Mexican Media Is Killing Canelo, Had Cotto Winning

[ironmt]

I had It 115-113, with 116-112 being a good score also. As a fan of the HBO crew and Harold Lederman, I have no Idea what they were watching unless It looked that much different live.

Cotto put up one hell of a fight for a guy his age and considering some of the wars he has been through. He took some massive shots and shook them off, he deserves a ton of respect. He looks as If he could fight another 2-3 big fights If he chooses to do so.

In closing, and this hurts to say, but Floyd also deserves a ton of respect, more then I Initially gave him credit for. He beat Canelo and made him look like a child In doing so.

[Mr. Philadel]

I had it 115-113 for Nelo....those scorecards were suspect

[-Antonio-]

That's crazy man. I thought Cotto MAYBE won 4 rounds watching it live. I lm surprised there'd a lot of people who thought he won.

[Bardock]

People that had it 7-5 that means you gave every close round to Cotto with is biased as fck and not fair Cotto won no clear rounds. I gave him some close rounds but at no point of the fight did Cotto dictate the pace.

[Bardock]

That's crazy man. I thought Cotto MAYBE won 4 rounds watching it live. I lm surprised there'd a lot of people who thought he won.

Thats because Cotto only did win 3 rounds 4 if you want to be really nice and really biased lol

[RED REP]

Cotto was on the juice mannnnn

[johnm is...]

HBO telecast was gargling those Canelo balls though.

This. It was almost too much. I hated even listening to it.

[jri9d0]

This. It was almost too much. I hated even listening to it.

Agreed.

I am now considering putting my television on mute for every broadcast when Lampley and Kellerman are aired.

[R_Walken]

Props to Canelo for getting the W didn't think he'd pull it off

But HBO and the judges left a bad taste in my mouth.

[SOL27]

ring generalship and effective aggression are almost entirely subjective so you could say well one guy is outboxing the other and fighting his fight or you could say one guy is coming forward and making the fight. the other crtieria are just used to setup getting to the most important step which is clean punching.

They absolutely are not. I'm sorry to say, but this does show your ignorance on the matter. You've dismissed 2 critical criteria for scoring fights, in an attempt to support your theory that clean punching is the only determining factor in a fight. Nowhere in the rules, does it say that clean punching should have a greater influence then the other 3 criteria in scoring a fight. You've put that assumption in there, and it's dead wrong.

also compubox is not accurate. this has been proven time and time again by many sources.

Care to cite these sources? Because your own personal stat tracking doesn't count. For instance:

"I'm only counting clean punches, not punches that hit gloves, shoulders, tickle the nose with no force etc..i'm counting punches."

i personally did my own compubox

And you think this matters? You expect me to believe, that a guy who saw Manny winning a fight he so obviously lost, would accurately track punch stats with no bias injected into the outcome. Right.

If all you're watching for is "clean punches", using your own personal definition, and discount 3/4 of the other criteria for winning a fight, then by all means Manny beat Floyd, and Canelo schools Cotto 119-109.

You're perspective makes sense to me now.