GGG is a very good boxer. Not great!

Still feel bad for him, being robbed of a victory. It's injustice.

I think the best positive for Golovkin is that the controversy will generate interest in a rematch and he should get another big lucrative fight. If the judges had scored the fight fairly I think ot would have been a Golovkin win from aything from 2 - 4 rounds and a UD would probably have maade a rematch less lucrative.

The Byrd card will atract all the attention but even the other two scorecrds were selling Golovkin short. A draw and a one round win.

Golovkin would be mad not to take the rematch for the money involved but I am not sure Golden Boy will want it straight away. I doubt Alvarez would win it without dodgy judging and given the controversy this time Im not sure Golden Boy could rely on more favours from them. there might even be a backlash in the opposite direction from judges.

He should demand a bigger piece of the pie.

If Mayweather hadn't of fought McGregor last month, I think GGG would of got the nod.

They wouldn't of got maximum sales (though I reckon it still sold well) and they will expect bigger business in May.

Canelo is the big name fighter, but the neutral fan will feel that GGG was robbed and pay to hopefully see him win the return.

The fight in May will sell BIG!

I have a lot of bones of contention with this fight but right now, the thing that annoys me is the dishonesty from those who picked Canelo by KO. They're now simply glossing over their prediction by saying "Why could'nt this supposed monster KO Canelo?", etc,etc.. Classic projection.

They know fine well that it reflects far worse on Alvarez - known for knocking out opponents with counter punches - when he could'nt KO a guy who was coming forward the entire fight.

Just how did they think Canelo was going to KO Golovkin?

You've just done the exact opposite there Marlon so a bit of double standards.

Marlon are you Herman?

88Chris05 wrote:I scored if 116-113 to Golovkin. Gave him the fourth through to the eighth, the tenth and the eleventh. Gave Alvarez the first two, the ninth and the twelfth, with the third round even.

A couple of rounds could be quibbled over either way, but I have no doubt that no matter how many times I watched it I'd be coming to the same conclusion; Golovkin, while not totally running away with it, won a close-ish but still clear enough fight. I've seen some people (not on here, but elsewhere) trying to equivocate for the verdict with the usual old straw man arguments of 'Well, there have been worse decisions', or 'Golovkin should have made sure he won by more, he only has himself to blame' etc. Drives me mad. That other fighters might have been ripped off worse, or that Golovkin could have won by six or seven points instead of three or four (which seems to be the going rate) are both totally irrelevant. The verdict leaves a stench and Alvarez has been a very lucky boy.

I thought Golovkin was a little slow out of the blocks, and took a lot of leather in the closing stages as he tried to get a stoppage (which never really looked likely, to be honest), but in the middle stages he moved Canelo around the ring whenever and wherever he wanted. Alvarez started and finished the fight well enough, but in the middle stages was running like a rabbit, reverting back to his habit of fighting in spurts, eating the jab etc. Golovkin had complete control for that stretch.

As for Adelaide Byrd's 118-110 card for Canelo....I don't know, I could throw around the usual words like disgrace, fixed, incompetent etc., but it just seems a pointless waste of time to do so. It says much about the dire straits boxing is in that this card, after the initial big talk, will just be met with a shrug of the shoulders. Nothing will come of it and Byrd will be back at ringside to judge another big fight in no time at all. I couldn't care less about defaming her character and suchlike - she clearly either decided beforehand that she was going to score the fight to Alvarez in the event of the fight going the full twelve, or she was instructed by Canelo's handlers to score the fight in his favour. Everyone knows this.

As others have said, the whole thing just make you want to say 'F**k off boxing' for good. No wonder the sport is on its arse.

Agreed and I don't think it's as big a deal that Golovkin, a lead puncher known for going forward, still controlled the thrust of the fight but failed to get the KO, than it is Canelo, a counter puncher known for KO'ing guys off of counters failed to KO a guy who was right in front of him all night. I truly believe the people using that argument are being disingenuous. What's worse is the majority of them said Canelo would wear GGG down and stop him!!!?

And he had the lion's share of the opportunities to do so seeing as he was in defensive mode for so much of the fight. Surely, the real question those people should be asking is "How come Canelo did'nt KO GGG?", not the other way round.

LionsV2 wrote:You've just done the exact opposite there Marlon so a bit of double standards.

How so?

DuransHorse wrote:I thought if GGG caught Canelo after 6 it was going to be over but I also thought he'd win due to pressure, workrate, activity and the fact that Canelo wouldn't be able to deter him or fight for enough whole rounds for the whole fight. I didn't think GGG would need to stop Canelo to get the win. I was wrong. The result annoys me.

You were wrong but right if that makes sense.

119-109 vs Cotto
117-111 vs Lara
118-110 vs GGG
114-114 vs Floyd
118-109 vs Trout
and he was of course, apparently in the midst of a 4-1 masterclass against Khan. Bonkers how at least one judge in every Canelo fight seems to be watching a greatest hits compilation.

Sorry Marlon you're talking nonsense, GGG was the puncher in there and the one expected to win by stoppage not Canelo.

I think Golovkin might have got a late stoppage a couple of years ago but I dont think hes at his best now regarding his punching, timing and combinations. Still outstanding at exerting pressure and he has a great chin which makes trying to keep him for ny sutained length of time really difficult. Alvarez started to look quite ragged in the mid rounds and I thought if Golovkin stepped up another gear and opened up when he had him on the ropes he might force a stoppage but I dont think he really went looking for it. Alvarez hit him with some good counters which may have kept Golovkin from opening up.

Can't use age as an excuse. He stepped up in class and hasn't looked as dominating (though very good still).

I called it years ago. He's very good. Far from great.

I can't believe many thought he could beat Ward.

LionsV2 wrote:Sorry Marlon you're talking nonsense, GGG was the puncher in there and the one expected to win by stoppage not Canelo.

You're missing the point. Plenty of big punchers fail to get the KO when their opponent employs negative tactics. Just like Tyson was the puncher vs Green, Smith and Tucker yet failed to get the KO. Did that reflect so badly on him that he did'nt deserve to get the nod in those fights? No it did'nt. Golovkin deserved to win that fight and saying that he could'nt KO Alvarez when the guy was in retreat for at least half the fight simply reflects a disingenuous argument.

Like I said, Canelo is a counter puncher, known for stopping guys who come at him. So, question for you, seeing as GGG came forward on Canelo more than anyone else he has faced, just why did Canelo not stop him? Also, who did you have winning the fight? If it was GGG then you admit he proved he is more than just a puncher.

AdamT wrote:Canelo put up a much better fight against GGG than he did against a 36 year old Floyd.

Well that's it then, forget the rematch, let's have Mayweather vs GGG. The real 50th fight.

If Floyd was 35, he would school GGG at 154.

Yours is the only disingenuous argument here Marlon, an entirely irrelevant comment to make.

LionsV2 wrote:Yours is the only disingenuous argument here Marlon, an entirely irrelevant comment to make.

You've failed to answer the questions I've asked you.

AdamT wrote:If Floyd was 35, he would school GGG at 154.

You just said age is no excuse when a previous member brought up GGG's wear and tear. Should be no different for Floyd then.

It isn't if you're active. Floyd is 40 and 150 pounds.

GGG should step up and try Ward or DeGale. He would lose.

Either way I don't think either fighters should be criticised for not securing a KO

Think both have them shown big power and both of them landed cleanly on each other, they just have really good chins

I do think GGG is a little past his best but I do agree that he has struggled to land with that power when he has stepped up!! But just because he doesn't win by KO doesn't mean he isn't a puncher, I mean no fighter has a 100% KO record...... is Hagler not a puncher because he didn't stop Duran who had been iced by Hearns

Nothing suggests that Canelo is vulnerable you have to go way back to his teen years to see him wobbled by Jose Cotto

I think him beating Ward might have been a bit unlikely but this was when GGG looked invulnerable and Ward was inactive, and no one said it would be a cakewalk

Still think he beats Degale who rests on the ropes far too much to beat GGG

AdamT wrote:It isn't if you're active. Floyd is 40 and 150 pounds.

GGG should step up and try Ward or DeGale. He would lose.

So let me get this straight. When I said that Floyd should fight Golovkin, you said I was "a hater who just wants to see him lose". Yet, you've just admitted you'd like to see GGG fight 2 guys you think he'd lose to!!!?

Pray, do tell me how that is not being a "hater"? And that's based on your own criteria for establishing what a "hater" is, remember?

Your questions are irrelevant and loaded one way.

Their chins are the reason why neither got the stoppage, it was just a pointless attempt at point scoring on your part.

I did it to counter your nonsense.

40 year old welter, that started at 130, should come back and fight a guy at 160? If Floyd wins, should he move up to face Degale?

Baby faced assassin wrote:Either way I don't think either fighters should be criticised for not securing a KO

Think both have them shown big power and both of them landed cleanly on each other, they just have really good chins

I do think GGG is a little past his best but I do agree that he has struggled to land with that power when he has stepped up!! But just because he doesn't win by KO doesn't mean he isn't a puncher, I mean no fighter has a 100% KO record...... is Hagler not a puncher because he didn't stop Duran who had been iced by Hearns

Nothing suggests that Canelo is vulnerable you have to go way back to his teen years to see him wobbled by Jose Cotto

I think him beating Ward might have been a bit unlikely but this was when GGG looked invulnerable and Ward was inactive, and no one said it would be a cakewalk

Still think he beats Degale who rests on the ropes far too much to beat GGG

That's my point. Factor in that Canelo spent a lot of the middle rounds in retreat, of course that's harder for the guy going forward than it is the other way round. Also, as you say, how is GGG not KO'ing him any different to Hagler failing to KO Duran or Leonard or Tyson for failing to KO Smith or Green, etc.?

Where I disagree with you a little is that I still think it reflects slightly worse on Canelo, in the sense that he is renowned for stopping guys who come forward and GGG arguably gave him more chances than previous opponents that he's actually stopped. I just think it's hypocritical of those who backed Canelo to win by KO to then gloss over that and taunt GGG with it.

LionsV2 wrote:Your questions are irrelevant and loaded one way.

Their chins are the reason why neither got the stoppage, it was just a pointless attempt at point scoring on your part.

Let's agree to disagree. I'll ask you again - Who did you pick to win and why?

I picked Golovkin because of his work rate.

Personally I'd pick GGG to beat Mayweather in their primes at 154.....No disgrace for Floyd who started at 130.....I'd pick McCallum to beat Benitez at 154 in their primes..No disgrace for Wilfred either.

However as Catchy says I think GGG is showing more vulnerability..

Certainly if he stays at 160...I'd love to see him fight Eubank jr after the Alvarez rematch....Could be a classic....Fighters get old very quickly after 35.