It?s amazing what you can learn from Ring Magazine, weeks after everyone has stopped caring.
Apparently, Canelo-GGG 2 was a classic?an ?instant classic,? to be precise?and ?one for the ages.?
The December 2018 edition of the fish wrapper?s delight (aka Bible of Boxing) is jam-packed with orgasmic rear-mounted cheerleading aimed at declaring the Saul Alvarez-Gennady Golovkin rematch an all-time great war. The Golden Boy-owned magazine was also more than eager to declare Golden Boy?s Alvarez definitive ruler of a ?deep and dangerous? middleweight division.
Both Canelo-GGG fights were good and the rematch was a bit better than the first, but neither was ?great.? And to call either a ?classic? is pretty damn insulting to those who fought real classics and to the fans who remember those classics. Anyone tossing that ?C? word around when it comes to this middleweight contest is either a boneheaded newcomer to boxing who?s never been exposed to classic war or a shill looking to create press release-level hyperbole.
Not to be too harsh on a decent bout featuring two good fighters trying their best, but Canelo-GGG did nothing to stand out from the pack of other decent fights. Both fighters took turns on offense, not so much turning any tides, but allowing a tide to recede before pushing forward. Neither fighter hurt the other, nor did they extend themselves in an effort to try and seriously hurt the other. If anything, the two Canelo-GGG bouts were as much about the fighters? weaknesses and inability to take control as they were about high-stakes battling.
Ultimately, Canelo-GGG 2, like Canelo-GGG 1 to a great extent, was more dueling banjos than duel to the death. The only real drama was in wondering how the judges would be scoring what they saw. It was a good fight, painted to be great, and then declared a classic.
And, as for the ?deep and dangerous? division Canelo now ?rules?? The 160 lb. class below the Mexican star consists of Golovkin, a self-destructing Billy Joe Saunders, a talented but inconsistent Demetrius Andrade, and ?for real? challengers Jermall Charlo (who neither Canelo nor GGG is eager to face) and Daniel Jacobs. Middleweight is top-heavy and good in the 1-5 slots, but it?s hardly deep.
It only stands to reason that Golden Boy?s Ring Magazine would exaggerate the depth of the division ruled by their cash cow and the quality of the battle that put him on top. But, what about all the other keyboard slappers who imagined they saw Hagler-Hearns this past September 15?
A casual perusal of the online Universo Pugilistico shows plenty of this overblown nonsense from sites and writers of varying abilities and levels of notoriety.
For instance, Sporting News had this intro to their Canelo-GGG 2 fight recap:
?The hatred that Canelo Alvarez and Gennady Golovkin had for each other heading into Saturday night?s rematch spilled over into 36 minutes of non-stop action in an absolute classic fight.?
Huh?
But maybe this delusion in certain quarters is understandable.
Writers like Dougie Fischer, who penned the Ring Magazine feature piece on the fight, have been GGG cheerleaders from taking their first whiff of the musky underarms of the smiling Kazakh KO machine. Anything Gennady Golovkin does, in their eyes, is automatically thrilling and so, so awesome. And when their guy meets resistance, well, that?s extra awesome?especially when he overcomes that resistance (as most of these guys seem to believe he did against Canelo both times).
The same can be said from the other side of the Canelo-GGG dynamic as anytime Alvarez shows the slightest hint of red chest hair on his pecs, his effort is canonized as the epitome of manly toughness and sold by his people as proof positive of legendary status.
Maybe it doesn?t hurt anything for na?ve boxing writers to think of this fight as a classic or for shills to sell the bout as something it isn?t. But dishonesty and/or lack of insight should always be checked. Right?
Or maybe it?s just best to shut up and realize that, these days, truth is relative and information is there to be twisted into a sales or political tool.
