Canelo's favouritism with the judges.

[New England]

So, after another night of atrocious scoring in a Canelo fight, let's sum up what happened so far in this guys career:

1. Austin Trout

- I clearly remember this fight for one thing. Open judging. And it was bad. Trout was outboxing Canelo for large parts of the fight imo - I even think I had it a draw watching it live.

Slight win for Canelo maybe.

Two of the scorecards read: 118-109 & 116-111. Laughable cards.

2. Floyd Mayweather

- Was outboxed from start to finish over 12 rounds. Hardly landed a decent shot all night.

One of the scorecards read 114-114. Possibly the worst scorecard ever in a world title fight.

3. Erislandy Lara

- Canelo looked amateurish to say the least, following Lara around without really cutting the ring off and was getting countered quite easily, albeit by a guy with a negative style.

One of the scorecards read: 117-111.

Overall, it was very debatable whether Canelo deserved that decision.

4. Miguel Cotto

- For my liking he lost most of the early rounds, it was give and take BUT HE DID DESERVE the win in the end. However, I saw JMM calling it a draw - and I know he's shown bias against Canelo in the past, but it was more a draw than these cards:

118-110, 119-109, 117-111.

For *** sake, one of the judges had Cotto winning 1 round. That's absolutely ridiculous.

What is it with this guy and favourable decisions? Honestly.

trout and lara didn't do a whole lot. it's really not hard to take rounds away from those guys. lara took a lot of body shots, and din't land a ton of meaningful punches in return. trout missed most of his jabs, and was actually hurt in that fight, so you could tell that the power he took had an effect.


the mayweather MD was silly, i'll give you that. floyd landed almost all of the meaningful punches.



this happens a lot more than people talk about in boxing. once you've decided that a guy won a round, and following rounds are similar, you ahve a tendency to score the round for the guy you originally felt won the round.


also, i don't think people consider enough the impact that a ringside seat has on a fight. i had media credentials for several years, and i've been in the media section for major fights on HBO, showtime, and smaller cards locally and on ESPN. you get a better view from home on your couch. you can't blink your eyes and switch from camera 1 to camera 2. if all of the exchanges are taking palce on the other side of the ring, behind the ref, when the fighters have their backs turned to you, you cannot score them with a degree of absolute certainty. again, you have the tenency to score based on how you scored the rounds that came before.


do i think canelo beat lara by a gigantic margin? or even trout? no. those fights were close. you can't call them robberies, just bring up that the cards were too wide, which they were.


also, i don't think it's fair to call canelo "amateurish" looking against lara, who genuinely still fights like an amateur. canelo was the much more professional fighter that night. you can miss wide from time to time. as long as you land more meaningful punches over the course of the round, like hard body shots, you win.

[PeasantCrusha]

So, after another night of atrocious scoring in a Canelo fight, let's sum up what happened so far in this guys career:

1. Austin Trout

- I clearly remember this fight for one thing. Open judging. And it was bad. Trout was outboxing Canelo for large parts of the fight imo - I even think I had it a draw watching it live.

Slight win for Canelo maybe.

Two of the scorecards read: 118-109 & 116-111. Laughable cards.

2. Floyd Mayweather

- Was outboxed from start to finish over 12 rounds. Hardly landed a decent shot all night.

One of the scorecards read 114-114. Possibly the worst scorecard ever in a world title fight.

3. Erislandy Lara

- Canelo looked amateurish to say the least, following Lara around without really cutting the ring off and was getting countered quite easily, albeit by a guy with a negative style.

One of the scorecards read: 117-111.

Overall, it was very debatable whether Canelo deserved that decision.

4. Miguel Cotto

- For my liking he lost most of the early rounds, it was give and take BUT HE DID DESERVE the win in the end. However, I saw JMM calling it a draw - and I know he's shown bias against Canelo in the past, but it was more a draw than these cards:

118-110, 119-109, 117-111.

For *** sake, one of the judges had Cotto winning 1 round. That's absolutely ridiculous.

What is it with this guy and favourable decisions? Honestly.

This IS about $$$ and boxing mafia. I can concede that Canelo was given the WIN against Cotto but the scorecards were pure comedy. Boxing has become 3rd world politics.

Bottom line is with 100 million peasants in need of a hero, it just makes economic sense to promote Canelo. Cotto is on his way out and it's business as usual.

[b00g13man]

For those saying it was close....name a clear Cotto round.

There really weren't any. The rounds I felt he "won" really could've gone to Canelo.

[LacedUp]

Maybe the judges are too kind to Canelo but you go too far in the other direction and it's obvious that you dislike Canelo and want others to think as poorly of him as you do. The Cotto fight was not a draw or even remotely close to a draw. Marquez hates Canelo's guts worse than you do. Most neutral observers had Canelo beating Cotto 116 to 112 or 117 to 111. Maybe Canelo has a style that judges tend to like. He beat Lara and Trout and damn near chased Lara out of the ring. It's mostly Canelo haters who claim he lost those fights.

You completely lost me here

I consider myself a fan of Canelo. Doesn't mean I appreciate him getting gift cards in almost all of his big fights.

I also picked him to beat Cotto.

[LacedUp]

For those saying it was close....name a clear Cotto round.

Why does every close round go to Canelo then?

[LacedUp]

trout and lara didn't do a whole lot. it's really not hard to take rounds away from those guys. lara took a lot of body shots, and din't land a ton of meaningful punches in return. trout missed most of his jabs, and was actually hurt in that fight, so you could tell that the power he took had an effect.


the mayweather MD was silly, i'll give you that. floyd landed almost all of the meaningful punches.



this happens a lot more than people talk about in boxing. once you've decided that a guy won a round, and following rounds are similar, you ahve a tendency to score the round for the guy you originally felt won the round.


also, i don't think people consider enough the impact that a ringside seat has on a fight. i had media credentials for several years, and i've been in the media section for major fights on HBO, showtime, and smaller cards locally and on ESPN. you get a better view from home on your couch. you can't blink your eyes and switch from camera 1 to camera 2. if all of the exchanges are taking palce on the other side of the ring, behind the ref, when the fighters have their backs turned to you, you cannot score them with a degree of absolute certainty. again, you have the tenency to score based on how you scored the rounds that came before.


do i think canelo beat lara by a gigantic margin? or even trout? no. those fights were close. you can't call them robberies, just bring up that the cards were too wide, which they were.


also, i don't think it's fair to call canelo "amateurish" looking against lara, who genuinely still fights like an amateur. canelo was the much more professional fighter that night. you can miss wide from time to time. as long as you land more meaningful punches over the course of the round, like hard body shots, you win.

I'm not calling them robberies. I agree they were close fights, have no problem with Canelo getting the win. But some of the cards were just outrageous. In the Lara fight, he was outlanding AND outpunching Canelo in a lot of rounds. Even had more eye-catching shots.

But the round still went the other way. I just think it's a common theme with Canelo that he gets VERY favourable jugding. I think most will agree that if Lara won one or two more rounds he'd have won the fight. Definitely.

He wouldn't have on the cards though.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Why does every close round go to Canelo then?

I gave Cotto 3 rounds and I was trying to give him rounds. All of Cotto's rounds could have conceivably gone to Canelo without argument.

It just wasn't a close fight.

[DannYankee]

Listen I am as unbiased in this **** as it gets.

I am no ginger fan boy actually think he has been over rated in the past, and I saw him get beat by Lara in a close fight since he didn't land ****. This however wasn't the case Saturday he was landing some really hard shots about as many as Cotto, but they where twice as hard because he was too strong for Cotto who looked puny.

I agree it was not that wide of a fight tho, and he has been pretty lucky with the judges so far. Maybe the judges just like how he throws his punches cause they look good who the hell knows

[LacedUp]

I gave Cotto 3 rounds and I was trying to give him rounds. All of Cotto's rounds could have conceivably gone to Canelo without argument.

It just wasn't a close fight.

I just disagree. Giving Canelo all of the rounds or near that was ridiculous.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

I just disagree. Giving Canelo all of the rounds or near that was ridiculous.

Tell me which round Cotto won clearly that couldn't have gone either way.