Much More Than Just Bad Blood: Canelo vs. Golovkin II
By: Gary Todd
In boxing, a lot can happen in a year, and this has definitely been the case for this fight and for these two fighters. Since that night in Las Vegas 2017, where these two elite boxers met for the first time, all eyes were on the rematch, which just had to happen.
The controversial ending which had ringside judge, Adelaide Byrd scoring 118 – 110 to Canelo Alvarez, in a fight which should have had Gennady Golovkin, a clear winner , had enraged fight fans around the world, particularly on social media. I had GGG winning 7 rounds to 5, and that was being kind to the Mexican. A draw was a bad ending , to a great event, and an entertaining fight for the millions of fans watching around the world . They deserved better, and so did Gennady Golovkin. The biggest issue for me, was the fact that Golovkin’s perfect record had been altered for the remainder of his career, and beyond. Adelaide Byrd was told to have a spell from boxing for a while, and we all moved on, focusing on the rematch.
The rematch was announced for the Mexican holiday week end, Cinco De Mayo which was the 5th of May 2018 , and both fighters went into training camp, to both do what they do to be the best they can possibly be to win . Golovkin [ 38 wins, [ 34 kos ] 1 draw. ] went up to Big Bear, and Canelo [ 49 wins, [ 34 kos ] 1 loss, and 2 draws. ] trained in his gym in Mexico. There was great excitement, and the build up to the fight was all about Canelo getting some “home cooking” in Vegas, and the countdown was on for both teams and the boxing fans.
There was rumours going around about Canelo being tested and failing two drug tests , then the media got hold of it, then it was made official that he had indeed failed and that traces of Clenbuterol were found in his system. [ Clenbuterol is a potent fat loss muscle preservation substance that retains muscle mass and strength while losing weight ]
As soon as I saw this, I knew the fight was off. Later, Canelo stated and claimed that he was a clean athlete, and that the drug was widely used in the meat industry in Mexico, and he had eaten some beef that had been affected. Shortly after there was a decision by his team and his promoter, Golden Boy to withdraw from the contest. Canelo was banned for 6 months, as opposed to a 1 year ban for testing positive to a banned performance enhancing drug .
With only a few weeks to go till May 5th, it was unclear if there would be a fight at all. The T-Mobile Arena was sold out for the mega fight with Canelo and tickets were refunded. The event was then rumoured to be heading across to the MGM garden arena, all the while trying to find a viable stand in to replace a Mexican superstar fighting on Cinco De Mayo . Not an easy thing to do.
Although I had planned and paid to travel across from the other side of the world for GGG v Canelo, I was glad the fight was off. If they didn’t ban Canelo, it would have devastated the sport of boxing. At the time, I didn’t think Golovkin would be fighting anyone. Not long after , it was announced that GGG would be fighting and the venue would be in Carson Los Angeles, at the Stub hub arena. The opponent would be Vanes Martiroyan [ 35 [ 21 kos ] 3 loss, and 1 draw ] A rough tough boxer who had been fighting for years, and had experience in world championship fights against Demetrius Andrade and Erislandy Lara, as well as Jermel Charlo. Lets face it, at that late stage we were lucky just to get a fight. Was the Armenian ever going to win? No, but we got a fight. Golovkin unleashed and showcased his formidable talents of pure speed , controlled aggression and power, ramming home the jab, then taking him out with a fistful of punches , to end the night with a fist full of dollars and a quiet realisation that this was over.
With that difficult period over, it didn’t take long before the rematch with Canelo being all the talk. [ Also in that time, Golovkin was stripped by the IBF, for not making his mandatory defence .
A lot of talk, until finally we got the fight we all want to see. The biggest fight in the sport of boxing. Canelo v Golovkin 2.
The big question in this fight is, can Canelo do anything different to beat Golovkin?
If he doesn’t, he will get beaten again and possibly get knocked out this time around. To win this fight, he has to fight for 3 minutes of each round and stay off the ropes, which he has a habit of doing . Golovkin and his trainer, Abel Sanchez will have been watching the tapes and they will see he can’t fight going backwards. In the first fight, he retreated to the ropes and waited for GGG to throw punches, closed up a tight defence, then push off the back foot, to try and surprize GGG hoping to get the attention of the ringside judges. The man from Kazakhstan will have learned from the first fight that he was waiting too much, not throwing punches, whilst Canelo was on the ropes. This time round, he has to hammer him.
Canelo has a great jab and he has to throw and establish that jab, followed up by his superb uppercut and finish with a hook. He has to push forward and put pressure on Golovkin. If he can do that, he will unsettle him and stop Golovkin’s momentum. I think GGG is open to the uppercut all night long as he carries his head down, chin up , with little head movement. If the Mexican comes to fight and try to knock out Golovkin, we will see a much different fight . Canelo Alvarez can win this fight. Will he have an easy time if he comes forward, No, but this time he has to . Golovkin knows he won the first fight, and he now has in his mind that Canelo had a bit of help from a banned substance and with that, he would definitely think he has the edge , mentally.
Is there anything he will do to change the way he fights, and I would say no other than sustained pressure off his ram rod jab. He will chase Canelo and cut the ring off, and throw a hard thudding jab setting up the huge straight right hand [ and or , an overhand, right or hook ] . He will take one coming in to land one of his own because he knows his is usually better . A big fight for all the marbles [ other than Billy Joe’s WBO belt , and the IBF strap.] so there will be pressure for both fighters, but most of the pressure will all be on the 27 year old Canelo Alvarez. There is talk of there being bad blood between the two fighters. Historically this has been used as a tool to promote a fight but with what has happened in the last year, I would say it’s much more than bad blood. This is a legacy fight that was tarnished. A controversial beginning, to a scandalised middle, to settling a score, and having a defining ending.
Golovkin Tko in the 9TH round
Gary Todd is an international best selling author with his books on world champions and their workouts. “Workouts From Boxing’s Greatest Champs “ Volumes 1 and 2. He has been involved in all aspects in the sport of boxing for over 30 years.
Why Mayweather And McGregor Are Beloved For Engaging In Bad Behavior
Why Mayweather And McGregor Are Beloved For Engaging In Bad Behavior
By: Sean Crose
America loves the pairing, but make no mistake about it – Conor McGregor and Floyd Mayweather behave horribly. The past few days have set me to thinking quite a bit about these two, as I’ve watched and written on the migraine headache that was their international press tour. And while I admit there was a fascinating element to it all, I found it strange that such men, McGregor in particular, are viewed as legitimate heroes.
Perhaps it’s all a backlash to the insane political correctness that has rocked the country. When students at exclusive colleges literally shut down free speech with the possible intent to take censorship nationwide, guys like Floyd and Conor can seem downright refreshing. “Mate,” McGregor once told a reporter calling him out for some prickly comments, “shut the fuck up.” Such things can be pleasing in a world where an Orwellian nightmare appears to be morphing into real life.
Yet Conor and Floyd are far from heroes saving the planet from goose stepping social justice warriors. They’re two men enthralled with bad behavior. To support these guys, to cheer on their antics, isn’t standing up to the tyranny of political correctness, it’s allowing the pendulum to swing too far the other way. Words are not, as the snowflakes tell us, acts of violence. They can hurt like hell, though, and that’s something these guys refuse to keep in mind – or even care about.
Mayweather has made some ugly statements over the years, including some particularly nasty ones regarding Manny Pacquiao’s being Asian. He’s since expressed remorse for those actions – fair enough – but his entire ho/pimp/ stripper routine during the press conferences this week bordered on scary at times. I sensed that McGregor himself was uncomfortable with it after a point, as if the master of mind games himself had finally found that it was he who was being played.
McGregor was far from a sympathetic figure during the tour, however. The man, in my opinion, knew what he was doing when he called Mayweather “boy.” He was simply seeing how far he could go. What’s more, McGregor’s actions with Showtime honcho Stephen Espinoza were truly horrifying. That’s right, horrifying. Not funny. Horrifying. Riling up a crowd of thousands, then flashing true disdain – and perhaps even a sense of violence – towards a single person isn’t cute or funny. It’s simply wrong – end of story.
By the way, McGregor’s hold on vast crowds is worth noting. Imagine, if you will, the man being a political figure rather than a sporting one. Frightened yet? With the instant aggression McGregor can suddenly summon in his enormous cult-like fan base, maybe you should be. The guy has a strange hold on people. Perhaps there are large numbers of individuals who find bad behavior liberating, who find what the Marlon Brando character in Apocalypse Now called “petty morality” stifling. If so, McGregor might be their man.
Or perhaps people just lack an empathy button and feel that McGregor and Mayweather are simply entertainers. Sure enough, some are openly saying they will pay one hundred dollars simply to be somehow engaged in a vast spectacle when the two meet for their massive, pay per view broadcast fight on August 26th. Then again, perhaps there’s something more at play here, something more sinister that says unsettling stuff about our society as a whole.
I haven’t watched pro wrestling in years, but one of the things that used to delight me about it was the characters – those over the top, cartoon figures who’d engage in all kinds of off the wall, sophomoric dramas right before our very eyes. One of the big keys to these characters was that they consistently celebrated the self. Indeed, pro wrestling was successful because it presented the art of self worship as a joke – a joke that even kids could see through, yet still enjoy. I’m guessing that still rings true with professional wrestling today. The whole freakin’ thing is satire. Mayweather and McGregor appear to have a lot in common with pro wrestlers of yore…except neither seems to be playing a part. Rather, these two appear to be, at most, employing extensions of themselves for public consumption. Each man is taking himself and his incredible success so seriously that it’s either frightening, pathetic, comical, or some combination of the three.
Yet, whether we choose to admit it or not, we as a society are taking them seriously, too. Again, this may all be a backlash to the PC crowd, which is attempting, with some serious success, to instill itself as a harsh and fearful deity to be cowed by, groveled before, and meekly obeyed. There’s even a good argument to be made that Political Correctness and the Cult of the Self are in competition to decide what society’s unofficial religion will be. If that’s the case, Mayweather and McGregor are the Cult of the Self’s Peter and Paul…except, of course, it’s doubtful either will ever settle for the role of mere apostle.
What’s easy to forget in all of this is that these are two men we’re talking about here, individuals with good and bad qualities who it would be wrong to judge in entirety. There’s no harm in judging their pubic personas, though, and seen through the prism of the past week, those personas leave much to be desired, whether they’re adored or not. That’s mainly why I’m not big on this fight – it’s all about the person rather than the contest.
Me, I’ll take the upcoming middleweight showdown between Canelo Alvarez and Gennady Golovkin over this circus anytime.
The Troubles with CompuBox
The Troubles with CompuBox
By: Matt O’Brien
Boxing is a notoriously difficult sport to score. Although the brief a fighter must follow is simple enough – hit and hurt your opponent more than he does you – deciding who completes this task more successfully can be a complicated affair.
Witness the myriad of disputed decisions that litter boxing history as evidence of the above. In the wake of Manny Pacquiao’s defeat to unfavoured Australian Jeff Horn last weekend, another contentious result can be added to that list.
Much was made in the controversy that followed the Filipino’s defeat of his apparent dominance according to the CompuBox punch statistics. Despite being unanimously declared the winner on the three judges’ cards, Horn allegedly landed just 92 punches of 625 thrown (15%) compared to 182 of 573 (32%) for the Pacman. While these stats seem to provide objective support for the idea that the judges’ scores did not accurately reflect the action in the ring, there are several reasons why we should handle the punch data with extreme caution.
First of all, while the name “CompuBox” might evoke images of a supercomputer programmed for the specific purpose of calculating the winner of boxing matches, the truth is somewhat more prosaic. In reality, CompuBox means two guys sitting at ringside with a laptop, each with the job of watching one boxer and four keys to press that record the punches that boxer attempts. The four buttons correspond to jabs thrown, jabs landed, power punches thrown and power punches landed. At the end of each round the numbers collected on the laptop are compared, and hey-presto – there’s your CompuBox punch stats.
So while the name sounds technical enough, we have to remember that there is a considerable amount of room for human error. For instance, recording when a single punch lands or misses sounds fairly straight forward, but telling if a blow grazed the gloves or connected with the side of the face can often be tricky even with the benefit of slow motion replays. In real-time as the action unfolds, it is far from an easy task. Consider also a body shot thrown on the blind side of the CompuBox operator: it could have been blocked by an elbow or it could have been a fight-changing rib-cruncher and they may be none the wiser.
The potential for human error only increases when we take into account combination punching. One-two-three-four – rat-a-tat-tat! – fired in a flurry of blurring gloves and grunts in less than a split second. Could you be sure that you’d accurately gauge, in real-time and without revision, exactly how many landed cleanly? Of course, a focused CompuBox operator would no doubt perform the task much better than the average viewer, but over the course of a twelve-round fight that would still leave a significant margin for error.
Even supposing, generously, that such errors could be reduced through careful training to a fairly negligible amount, the types of punches recorded are still liable to present a misleading picture of how a fight is unfolding. That’s because, as noted, CompuBox operators are faced with a choice of only two types of punches: “jabs” and “power punches”. The problem with this description is that the actual power behind a particular punch has no bearing on it being categorized as such. A jab is simply a straight punch thrown with the fighter’s lead hand; everything else is considered a “power” shot, by CompuBox definition.
In the words of one the co-founders of CompuBox, Bob Canobbio, “We call a non-jab a power punch for lack of a better description… we call it power punch because it sounds better than non-jab.” While this might be a great recipe for a catchy, TV-friendly sound bite, it’s a terrible method for recording which fighter is actually landing the most damaging blows.
Ignoring these practical limitations for a moment though, a more fundamental problem exists: the difference between tallying punches and scoring rounds. For while it’s a convenient formula to regard the fighter who lands the most as the winner (as the old amateur, Olympic-style scoring system used to do), professional boxing depends on much more than this.
Specifically, the four scoring criteria are: (1) accurate punching; (2) effective aggression; (3) defence; and (4) ring generalship. What CompuBox seeks to provide is an objective measure of the first criteria. What it does not provide is an accurate reflection of all of the criteria judges are adhering to. In this sense, it can be a dangerously flawed tool in assessing who won a professional boxing match, even assuming the punch stats are 100% accurate.
Of course, it’s easy to dismiss the importance of “effectiveness”, “defence” and “ring generalship” as wordy and intangible. On the contrary, they are in fact very real and concrete: they are the difference between a shot crashing into an arm, or it being rolled over a shoulder; they are the difference between a fighter pushing his opponent back into a corner, or being lulled into a trap; they are the reason why Willie Pep and Pernell Whitaker star in the Boxing Hall of Fame, and Eric Esch (aka “Butterbean”) starred in Jackass: The Movie.
Consider, for example, the following exchange: Fighter A throws a fast series of looping punches as Fighter B backs into a corner. Let’s imagine that three punches out of a six punch combination land – but none of the blows does damage, and are either lacking in force or partially deflected by Fighter B. Then – boom! – Fighter B unloads with a well-timed, accurate jab-shot that rocks the head back of Fighter A, before nimbly skipping off to the other side of the ring with his opponent ambling after him.
Now, according to a CompuBox reading, in the above exchange Fighter A out-landed Fighter B by 3 power punches compared to 1 jab – an impressive statistic. He also showed more “aggression”, throwing 6 punches to his opponent’s 1. Any astute ringside observer would know to discard the significance of the punch stats in this instance though. Not only did Fighter B render the incoming attack ineffective with his superior defensive skills, he also controlled the flow of the action by enticing his opponent to throw punches only to achieve the goal of countering him, which he did accurately and effectively with a more damaging blow (that was not recorded as such), before lulling his foe towards another trap.
This is called ring generalship: making your opponent fight your fight and dictating the pace, range and terms at which the action takes place. Too often, punch data simply does not pay heed to these nuances. Multiply the above exchange by a few times per round over the course of a twelve-round fight, and you start to get a very good idea of just how skewed any reading of a fight based purely on CompuBox stats could become.
One final problem is that the final punch statistics for any given fight are never revised. That means however many punches are recorded on the night, in real-time, remains the “go-to” data for that match forever more. This is a real shame. While it is obviously useful during the live airing of a fight to provide viewers with a measurable guide to the action unfolding in front of them, there’s no reason why these figures could not be scrutinized and corrected utilizing available technology in the weeks that follow.
Consider how much more meaningful these numbers would be if a panel of observers reviewed fights and re-tallied the punch stats using slow motion and different camera angles to assess them more precisely. It would then be possible, for example, to extend the number of categories of punches to provide a fairer reflection of who is the more effective aggressor (i.e. who was actually landing the “power punches”). As a starting suggestion, “Damaging Blows” could be added to include those that land with greater visible effect or force, snapping the head back, producing a noticeable facial reaction or clearly hurting the opponent. This kind of revision might not be practical for every single fight, of course, but it would certainly be a welcome addition for replays of the biggest PPV contests.
All in all then, considering the potential impact of human error on the numbers recorded, the somewhat spurious categorization of the kinds of punches thrown, and the notoriously subjective nature of boxing’s four-point scoring criteria, what we are left with is a system containing significant flaws. The wider point here though is not that CompuBox is a completely useless tool or that it should be abandoned. The point is rather a cautionary one: while CompuBox stats can provide valuable insight into the activity unfolding in the ring and a fascinating guide to understanding the ebbs and flows of a particular contest, we should remember that it is ultimately just that – a guide.
As the CompuBox website itself clearly states: “CompuBox stats in no way, shape or form, determine a winner of a fight. The stats are used to enhance a telecast, show the estimated barometer of activity by both fighters and paint a picture of the activity on a round-by-round basis.”
We would do well to remind ourselves of these words more often in the aftermath of a controversial decision. The troubles with CompuBox only arise when the numbers are cited as incontrovertible “proof” that a fighter was dominant or used to justify cries of “robbery” – without putting them in context of the wider judging criteria, or considering that they could just be plain wrong.
Pacman Robbed Down Under
Pacman Robbed Down Under
By: Ken Hissner
WBO welterweight champion Manny “Pac Man” Pacquaio, 60-6-2 (38), of the PH, lost a disputed decision to Jeff “The Hornet” Horn, 17-0-1 (11), of Australia in Brisbane, Australia, over 12 rounds.
In the first round Horn seemed to hold an edge. In the second round it was close with Pacquaio. In the third round Pacquaio continues getting the best of Horn who uses all the dirty tactics the referee allows him to get away with. In the fourth round Pacquaio lands many power punches.
In the fifth round Horn caused a clash of heads caused a cut along Pacquaio’s hairline. In the sixth round Pacquaio continues to fight both Horn and the American referee Mark Nelson. The much larger looking Nelson landed a good punch along side of the head of Pacquaio. In the seventh round Horn tries to bull his way in but Pacquaio counters him well. In the eighth round Horn was cut over the right eye.
In the ninth round Pacquaio had a big round but Horn came back in the tenth. In the eleventh round referee Nelson finally warns Horn for using his forearm into the throat of Pacquaio but not for all the headlocks he gets away with. In the twelfth and final round both let it all hang out with the blood flowing. Pacquaio’s hand speed has been his biggest asset.
Judge 117-111, 115-113 twice for Horn and this writer 117-111 for Pacquaio. Another black eye for boxing with a horrible decision by the “three blind mice” and the actions of referee Mark Nelson.
Middleweight “Sugar” Shane Mosley, Jr., 10-2 (7), of Pamona, CA, lost by split decision to southpaw David Toussaint, 10-0 (8), of Australia, over 8 rounds.
In the first round it was a feeling out round on both parts. Toussaint suffered a small cut over his eye. In the second round Toussaint landed a hard straight left to the head of Mosley. In the third and fourth rounds Mosley out boxed Toussaint.
In the fifth and sixth rounds Toussaint got in his share of punches but Mosley still was in control. In the seventh round Mosley went to the body as instructed by his trainer. In the eighth and final round it ended up the best round of the fight.
Judges 77-75 Mosley, 77-76 Toussaint, 77-76 Toussaint. This writer had it 77-75 Mosley.
Kovalev Gets Shafted by Ward and the Referee Again!
Kovalev Gets Shafted by Ward and the Referee Again!
By: Ken Hissner
Foul’s ended two fights while the Nevada commission allowed this to happen on the PPV event. The event was held at the Mandalay Bay Hotel & Casino, Events Center in Las Vegas, NV. Another black eye for boxing!
WBO, WBA and IBF light heavyweight champion Andre “S.O.G.” Ward, was given the stoppage over Russian Sergey “Krusher” Kovalev, 30-2-1 (16), of Ft. Lauderdale, FL, at 2:29 of the 8th round.
In the opening Kovalev outlanded Ward who did more clinching than fighting. In the second round Kovalev used an effective jab. Ward hit Kovalev low and referee Tony Weeks gave him a minute rest. In the third round Kovalev landed the best punch of the fight up until that point a right to the head of Ward. In the fourth round Ward got in a jab and right hand though Kovalev continued to press the action. Looked like the first round Ward won.
In the fifth round Kovalev bloodied Ward’s nose. In the sixth round Ward landed a good left hook to the chin of Kovalev. Kovalev continues to outpunch Ward. In the seventh round Ward outlanded Kovalev in a close round. In the eighth round Ward rocked Kovalev with a right to the head hurting him. Kovalev did his best to hold on but was hit low for the third time without losing a point. The fourth low blow doubled Kovalev over while the referee Ton Weeks suddenly stopped the fight not DQ’ing Ward but giving him the win.
Judges Glen Feldman and Dave Moretti had Ward ahead 67-66 while Steve Weisfeld had Kovalev ahead 68-65 as did this writer.
WBA Super World Super bantamweight champion Cuban southpaw Guillermo Rigondeaux, 18-0 (12), of Miami, FL, hit Flores “after the bell” but the referee was overruled by the Executive Director Bob Bennett ruling a knockout over IBO Super bantamweight champion Moises “Chucky” Flores, 25-1 (17), of Guadalajara, MEX, at the end of the 1st round.
For some reason referee Robert Byrd was allowed to talk and influence Bennett while referee Vic Drakulich wanted it called a NC. Bennett said it was a punch before the bell sounded though the replay showed it was after the round. Bennett said he got word from the truck confirming it was before while HBO commentator Jim Lampley of HBO said he called someone in the truck and got the opposite answer. Roy Jones, Jr. agreed it was a knockout despite watching the replay show it was a punch “after the bell”.
In the first round Flores did all the punching until the 10 second warning when Rigondeaux grabbed Flores behind the head and hit him with a pair of uppercuts to the midsection when the bell sounded Rigondeaux hit Flores with a left hand to the head and to the canvas.
USBA Middleweight champion Luis Arias, 18-0 (9), of Milwaukee, WI, stopped Arif Magomedov, 18-2 (11) at 1:16 of the 5th round.
In a close 4 rounds Arias was allowed to clinch and hit Magomedov in the kidney and behind the head without warning from referee Robert Byrd. In the 5th round during a clinch referee Byrd out of position behind Magomedov grabbed him by the arms while Arias “sucker punched” him to the head. Referee Byrd only warned Arias without taking a point. Within 30 seconds a right hand from Arias dropped Magomedov. After beating the count Arias jumped on him causing referee Byrd to halt the fight.
WBA World light heavyweight champion, Dmitry Bivol, 11-0 (9), of St. Petersburg, RUS, stopped southpaw Cedric Agnew, 29-3 (15), of Chicago, IL, at 1:27 of round 4.
In the opening round Bivol dropped Agnew with a combination to the head. In the following 2 rounds Bivol beat up on Agnew who kept his hands up and threw very little in return. In the fourth round Agnew suffered a bloody nose and swelling under both eyes. Bivol landed a left hook driving Agnew back a few steps forcing referee Russell Mora to wisely call a halt.
It was a sad night for boxing. NV insists on using their own referee who are average at best. The PPV buyers got shortchanged again!
Canelo and Chavez Jr. Another Hype Job That Flopped Big Time!
Canelo and Chavez Jr. Another Hype Job That Flopped Big Time!
By: Ken Hissner
After Kovalev and Ward one had to wonder why anyone called Ward a “boxer”. It was jab and grab 46 or 47 times by Ward. Only a bias referee allowed him to do it for 12 rounds. Kovlev hopefully learned a lesson that he should have learned allowing Bernard Hopkins to go 12 rounds losing all of them and Kovalev not going in for the knockout.
In the next one we have Russian born Kovalev knocking Ward’s Christian beliefs giving Ward food for fuel to really box his ears off. On the other hand will Kovalev’s people have any say on who the referee will be this time like that should have had the first time? This writer felt Kovalev was a five point winner but now time will tell.
Julio Cesar Chavez, Jr., was possibly the greatest Mexican fighter of all time while names like Ruben Olivares, LupePintor, Salvatore Sanchez, Ricardo Lopez and Carlos Zarate are right up there. Jr. didn’t bring in his “A” game like he did with Sergio Martinez.
Chavez, Jr. in that “bath robe” carrying his precious daughter into the facility made one wonder “this is a boxer?” His antics being viewed while other bouts were going on made you ask it again. Canelo on the other hand took many photos with others but had that “game face” on. The fact he looked horrible with Mayweather hopefully may have gotten erased but look who he beat?
GGG? Does Canelo think he’s going to go toe to toe with him? GGG is coming off his toughest fight as champion. Not preparing for a southpaw a “light heavy” at 185(?)Jacobs was allowed to miss a second weigh-in as GGG came in at 170 meaning Jacobs couldn’t go over 180 was to Jacob’s advantage?
GGG is all business. Out of the ring he’s like another great fighter in Alexis Arguello giving his opponent compliment after compliment until the bell rings. GGG is by-passing a fourth title with Saunders WBO crown in June in KAZ to finally get Canelo into the ring after a year of postponement by the Canelo camp.
Fool me once, fool me twice…….but when a Mayweather-McGregor farce is getting attention boxing needs a Ward-Gatti fight or two to get the fans and attract some new fans to the sport of boxing. To call Joshua and Klitschko a “great” fight due to a pair of knockdowns tells you it’s not the same as “back in the day!”