Sometimes, professional boxing can leave onlookers and participants drained, from excitement or outrage. Those twin emotions competed with each other yet again here on Saturday night when Adalaide Byrd, a respected official with a long history of sound judgment, came to the daft conclusion that Saúl “Canelo” Álvarez had won all but two rounds of his career-defining and quite excellent fight against Gennady Golovkin.
“This is terrible,” Golovkin said in the immediate aftermath, still the owner of his WBC, WBA, IBF and IBO world middleweight titles, but devastated to be denied victory, and only placated by positive talk of the inevitable rematch.
In his charming and truncated English, he described the fight as, “a drama show”. He added: “Of course I want the rematch. This was a real fight. Look, I still have all the belts. This was the biggest fight in the world. I’m still the champion.”
But not undisputed, like Bernard Hopkins was. And not the lineal champion, which Álvarez remains, because of his win over Miguel Cotto in 2015. There is unfinished business.
Certainly, Golovkin is willing to fight Álvarez again, and the Mexican wants it too, of course. But the scorecard shows they drew, when Golovkin deserved to win by a couple of rounds. So they will do it again, largely because of the heroism of the winner and loser, compounded by the eccentricity of Byrd.
After taking an early lead then soaking up a steady mid-fight beating, Álvarez fought back and, according to Byrd, won 118-110. He thus avoided what should have been a close and painful defeat.
Byrd’s colleagues knew it. Dave Moretti got it about right, giving it to the ageless Kazakh knockout artist 115-113, while Don Trella called it 114-114. The Guardian saw it 7-4-1 in rounds for Golovkin, but could be persuaded that a couple of those were close, and the even round might have gone either way.
So the draw was not the outrage. It was the margin of Byrd’s call (she famously refuses to score even rounds). If she had given it to Álvarez by a point there would have been only marginal disgruntlement. In a way it was the ideal decision from a financial point of view, because the rematch will be even bigger, and so will the bank accounts of the fighters, the TV executives, the promoters and all the myriad parties of joined interest.
But this was supposed to be an event that decided who was the best fighter in the world. It did not do that. It might, down the road, but everyone was left frustrated. Golovkin’s promoter, Tom Loeffler, said: “I’m sure we can sit down with Oscar [De La Hoya] and put that together.” He added: “There were some close rounds, but I don’t know how [Byrd] scored it like that.”
Golovkin’s’s trainer, Abel Sanchez, was more blunt: “I think she needs to go back to school.” Bob Bennett, executive director of the Nevada State Athletic Commission, defended Byrd – a Las Vegan who is married to Hall of Fame referee Bob Byrd – saying: “That’s the life of a judge. She had a bad night in a big fight. She saw the fight in a different way.”
Bennett said he nonetheless retained total faith in her competence and, to be fair, she came to the contest with a consistently good record in 442 bouts over 20 years. “When you’re a judge and you’re on the money, nobody says anything about it,” he said.
As he had pointed out during the week, the referee, Kenny Bayless, as well as Byrd, Moretti and Trella had, “about 124 years of experience” between them. Bayless has refereed more than 70 championship and elimination fights, Byrd had been a judge in 115 at that level, with Moretti on 169 and Trella 60.
Loeffler and De La Hoya go back a long way – he managed Oba Carr, who lost to the Golden Boy in 1999 – so their rapport should smooth the way for another fight, and that might disappoint, as rematches sometimes do.
But there remains a chance of justice being done – which did not happen at the T-Mobile Arena on Saturday night.
De La Hoya said: “I had it 7-5 [in rounds] for Canelo, but it was one of the best fights we have seen in recent years. Both are tremendous champions. I feel bad that Byrd is taking a bit of heat, but she is a very competent judge over many, many years. Boxing won today.”
No it didn’t – as nearly everyone else in the room agreed – including his friend Loeffler, who could not see an overall upside in boxing terms, although he will put that aside when they go through the rematch clause.
That, though, is way too much energy devoted to controversy when what the fight and the fighters deserved was celebration of a collision of wills, strength and skill that was at times breathtaking.
Álvarez, eight years younger but more seasoned as a pro with 52 fights to 35-year-old Golovkin’s 38 bouts, surprised by taking the early fight to his opponent, who took a few rounds to find his rhythm. Once the Kazakh started driving his lethal jab through the middle of Álvarez’s guard, however, the Mexican struggled. His countering swings under sustained pressure were ill-timed and wild, although some landed. Only one, in the ninth, seriously inconvenienced Golovkin.
But Álvarez’s sheer bloodymindedness got him back into the contest. Whatever Byrd thought, he gave up a significant chunk of the action in the middle stages, recovered to grab back a couple of the late rounds but could not summon the one clean finisher he needed to stop Golovkin in his tracks. Nobody has done that to the champion. If Álvarez cannot do it, it is unlikely it will ever happen.
Similarly, Álvarez’s chin absorbed shots that have reduced 33 of Golovkin’s opponents to rubble. Thus it is confirmed that two such immovable forces are destined to meet again. In all likelihood Byrd will not be on the judging panel.
The moral victory was Golovkin’s, but that was not enough for him. He was plainly distraught afterwards. He had spoken eloquently before the fight about the dangers of the sport to a fighter’s health. He now understands, for the first time in his professional career – and the first time since he was unlucky to be denied a gold medal at the 2004 Olympics – that pain can arrive through other senses.
Boxing, perhaps more than many other sports, can do that. It is as unfair as it is inevitable.
