GGG V Canelo - Sept 16th( See First post for Info on How to Watch)

wonderfullife

walshb wrote: »

It can never be "fair" due to people and subjectivity.

One possible explanation for Mrs. Byrds scorecard (other than incompetence/corruption) is that she is very easily swayed by what she hears and not what she sees. The crowd were massively pro-Canelo and were cheering wildly at shots he was clearly missing.

It's no secret that she is a) in her early 60's and b) her eyesight is not fantastic she's never pictured without her glasses on. A lot of those power shots Canelo threw clearly missed but from her vantage point with questionable eyesight and the crowd roaring, I guess that's a charitable explanation for her scorecard.

Robert got the ref gig for May-Mac and now his missus gets the judging gig for this so they obviously have some sway with the Nevada State Athletic Commission.

Burial.

Canelo KO

Lot of people had Kovalev beating Ward in the first. Although it was a close fight as well I couldn't score it better than a draw for Kovalev in the four or five times I watched the fight back. Megadodge was spot on there...people should post their RBRs with a little comment on them. Seen it done as a routine thing on specific Boxing forums. Although a lot of the dedicated card posters seem to have horrific cards from what I have seen I give them credit for posting and elaborating on each round.

wonderfullife

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

well as fair as fair can be without implementing some sort of computerised automatic scoring system

Computerised scoring is not the answer as it still relies on human input, take Compubox for example that's still a human being pressing a button when he/she sees a shot landing.

The only way to achieve anything remotely close to "true fairness" in any judging discipline whether it's boxing, mma, olympic diving, dressage, gymnastics.... is to have a ridiculous amount of experts judging: both to remove the possibility of corruption and to achieve the broadest consensus.

Instead of 3 judges ringside, you put put 300 expert judges in a sound-proofed room watching the sport on big screens with no commentary, no crowd to sway them etc.

It's completely unrealistic of course but that'd be the closest thing to achieving fairness in judging. As things stand, judges are 100% vulnerable 1) to the crowd. 2) to their fixed vantage point ringside 3) to their vision.

The 3 judges should really all be in a sound-proofed, guarded room backstage watching a big screen with no commentary, multiple angles and replays available to them. That would be an immediate fix to the issue of crowd-influence.

gilmour

Canelo Points

Just watched the fight two more times back to back. Last night i scored it 6-6, today i scored it 7-5 GGG and again a 6-6 draw.

Personally, ignoring the ridiculous 10-2 card, thats the best draw call i've seen. It was nigh on impossible to call some of those rounds. A cast iron granite chin taking clean shots and walking through them but made to miss while looking crude and eventually getting some punches in is always hard for me to score. Canelo was by far the better boxer with the better variation of punches, and a better defence. But GGG's constant pressure, workrate, and jab was there after the 3rd round till the final bell (and of course walking through rockets).

Next May is too far away for the rematch, hopefully Feb/Mar but after seeing Canelos comments today about how he will decide if its a rematch or not because its his era (which is absolutely ****ing ridiculous given that GGG has all of the belts) i wouldn't be surprised if he fights someone else on Cinco De Mayo and maybe then GGG for this time next year to drain another year off him.

blade1

GGG KO

walshb wrote: »

If anything it was those picking Canelo that got it more correct.

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

walshb

Canelo KO

blade1 wrote: »

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

There was context in what I wrote there. It was directed at one poster's view on what would happen in the fight.

Personally I felt GGG deserved the nod. I had it 5/4 GGG after 9. I didn't score the final 3 rds. Bottom line is that it was a very competitive fight, and the result wasn't a poor call IMO..

walshb

Canelo KO

Morrison J wrote: »

I said he didn't win as I thought he would. I predicted a stoppage.

He did show a clear display of superiority. He won comfortably. Saying Canelo was every bit as good is pure madness.

Sorry, that is nonsense. He was not a comfortable winner, and no way was there a clear display of superiority. You are far too biased here. Cannot get off your GGG horse.. you so so wanted GGG to win, and I reckon (or would hope) that this has affected your assessment.

Me. I was more rooting for GGG, despite my prediction. I am not one for having to get it "right." GGG deserved it, but just about.

.ak

normanoffside wrote: »

Official Scorecards here. Forget about Adelaide Byrd. Trella scoring the 7th to Canelo is actually what affected the result. Wow. How can you give Canelo the 7th?

Probably a stupid question, but why don't they add another dimension to the judges scores by removing the point system by adding a best out of three to decide a round.

So what I'm saying is if two judges score it 10-9 to fighter A but a third judge scores it 9-10 to fighter B then fighter A wins the round on majority decision.

So the final score will actually be Fighter A by X rounds.

Morrison J

Canelo Points

walshb wrote: »

Sorry, that is nonsense. He was not a comfortable winner, and no way was there a clear display of superiority. You are far too biased here. Cannot get off your GGG horse.. you so so wanted GGG to win, and I reckon (or would hope) that this has affected your assessment.

Me. I was more rooting for GGG, despite my prediction. I am not one for having to get it "right." GGG deserved it, but just about.

Effective aggression and ring generalship wise there was absolute miles between both fighters. GGG also out-threw and outlanded Canelo. He clearly won and was clearly the superior fighter.

Read the below quote. I said it wasn't going to be easy and that GGG wins it more times than not. I dunno why your making things up saying I was expecting GGG to completely dominate. I hold my hands up entirely that I underestimated Canelo's chin. It's granite.

I just thought it was a fairly straightforward pick to go with GGG. I 100% stick by that fact that it was. Unfortunately corruption hasn't helped back that up.

Morrison J wrote: »

I don't think anyone is saying it's an easy fight for either fighter. I do think it's an easy fight to call though, if that makes sense.

Can't see the logic in favouring Canelo when he has so many disadvantages going into it. GGG has the size, accuracy, stamina, power, better jab, better feet, ring IQ and more proven chin.

Canelo is younger, throws flashier, probably more eye catching punches and has better head movement. What else?

Then there's the fact that we've no idea how Canelo will react to facing a real puncher. GGG has taken punches from way bigger hitters then Canelo. He'll have no problem taking that power. Can Canelo take GGG's best shots? Recently nobody bar a 180lbs Danny Jacobs has been able to (arguably without taking GGG's best shots) so I'd doubt it.

This reminds me so much of only recently when people starting picking Broner to beat Garcia. Boxing fans try to outsmart themselves sometimes. It's simple when you break it down imo. Nearly everything points to GGG winning this fight more times than not.

Outlaw Pete

Draw

Ah I see, was looking at the wrong column. Even Byrd gave GGG that round.

walshb

Canelo KO

Morrison J wrote: »

Effective aggression and ring generalship wise there was absolute miles between both fighters. GGG also out-threw and outlanded Canelo. He clearly won and was clearly the superior fighter.

Kovalev threw more and landed more, including power punches vs. Ward in fight 1 but you weren't having a bar of it.

If you compu box compare that fight with last night's fight you will see quite a similarity.

No clearly won at all. It is either pure bias to suggest it or pure incompetency, or both?

colly10

Away at the moment so just got to see it with Japanese commentry, here's my round by round -

10-9 Canelo
10-9 Canelo - hard to call
9-10 - GGG
9-10 - GGG
9-10 - GGG
10-9 - Canelo - hard to call
9-10 - GGG
9-10 - GGG
9-10 - GGG
9-10 - GGG - hard to call
9-10 - GGG - hard to call
10-9 - Canelo

I don't think Canelo felt he won, especially when he was over with De La Hoya. Great fight but I think it was GGG's

Henno30

Canelo KO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gc4QTqslN4

Henno30

Canelo KO

normanoffside wrote: »

?

Five unanimous rounds if I'm not mistaken? That's extremely low. Six is usually the worst you'd see. Three of those five being the last three rounds as well. Stinks.

Morrison J

Canelo Points

walshb wrote: »

Morrison J wrote: »

Effective aggression and ring generalship wise there was absolute miles between both fighters. GGG also out-threw and outlanded Canelo. He clearly won and was clearly the superior fighter.

Kovalev threw more and landed more, including power punches vs. Ward in fight 1 but you weren't having a bar of it.

If you compu box compare that fight with last night's fight you will see quite a similarity.

No clearly won at all. It is either pure bias to suggest it or pure incompetency, or both?

Those fights played out so differently. Kovalev gassed and did little to no quality work in the second half of the fight. GGG pretty much controlled the ring for 12 rounds last night. Ward - Kovalev was far closer and had a way bigger mix of opinions coming with it. Loads of people thought Ward won, I don't think I've seen anyone score last night's fight to Canelo.

Maybe you're just biased to Canelo after picking him? Some of the stuff you've been saying, making a case for the dodgy scorecards that go in his favour are outrageous.

Outlaw Pete

Draw

https://twitter.com/agaz996/status/909271501450485761

Mantis Toboggan

Canelo KO

Byrd is to be stood down, about time.

walshb

Canelo KO

Morrison J wrote: »

Those fights played out so differently. Kovalev gassed and did little to no quality work in the second half of the fight. GGG pretty much controlled the ring for 12 rounds last night. Ward - Kovalev was far closer and had a way bigger mix of opinions coming with it. Loads of people thought Ward won, I don't think I've seen anyone score last night's fight to Canelo.

Maybe you're just biased to Canelo after picking him? Some of the stuff you've been saying, making a case for the dodgy scorecards that go in his favour are outrageous.

The only bias is with you. GGG for me did enough to win.

The bias is your OTT claims of clear superiority, corruption etc.

It was quite a close fight, and the man you have been banking on so much didn't deliver in the fashion you told us he would. That seems to be to your frustration, hence your nonsense claims of corruption and clear superiority etc.

The "dodgy" card discussion I am debating is completely separate. Different discussion. I am trying to see how that card could be justified or defended. That's all. I neither agree or disagree with it, and I gave reasons. Main one being a lot of rds difficult to score, which can lead to differing card scores.

Morrison J

Canelo Points

walshb wrote: »

Morrison J wrote: »

Those fights played out so differently. Kovalev gassed and did little to no quality work in the second half of the fight. GGG pretty much controlled the ring for 12 rounds last night. Ward - Kovalev was far closer and had a way bigger mix of opinions coming with it. Loads of people thought Ward won, I don't think I've seen anyone score last night's fight to Canelo.

Maybe you're just biased to Canelo after picking him? Some of the stuff you've been saying, making a case for the dodgy scorecards that go in his favour are outrageous.

The only bias is with you. GGG for me did enough to win.

The bias is your OTT claims of clear superiority, corruption etc.

It was quite a close fight, and the man you have been banking on so much didn't deliver in the fashion you told us he would. That seems to be to your frustration, hence your nonsense claims of corruption and clear superiority etc.

The "dodgy" card discussion I am debating is completely separate. Different discussion. I am trying to see how that card could be justified or defended. That's all. I neither agree or disagree with it, and I gave reasons. Main one being a lot of rds difficult to score, which can lead to differing card scores.

There is no possible way of justifying the 118-110 card to Canelo. I don't know why you'd even bother trying. Blatant corruption. Saying it's nonsense to call out the corruption is ridiculous too. Would you prefer we all just accepted all these dodgy cards and pretending they weren't there?

I gave GGG 8 rounds. Howard Lederman scored it the same as did loads of other people. I don't see anyone saying Canelo won wide apart from one bent judge.

walshb

Canelo KO

I am going to watch the fight later. More studiously. Will give my honest score.

At 4.30 in the morning and live it can be not that easy to give your real thoughts.

Relaxed, watching it more closely and alert usually allows you to score more effectively.

Live I felt GGG deserved it, but I didn't have an actual full score card.

Byrd's card? Well. If I cone across a fair few difficult to score rds then maybe her card isn't necessarily bad, and it certainly does not need to be corrupt.

You have an awful habit of bandying around corruption and robbery allegations (without a shred of proof) just because sometimes people don't see a score like you. And no shame about it either.

wally1990

walshb wrote: »

I am going to watch the fight later. More studiously. Will give my honest score.

At 4.30 in the morning and live it can be not that easy to give your real thoughts.

Relaxed, watching it more closely and alert usually allows you to score more effectively.

Live I felt GGG deserved it, but I didn't have an actual full score card.

Byrd's card? Well. If I cone across a fair few difficult to score rds then maybe her card isn't necessarily bad, and it certainly does not need to be corrupt.

You have an awful habit of bandying around corruption and robbery allegations (without a shred of proof) just because sometimes people don't see a score like you. And no shame about it either.

I want it the next morning and really thought GGG won IMO

Morrison J

Canelo Points

walshb wrote: »

I am going to watch the fight later. More studiously. Will give my honest score.

At 4.30 in the morning and live it can be not that easy to give your real thoughts.

Relaxed, watching it more closely and alert usually allows you to score more effectively.

Live I felt GGG deserved it, but I didn't have an actual full score card.

Byrd's card? Well. If I cone across a fair few difficult to score rds then maybe her card isn't necessarily bad, and it certainly does not need to be corrupt.

You have an awful habit of bandying around corruption and robbery allegations (without a shred of proof) just because sometimes people don't see a score like you. And no shame about it either.

There has been too many incidents of Canelo getting favourable cards for it to be anything but corruption. If it was human error or whatever you'd see Canelo get dodgy cards going against him too. Never happens though. He brings in something like 95% of Golden Boy's earnings. It all adds up to point at corruption.

I'll never understand why you always side with the judging in these matters. You were the same throughout the Olympics. There is so much corruption in boxing. Just accept that fact and stop throwing it under the carpet every single time.

walshb

Canelo KO

You do know what corruption means? It requires some evidence and analysis. Not just "I don't like that. I disagree with that. That is corruption."

You sound like a spoiled little child...

Of course corruption exists in life. But to bandy it around willy nilly with no substance to verify it or back it up, well...

I prefer substance and proof and all that..shoot me.

Not every boxing scorecard that is quite different than the others is automatically corrupt.

I am 3 rds complete. Canelo wins 1 and 2. Draw rd 3. All three could be argued for either man..

colly10

I understand scoring is subjective and maybe you gave every close round to Canelo, even if you give every close round to Canelo I still don't see how you could find 10 rounds for him.

I haven't even heard anyone call it a Canelo win, corruption or not, she shouldn't be allowed to judge again

yourdeadwright

Canelo KO

I watched it live and I like to mark down rounds as I go , I actually had it a  7-5 to Canelo , but it thought he squeaked 2 rounds that at the time of watching that I knew could have gone either way,
I thought GGG won his rounds easy but that Canelo squeaked in more, but i'll have to rewatch it with the aul commentary turned off,

yourdeadwright

Canelo KO

I watched it live and I like to mark down rounds as I go , I actually had it a  7-5 to Canelo , but it thought he squeaked 2 rounds that at the time of watching that I knew could have gone either way,
I thought GGG won his rounds easy but that Canelo squeaked in more, but i'll have to rewatch it with the aul commentary turned off,

Morrison J

Canelo Points

walshb wrote: »

You do know what corruption means? It requires some evidence and analysis. Not just "I don't like that. I disagree with that. That is corruption."

You sound like a spoiled little child...

Of course corruption exists in life. But to bandy it around willy nilly with no substance to verify it or back it up, well...

I prefer substance and proof and all that..shoot me.

Not every boxing scorecard that is quite different than the others is automatically corrupt.

I am 3 rds complete. Canelo wins 1 and 2. Draw rd 3. All three could be argued for any man..

OK I will wait for the results from the investigation that is definitely never going to take place before I label anything corrupt.

I've seen all the evidence I need in the ring for me to know there's dodgy stuff going on. It's so blatant.

walshb

Canelo KO

I scored it 117-113 GGG

1. Canelo. Close. Either man
2. Canelo. Close. Either man
3. Draw
4. GGG. Close. Either man
5. GGG. Little clearer for me.
6. GGG. Close. Either man
7. GGG. Clearer.
8. GGG. Little clearer.
9. GGG. Close. Either man
10. Canelo. Close. Either man
11. GGG. Close. Either man. All three judges went Canelo
22. GGG. Close. Either man. All three judges went Canelo.

Guys, that was a very difficult fight to score for most rds.

Byrd's card clearly off compared to mine, but with all the rds so close, bar a few, no way I'd hang her for her card.

Overall I think Canelo had the better substance on offence, but GGG had the better ring generalship. Mainly down to his forward pressure.

eagle eye

I have seven rounds that I was certain that GGG won.
I have rounds that I thought he edged but could go either way and three that were definitely Canelo.

walshb

Canelo KO

eagle eye wrote: »

I have seven rounds that I was certain that GGG won.
I have rounds that I thought he edged but could go either way and three that were definitely Canelo.

I found so many to be difficult to score with certainty.

It's always been the case with boxing and subjectivity.

But generally speaking a very close fight can fairly have any type of score...

Close fights with many close rds do not have to have close score cards.