Look, this is the problem, and I have been pretty vocal about this even before GGG 2, and the Kovalev fights. The problem is not any single one scorecard, we all know how awful CJ Ross is, how awful Adelaide Byrd has been etc. This does not only happen to Canelo, it happens to everyone. But while it does, we can not just look at any single one fight, and because you can justify that outcome, it means that everything is fine and dandy. We need to look at the big picture.
Let me preface by saying that I have been around the early days of online poker and sportsbetting and advantage gambling. But whenever a big scandal is uncovered, i.e. the basketball point shading incident, bets that make sites limit sharps, ultimatebet/potripper scandal, botting in poker, and now the Postle cheating incident, etc. what the ultimate evidence ends up being is how far this behavior deviates from the norm. You analyze the data and see how much of an outlier each case is and whether it's within the realm of statistically probable when gathered together. Of course the logistics behind these processes and how they work can get pretty complicated, but this is how it is in a nutshell. It's not any isolated incident that proves anything, but the accumulation of all of them.
It's the same with Canelo, it's not any individual scorecard/fight that indicates anything shady, but it's all of the instances grouped together where the behavior deviates substantially imo. And it hasn't even been that many yet, but ever since GGG 1, it has happened twice more with GGG 2 and Kovalev. That's 3 dubious scores in 5 fights! Sure, you can pretend the scorecards didn't matter in the last one but of course they matter to anyone with half a brain, because you can extrapolate and see where this pattern is headed. Was there anything wrong with these scores in isolation? No not really, Canelo 6-4 ivs. Kovalev is a bit iffy but a case can be made for it; a MD over GGG is probably a fine score too given that it was such a close fight. But you can notice there is a trend here, a trend to give Canelo close rounds. If he fights aggressive and throws and misses more while getting countered more effectively, he wins a SD vs. Lara, but if he fights more akin to Lara vs. Kovalev, where he counters more accurately but has significantly less volume he also would win. Dave Moretti was scoring in both fights and he had Canelo ahead in each!
People know it's true that there is a Canelo bias, even the extreme fanboys will likely admit that. I have been alluding to this on the forums for a long time too, even before the GGG fights. Of course, it's still early and the sample size is pretty small, but you can all see where it is heading, especially with the direction DAZN seems to be going in.
My point is just how hard it is for anyone going forward to beat Canelo given how much he must outclass him to win the decision. It's something that will be nearly impossible given how good Canelo is. I just hate this blatant favoritism, and I actually like Canelo as a boxer. But now it's getting to be so egregious that it's disgusting, especially with the network backing. It's just going to keep happening and everyone is going to sing the same tune "it's a close fight so Canelo gets it" as it happens over and over again, and that just seems crazy to me.
