Quote Originally Posted by Ron Swanson View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Gandalf View Post
Quote Originally Posted by powerpuncher View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Ron Swanson View Post
I wouldn’t disagree on any round except I can’t see GGG getting 7. That one blows my mind.
If I remember correctly, I think that was the most clear round for Canelo for me.
I agree. I had Canelo winning 2 early rounds and in the middle in the 7th too it looked as though the fight was tightening up somewhat. But GGG seemed to dig deep and separate them again down the stretch. Canelo obviously had his moments, but his output was lower and GGG was doing the damage then.

I cannot get over the bizarre argument that because GGG wanted Canelo to fight that somehow standing his ground eradicates who is doing most of the work. Andre Ward for instance makes that argument and I think it is a really dumb argument. You score a fight round by round and to say that fighter A did this and fighter B used his own plan B therefore he loses rounds is plainly ridiculous. I have heard Kellerman make the same argument. It's very poorly thought out thinking and unfortunately these people get to make the narrative.
For the record, and I’m not defending Kellerman, he did clarify the next day that when he was saying Canelo was winning the perception of the fight he didn’t mean he was actually winning the fight. He meant there is the perception, and the scoring, that they are separate. Like you could control how the fight is being fought but still lose. You still have to actually do the better work. I thought Canelo did control how it was being fought, he did force GGG to back up almost the whole fight. But I didn’t have Canelo win, so I get where he is coming from.


Commentators tend to flop all over themselves trying to be eloquent, and all they do is muddle up the waters. WTF is all the nonsense about "winning the perception" or "winning the story" of the fight. I'd say FFS just score the fight according to your own personal judgment and quit trying to be philosophical about it.