SHOCKER.ITS ALVAREZ VS TROUT..

wow a few writers on espn page not dan r are saying trout alvarez on may 4..if true give alvarez credit.he tried with williams cotto and kirkland and all bad luck.thats not cherrypicking guys but trout indeed is a fight fat dan and several said no way.if he wins floyds next.lets give alvarez credit for once.

Canelo deserves a ton of credit even if he loses. I am very intrigued to see how this goes. GBP and fan base behind one fighter but the Sith Lord Al Haymon behind the other. Does that mean we will get a fair decision? I don't know. Can Trout stand up to Canelo? I think that is the biggest question. I think Trout can outbox cinnamon. It just amazes me what Al Haymon could possibly be doing with Trout. Trout, a road warrior with little fan base, somehow got the Cotto fight. He now gets a very winnable fight against another big name. Can Trout get Floyd with a win? I doubt it but I also doubted him getting Cotto and Canelo.

Hopefully some young guy is able to cleanly beat Floyd before he retires. The biggest names are built by beating the previous generation's big names. Pac got beat by another veteran and got robbed. Timmy built nothing from that. Canelo, Trout, or Guerrero all have a chance against Money. I think Sergio is vulnerable at middle as well. Pac has lost a lot of mystique already and may not even be a big enough win to give a young guy a push anymore.

ubeeg some good points.i also agree that sergio is vulverable.

Why is Canelo very beatable for a guy like Trout? Trout's best win was Cotto. To me Cotto at this stage and at '54 isn't a great win (it's a good win). Canelo may not have a great resume but the fighter's he's absolutely dominated are better than everyone save for shot Cotto that Trout has on his. This fight reminds me of Kessler Ward except I think that Canelo at this stage is better tahn Kessler was that stage and Ward is better than Trout at any stage. I think it's a good fight for both but I don't think that Canelo is this pushover that a lot of naysayers think he is. I'm picking Canelo.

hardcorebee24 wrote:Why is Canelo very beatable for a guy like Trout? Trout's best win was Cotto. To me Cotto at this stage and at '54 isn't a great win (it's a good win). Canelo may not have a great resume but the fighter's he's absolutely dominated are better than everyone save for shot Cotto that Trout has on his. This fight reminds me of Kessler Ward except I think that Canelo at this stage is better tahn Kessler was that stage and Ward is better than Trout at any stage. I think it's a good fight for both but I don't think that Canelo is this pushover that a lot of naysayers think he is. I'm picking Canelo.

I don't know if you have a different definition of very beatable than me but I mean it is close to a 50-50 fight in my eyes. Trout has the better win, can box, is southpaw, and has been on the road his entire career. Ryan Rhodes is the only legit 154 lb guy Canelo has fought and I personally only consider him as a guy that never really should've been in the top 10. I also happen to think Delvin and David Lopez were decent wins over bigger guys than Canelo has beaten. I believe Canelo will be the betting favorite and more likely to get the official decision but I think Trout is just as likely to deserve the decision.

UBeeg9cats wrote:

hardcorebee24 wrote:Why is Canelo very beatable for a guy like Trout? Trout's best win was Cotto. To me Cotto at this stage and at '54 isn't a great win (it's a good win). Canelo may not have a great resume but the fighter's he's absolutely dominated are better than everyone save for shot Cotto that Trout has on his. This fight reminds me of Kessler Ward except I think that Canelo at this stage is better tahn Kessler was that stage and Ward is better than Trout at any stage. I think it's a good fight for both but I don't think that Canelo is this pushover that a lot of naysayers think he is. I'm picking Canelo.

I don't know if you have a different definition of very beatable than me but I mean it is close to a 50-50 fight in my eyes. Trout has the better win, can box, is southpaw, and has been on the road his entire career. Ryan Rhodes is the only legit 154 lb guy Canelo has fought and I personally only consider him as a guy that never really should've been in the top 10. I also happen to think Delvin and David Lopez were decent wins over bigger guys than Canelo has beaten. I believe Canelo will be the betting favorite and more likely to get the official decision but I think Trout is just as likely to deserve the decision.

Delvin Rodriguez is not good. He actually sucks. His biggest win was Comanche Boy last night. That was his third fight at 154 (Trout) he had two against Wolak, he was a career welterweight so I don't know where you got he was a bigger guy. David Lopez is meh with 9 losses via KO and 12 losses total going inot the Trout fight on his record. Baldomir, Faded Mosley, Rhodes, Lopez and Kermit Cintron were all more accomplished and are all still better than those two chumps that Trout decisioned. Seriously not really good examples of better opponents. Don't forget that Canelo tried to make fights with the tops in the division, it just didn't work out. Again, I'm not saying that Canelo has proven to be a world beater or that Trout sucks, neither guy has a great resume but I don't understand based on performance why you think that Canelo's style is so beatable by a guy like Trout who hasn't proven shit. Why would Trout be unlikely to get the implied decision? He's an Al Haymon fighter fighting on a Floyd card in his home country.

Why was Ring Mag, Boxrec, ESPN and most other publications wrong about Rhodes and you right?

if the trout that fought cotto shows up he has a respectable chance to win.he moved threw punches well at a fair pace.if the trout of all his other fights shows up alvarez takes him out.
i agree with hardcore that alvarez has fought overall better competion.

hardcorebee24 wrote:
Delvin Rodriguez is not good. He actually sucks. His biggest win was Comanche Boy last night. That was his third fight at 154 (Trout) he had two against Wolak, he was a career welterweight so I don't know where you got he was a bigger guy. David Lopez is meh with 9 losses via KO and 12 losses total going inot the Trout fight on his record. Baldomir, Faded Mosley, Rhodes, Lopez and Kermit Cintron were all more accomplished and are all still better than those two chumps that Trout decisioned. Seriously not really good examples of better opponents. Don't forget that Canelo tried to make fights with the tops in the division, it just didn't work out. Again, I'm not saying that Canelo has proven to be a world beater or that Trout sucks, neither guy has a great resume but I don't understand based on performance why you think that Canelo's style is so beatable by a guy like Trout who hasn't proven shit. Why would Trout be unlikely to get the implied decision? He's an Al Haymon fighter fighting on a Floyd card in his home country.

Why was Ring Mag, Boxrec, ESPN and most other publications wrong about Rhodes and you right?

Delvin is definitely bigger than Lopez, Hatton, and Gomez. Mosley had to move up in weight as well. Cintron was 1-2 in his last 3 and was in such a groove, he hasn't fought since then. Delvin was ranked at 154 by Ring and others when he fought Trout. That means if Rhodes gets credit for being ranked, so does Delvin. The guys you mentioned all are more accomplished but mostly at 147 and a lifetime ago. There is no way I pick Baldomir, Mosley, Lopez, Rhodes, or Cintron over Delvin if they fought at 154 next. Lopez still has a lot of life in him but he was a junior welter that got a big TKO at welter. As for David Lopez, he was never ranked or anything special but he was a legit 154 lb guy who is now fighting at 160 against Don George. He is currently ranked 26th at middle by boxrec. Delvin is ranked 13th at 154. Josesito is ranked 10 at welter so beating Josesito at welter is about like beating Delvin at 154 according to boxrec. Gomez is the only guy ranked as high as David Lopez of the guys you mentioned. So yes I think they are better wins at 154 at the time they were the opponents.

Trying to get a fight is different than getting a fight. I don't give more credit for someone trying to fight someone else. I only give credit for getting in the ring with the opponent. I also don't understand why saying its a 50-50 fight is such a slight to Canelo. You are readily admitting that Trout has the biggest win of the 2 as well as that neither have proven a lot more than the other. I think an undefeated, legit 154 lb, slick, southpaw boxer has a chance against a guy who has fought only 2 154 lb fighters. Canelo could easily win. As for the possibility for the decision to go to Canelo instead of Trout in the scenario Trout deserves it, that is just an outcome that I see as possible. It seems like 40% of big decisions are wrong recently. I see Canelo as a BIG PPV star in the making. He has the most ravenous fan base and most powerful promotional company behind him. The WBC belt will be up for grabs so the Mexican biased ABC org might have sway over officials. The judges like power and activity over clean punching. They might also get swayed by the crowd. Yes, Haymon counteracts a whole bunch of that but does he counteract all of it? I just don't know. We will see. Canelo might just KO or dominate Trout or Trout may dominate Canelo. Any of those outcomes are definite possibilities and my worries will be for nothing.

UBeeg9cats wrote:

hardcorebee24 wrote:
Delvin Rodriguez is not good. He actually sucks. His biggest win was Comanche Boy last night. That was his third fight at 154 (Trout) he had two against Wolak, he was a career welterweight so I don't know where you got he was a bigger guy. David Lopez is meh with 9 losses via KO and 12 losses total going inot the Trout fight on his record. Baldomir, Faded Mosley, Rhodes, Lopez and Kermit Cintron were all more accomplished and are all still better than those two chumps that Trout decisioned. Seriously not really good examples of better opponents. Don't forget that Canelo tried to make fights with the tops in the division, it just didn't work out. Again, I'm not saying that Canelo has proven to be a world beater or that Trout sucks, neither guy has a great resume but I don't understand based on performance why you think that Canelo's style is so beatable by a guy like Trout who hasn't proven shit. Why would Trout be unlikely to get the implied decision? He's an Al Haymon fighter fighting on a Floyd card in his home country.

Why was Ring Mag, Boxrec, ESPN and most other publications wrong about Rhodes and you right?

Delvin is definitely bigger than Lopez, Hatton, and Gomez. Mosley had to move up in weight as well. Cintron was 1-2 in his last 3 and was in such a groove, he hasn't fought since then. Delvin was ranked at 154 by Ring and others when he fought Trout. That means if Rhodes gets credit for being ranked, so does Delvin. The guys you mentioned all are more accomplished but mostly at 147 and a lifetime ago. There is no way I pick Baldomir, Mosley, Lopez, Rhodes, or Cintron over Delvin if they fought at 154 next. Lopez still has a lot of life in him but he was a junior welter that got a big TKO at welter. As for David Lopez, he was never ranked or anything special but he was a legit 154 lb guy who is now fighting at 160 against Don George. He is currently ranked 26th at middle by boxrec. Delvin is ranked 13th at 154. Josesito is ranked 10 at welter so beating Josesito at welter is about like beating Delvin at 154 according to boxrec. Gomez is the only guy ranked as high as David Lopez of the guys you mentioned. So yes I think they are better wins at 154 at the time they were the opponents.

Trying to get a fight is different than getting a fight. I don't give more credit for someone trying to fight someone else. I only give credit for getting in the ring with the opponent. I also don't understand why saying its a 50-50 fight is such a slight to Canelo. You are readily admitting that Trout has the biggest win of the 2 as well as that neither have proven a lot more than the other. I think an undefeated, legit 154 lb, slick, southpaw boxer has a chance against a guy who has fought only 2 154 lb fighters. Canelo could easily win. As for the possibility for the decision to go to Canelo instead of Trout in the scenario Trout deserves it, that is just an outcome that I see as possible. It seems like 40% of big decisions are wrong recently. I see Canelo as a BIG PPV star in the making. He has the most ravenous fan base and most powerful promotional company behind him. The WBC belt will be up for grabs so the Mexican biased ABC org might have sway over officials. The judges like power and activity over clean punching. They might also get swayed by the crowd. Yes, Haymon counteracts a whole bunch of that but does he counteract all of it? I just don't know. We will see. Canelo might just KO or dominate Trout or Trout may dominate Canelo. Any of those outcomes are definite possibilities and my worries will be for nothing.

Rodriguez, a 3.85/1 betting underdog, entered with a record of 2-3-1 in his previous six bouts, going into the Trout fight. What was he ranked as per ring going into the Trout fight?

hardcorebee24 wrote:

Rodriguez, a 3.85/1 betting underdog, entered with a record of 2-3-1 in his previous six bouts, going into the Trout fight. What was he ranked as per ring going into the Trout fight?

He was ranked 10th.

2011 End of Year Ring Rankings.

UBeeg9cats wrote:

hardcorebee24 wrote:

Rodriguez, a 3.85/1 betting underdog, entered with a record of 2-3-1 in his previous six bouts, going into the Trout fight. What was he ranked as per ring going into the Trout fight?

He was ranked 10th.

2011 End of Year Ring Rankings.

He fought Trout in June. Where was Trout ranked? When Alvarez was ranked 9th he fought the 4th ranked Rhodes. Rodriguez had two fights against the same guy at '54 prior to fighting Trout. You said that Mosley moved up, he did but he is far more experienced and accomplished at '54 than Rodriguez. So was Kermit Cintron who holds a victory over Angulo and fought Martinez tough in Draw(loss) at '54 and has much more experience against stiffer competition than Rodriguez. Cotto is Trout's best, Cotto avoided Canelo at '54. The reason why I'm making a point about this is because people constantly denigrate Canelo because of his popularity. I will be the first to tell you that his competition is anything to rave about but Trout's resume is no great shakes. It's filled with nameless bums. Rodriguez was a prospect that never panned out and until Trout beat a chubby beat down Cotto (pains me to say that) he hadn't had a significant win. That was a great win but folks should point out that Cotto was coming off of a loss and is giving up too much at '54. They will both be each other's best fight but I feel that Canelo get's added hate because of his popularity and we like Trout and his underdog story but let's not fool ourselves and use Delvin Rodriguez as a measuring stick for good competition.

hopefully the fight actually happens. neither guy has fought great competition. trout didnt look good against rodriguez but looked legit against cotto. canelo looks solid. im not 100% sure who will win. to me, i think it more depends on which trout shows up. canelo is what he is. if trout shows up sharp and in shape, i think he wins.

hardcorebee24 wrote:
He fought Trout in June. Where was Trout ranked? When Alvarez was ranked 9th he fought the 4th ranked Rhodes. Rodriguez had two fights against the same guy at '54 prior to fighting Trout. You said that Mosley moved up, he did but he is far more experienced and accomplished at '54 than Rodriguez. So was Kermit Cintron who holds a victory over Angulo and fought Martinez tough in Draw(loss) at '54 and has much more experience against stiffer competition than Rodriguez. Cotto is Trout's best, Cotto avoided Canelo at '54. The reason why I'm making a point about this is because people constantly denigrate Canelo because of his popularity. I will be the first to tell you that his competition is anything to rave about but Trout's resume is no great shakes. It's filled with nameless bums. Rodriguez was a prospect that never panned out and until Trout beat a chubby beat down Cotto (pains me to say that) he hadn't had a significant win. That was a great win but folks should point out that Cotto was coming off of a loss and is giving up too much at '54. They will both be each other's best fight but I feel that Canelo get's added hate because of his popularity and we like Trout and his underdog story but let's not fool ourselves and use Delvin Rodriguez as a measuring stick for good competition.

Delvin fought a FOTY candidate fight and then dominated in a rematch against a lower top 10 Ring ranked fighter. This got Delvin his ranking. I don't know if Trout was even ranked but he won the fight over a ranked fighter. Rhodes was ranked 4th but Cotto was probably ranked 3rd when Trout took him. Again I conceded the point they are more accomplished but did not think they had much when Canelo fought them. I wouldn't give Canelo any credit beating Sugar Ray Leonard if he fought him next and Leonard has a better resume than everyone on both of their resumes combined.

Let's look at Mosley, Cintron, and Rhodes fights before and after Canelo as well as Delvin and Cotto's around Trout as best as we can. Mosley was 0-2-1 in the 3 years leading up to Canelo, moved up to face Canelo, and then retired from the loss. Cintron was 3-2-1 in the 3 years leading up with the draw being a gift and one really good win. One loss he leapt out of the ring to get out of the fight and the other he lost decisively. The quality win was over 2 years before Canelo. He has not fought since then. Rhodes was 6-0 in the 3 years leading up with Jamie Moore being the only one even close to world class. Since then he had a comeback win then got beat worse by Rabchenko. Delvin was 2-3-1 with all 3 losses being disputed. The win immediately preceding the Trout fight was against a ranked 154 lb fighter. He has had a solid win since then. Cotto was 3-1 all at 154. His loss was to the top fighter in the game and was Floyd's closest fight in years.

Its about the quality of competition when they fight.

UBeeg9cats wrote:

Delvin fought a FOTY candidate fight and then dominated in a rematch against a lower top 10 Ring ranked fighter. This got Delvin his ranking. I don't know if Trout was even ranked but he won the fight over a ranked fighter. Rhodes was ranked 4th but Cotto was probably ranked 3rd when Trout took him. Again I conceded the point they are more accomplished but did not think they had much when Canelo fought them. I wouldn't give Canelo any credit beating Sugar Ray Leonard if he fought him next and Leonard has a better resume than everyone on both of their resumes combined.

Let's look at Mosley, Cintron, and Rhodes fights before and after Canelo as well as Delvin and Cotto's around Trout as best as we can. Mosley was 0-2-1 in the 3 years leading up to Canelo, moved up to face Canelo, and then retired from the loss. Cintron was 3-2-1 in the 3 years leading up with the draw being a gift and one really good win. One loss he leapt out of the ring to get out of the fight and the other he lost decisively. The quality win was over 2 years before Canelo. He has not fought since then. Rhodes was 6-0 in the 3 years leading up with Jamie Moore being the only one even close to world class. Since then he had a comeback win then got beat worse by Rabchenko. Delvin was 2-3-1 with all 3 losses being disputed. The win immediately preceding the Trout fight was against a ranked 154 lb fighter. He has had a solid win since then. Cotto was 3-1 all at 154. His loss was to the top fighter in the game and was Floyd's closest fight in years.

Its about the quality of competition when they fight.

Anyone Delvin Rodriguez has fought that is a name he lost to save for Pawel Wolak who really is a part time fighter full time construction worker (look that up).

Mosley has retired every year for the last ten years. He was just about to get a fight with Paulie so he's not retired, he's a former belt holder at '54. He sucks now I agree.

Please don't make me do this: Cotto beat a one legged Rabbi, fought a tough fight with an older Mayorga than the one Shane KO'd. Beat a one eyed Margarito and lost to Floyd and Trout (ranked fighters).

Comanche Boy is a solid win? If you think that then this isn't even worth a debate.

For some reason, before I just checked it right now, I was under the impression that Trout was the much taller and rangier fighter and thought that he would win the fight by jabbing, outworking Canelo and moving on the outside. Now I'm not so sure because they're pretty much the same size. I'll have to watch their last couple of fights again.

hardcorebee24 wrote:
Delvin Rodriguez is not good. He actually sucks. His biggest win was Comanche Boy last night.

hardcorebee24 wrote:
Anyone Delvin Rodriguez has fought that is a name he lost to save for Pawel Wolak who really is a part time fighter full time construction worker (look that up).

Mosley has retired every year for the last ten years. He was just about to get a fight with Paulie so he's not retired, he's a former belt holder at '54. He sucks now I agree.

Please don't make me do this: Cotto beat a one legged Rabbi, fought a tough fight with an older Mayorga than the one Shane KO'd. Beat a one eyed Margarito and lost to Floyd and Trout (ranked fighters).

Comanche Boy is a solid win? If you think that then this isn't even worth a debate.

You said this. I was just trying to use what you said because I don't even know Comanche Boy.

I still take Delvin over anyone on Canelo's resume at 154 when Canelo fought them. Do you take anyone that Canelo has fought over Delvin or Cotto right now? Please tell me if you do because I feel like we are going in circles here. Really I have nothing more to say on this subject. I'm not mad I just feel like I made my point.

UBeeg9cats wrote:

hardcorebee24 wrote:
Delvin Rodriguez is not good. He actually sucks. His biggest win was Comanche Boy last night.

hardcorebee24 wrote:
Anyone Delvin Rodriguez has fought that is a name he lost to save for Pawel Wolak who really is a part time fighter full time construction worker (look that up).

Mosley has retired every year for the last ten years. He was just about to get a fight with Paulie so he's not retired, he's a former belt holder at '54. He sucks now I agree.

Please don't make me do this: Cotto beat a one legged Rabbi, fought a tough fight with an older Mayorga than the one Shane KO'd. Beat a one eyed Margarito and lost to Floyd and Trout (ranked fighters).

Comanche Boy is a solid win? If you think that then this isn't even worth a debate.

You said this. I was just trying to use what you said because I don't even know Comanche Boy.

I still take Delvin over anyone on Canelo's resume at 154 when Canelo fought them. Do you take anyone that Canelo has fought over Delvin or Cotto right now? Please tell me if you do because I feel like we are going in circles here. Really I have nothing more to say on this subject. I'm not mad I just feel like I made my point.

I was taking a shot at Delvin's resume saying that a club fighting, side show attraction like Comanche Boy was his best win. It's like saying Larry Holmes best win was Butterbean.