Golovkin v Canelo II - September 15th

News, Banter and anything else non football!!
User avatar
Neville Bartos
Posts: 3949
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2016 2:29 am
Location: Flyyyyyyyyyin'
x 384
x 510

Re: Golovkin v Canelo II - September 15th

Post by Neville Bartos » Tue Sep 18, 2018 5:02 pm

Pennywise wrote:
Neville Bartos wrote:
Irrespective it's funny how those close rounds ALWAYS go Alvarez's way.
ODLH has apparently written an open letter to fans moaning about the reaction to the decision. I guess he's upset the fans can't be as easily manipulated as the judges.
Always....unless he's fighting Mayweather you mean? :lol:

I get people don't like Alvarez mate, I wanted a GGG win, but this screaming about the decision is ridiculous. I've seen some absolute shockers in Vegas, the Lewis example was a good one, more recently Bradley SD'ing the Pac-man; they were genuine robberies, this just wasn't.

7/8 of those rounds could have gone either way, so how anyone can complain that the verdict was a "robbery" when the decision was literally a point either way is beyond me.

Those close rounds didn't ALWAYS go to Alvarez in this fight either....look at the scorecards, it was fucking close, Golovkin got a good number of them, just not enough. One in fact.
Who anyone wanted to win should be irrelevant. And 'close' is just a way of excusing poor or corrupt judging.
Pointing out the Alvarez biased judging isn't screaming.

We keep seeing Alvarez getting questionable scorecards. One judge had him drawing with Mayweather. Winning 4 of the last 5 rounds. Insane stuff. Go and rewatch that fight and tell me about close rounds that could've gone either way.

That this fight was closer than the first with GGG makes giving the decision to Alvarez more palatable for some. Not me. A close fight was ALWAYS going Alvarez's way. Always.
GGG won comfortably first time, he was hard done by on one scorecard and utterly robbed on another.
If he'd won the first and Alvarez had edged this one there might have been some mild grumbling, but that first fight set the tone.
I think it was the complete predictability of Alvarez winning a decision in a fight most had GGG edging. It's like always being the wrong end of close penalty decisions. In isolation you might write it off as bad luck, but after the sixth or seventh on the spin you start to question the process.
0 x
Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labour of others by means of such appropriations.

User avatar
Pennywise
Posts: 2086
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 9:04 am
x 1
x 61

Re: Golovkin v Canelo II - September 15th

Post by Pennywise » Tue Sep 18, 2018 6:55 pm

Neville Bartos wrote:
Pennywise wrote:
Always....unless he's fighting Mayweather you mean? :lol:

I get people don't like Alvarez mate, I wanted a GGG win, but this screaming about the decision is ridiculous. I've seen some absolute shockers in Vegas, the Lewis example was a good one, more recently Bradley SD'ing the Pac-man; they were genuine robberies, this just wasn't.

7/8 of those rounds could have gone either way, so how anyone can complain that the verdict was a "robbery" when the decision was literally a point either way is beyond me.

Those close rounds didn't ALWAYS go to Alvarez in this fight either....look at the scorecards, it was fucking close, Golovkin got a good number of them, just not enough. One in fact.
Who anyone wanted to win should be irrelevant. And 'close' is just a way of excusing poor or corrupt judging.
Pointing out the Alvarez biased judging isn't screaming.

We keep seeing Alvarez getting questionable scorecards. One judge had him drawing with Mayweather. Winning 4 of the last 5 rounds. Insane stuff. Go and rewatch that fight and tell me about close rounds that could've gone either way.

That this fight was closer than the first with GGG makes giving the decision to Alvarez more palatable for some. Not me. A close fight was ALWAYS going Alvarez's way. Always.
GGG won comfortably first time, he was hard done by on one scorecard and utterly robbed on another.
If he'd won the first and Alvarez had edged this one there might have been some mild grumbling, but that first fight set the tone.
I think it was the complete predictability of Alvarez winning a decision in a fight most had GGG edging. It's like always being the wrong end of close penalty decisions. In isolation you might write it off as bad luck, but after the sixth or seventh on the spin you start to question the process.
You do this a lot mate, but seriously, stop with the hyperbole: 'Always?' '6 or 7 on the spin?'

It has been 2, one had him losing, one he got the draw. The last fight was too close to call.

Your argument gets lost in that kind of bollocks.
0 x

User avatar
Neville Bartos
Posts: 3949
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2016 2:29 am
Location: Flyyyyyyyyyin'
x 384
x 510

Re: Golovkin v Canelo II - September 15th

Post by Neville Bartos » Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:02 pm

Pennywise wrote:
Neville Bartos wrote:
Who anyone wanted to win should be irrelevant. And 'close' is just a way of excusing poor or corrupt judging.
Pointing out the Alvarez biased judging isn't screaming.

We keep seeing Alvarez getting questionable scorecards. One judge had him drawing with Mayweather. Winning 4 of the last 5 rounds. Insane stuff. Go and rewatch that fight and tell me about close rounds that could've gone either way.

That this fight was closer than the first with GGG makes giving the decision to Alvarez more palatable for some. Not me. A close fight was ALWAYS going Alvarez's way. Always.
GGG won comfortably first time, he was hard done by on one scorecard and utterly robbed on another.
If he'd won the first and Alvarez had edged this one there might have been some mild grumbling, but that first fight set the tone.
I think it was the complete predictability of Alvarez winning a decision in a fight most had GGG edging. It's like always being the wrong end of close penalty decisions. In isolation you might write it off as bad luck, but after the sixth or seventh on the spin you start to question the process.
You do this a lot mate, but seriously, stop with the hyperbole: 'Always?' '6 or 7 on the spin?'

It has been 2, one had him losing, one he got the draw. The last fight was too close to call.

Your argument gets lost in that kind of bollocks.
It's not an argument, it's my opinion. You want to give corrupt judging a free pass then that's your prerogative.
The last fight being too close is also your opinion. Most people called it for GGG, as did most of the media. So I guess your opinion's in the minority. ;)
0 x
Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labour of others by means of such appropriations.

User avatar
Pennywise
Posts: 2086
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 9:04 am
x 1
x 61

Re: Golovkin v Canelo II - September 15th

Post by Pennywise » Wed Sep 19, 2018 7:56 am

Neville Bartos wrote:
Pennywise wrote:
You do this a lot mate, but seriously, stop with the hyperbole: 'Always?' '6 or 7 on the spin?'

It has been 2, one had him losing, one he got the draw. The last fight was too close to call.

Your argument gets lost in that kind of bollocks.
It's not an argument, it's my opinion. You want to give corrupt judging a free pass then that's your prerogative.
The last fight being too close is also your opinion. Most people called it for GGG, as did most of the media. So I guess your opinion's in the minority. ;)
Now your using the argument from popularity? :D

You don't think that last fight was close? Come on.
0 x

User avatar
Taansend
Posts: 7053
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2016 9:40 pm
Location: St Petersburg, FL
Contact:

Re: Golovkin v Canelo II - September 15th

Post by Taansend » Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:45 am

Both fights were close. I think where some people get hysterical in this bout was that, in my humble opinion, Canelo shaded the first six rounds while Golovkin shaded the last six.

Two rounds either way is fine with me. I can see an argument for Golovkin winning or Alvarez.

Nev is a bit of a shrill old lady when it comes to boxing :lol:

Remember when he said Lomachenko was SWERVING Rigondeaux :D

And thought that Canelo should have fought GGG straight after losing to Mayweather :shock:

Maybe he's angling to take over from Colin Hart in The Sun. They love that kind of hyperbole.
0 x

User avatar
jameskel
Posts: 1660
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:22 pm
x 119

Re: Golovkin v Canelo II - September 15th

Post by jameskel » Wed Sep 19, 2018 12:16 pm

Or maybe, he is just saying, you 2 are a couple of no nothing cunts??

Perhaps?
0 x
Taans can fuck right off

User avatar
FlatCapDave
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue May 15, 2018 9:36 am
x 18
x 11

Re: Golovkin v Canelo II - September 15th

Post by FlatCapDave » Wed Sep 19, 2018 12:30 pm

Simple answer to this shite is the development of AI judging for sporting events, put the daft cunts from the boys club out of the game altogether.

Also, bring back 15 rounds. Fuck the draw.
0 x

User avatar
Pennywise
Posts: 2086
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 9:04 am
x 1
x 61

Re: Golovkin v Canelo II - September 15th

Post by Pennywise » Wed Sep 19, 2018 12:53 pm

jameskel wrote:Or maybe, he is just saying, you 2 are a couple of no nothing cunts??

Perhaps?
Know James, the work is know.
0 x

User avatar
jameskel
Posts: 1660
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:22 pm
x 119

Re: Golovkin v Canelo II - September 15th

Post by jameskel » Wed Sep 19, 2018 2:06 pm

:D
The word, was definitely "cunts"


Anyway, what is this "work" you talk off????

:D
0 x
Taans can fuck right off

User avatar
Pennywise
Posts: 2086
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 9:04 am
x 1
x 61

Re: Golovkin v Canelo II - September 15th

Post by Pennywise » Wed Sep 19, 2018 4:15 pm

jameskel wrote::D
The word, was definitely "cunts"


Anyway, what is this "work" you talk off????

:D
Fuck it. :lol: :lol:
0 x

Post Reply

Social Media