Posted:
#1
i had it 116-113 mayweather i had 1 round even and i had floyd winning the last 4 rounds
the guy that had it for oscar should have his eyes checked and his head examined
just watched Mayweather-DLH
...
Views: 611
Posts: 10
Posted:
#2
Whats weird is where I was sitting in the stands, it looked like Oscar was the clear winner. The whole crowd around me was furious, yelling "bullshit" when they announced the decision.
I had money on Mayweather, and assumed I lost, was just waiting for confirmation from the ring announcer.
I watched it again on tv this afternoon, and realized now the Mayweather blocked alot of Oscars shots, and got in much more clean shots..The flurry of punches from Oscar was a little misleading from where we sat.
That being said, it was a close fight, and i give a slight edge to Mayweather, now that I have seen it on tv.
Why didnt Oscar use his jab more at the end?
I had money on Mayweather, and assumed I lost, was just waiting for confirmation from the ring announcer.
I watched it again on tv this afternoon, and realized now the Mayweather blocked alot of Oscars shots, and got in much more clean shots..The flurry of punches from Oscar was a little misleading from where we sat.
That being said, it was a close fight, and i give a slight edge to Mayweather, now that I have seen it on tv.
Why didnt Oscar use his jab more at the end?
Posted:
#4
Quote Originally Posted by NJDevils:
i had it 116-113 mayweather i had 1 round even and i had floyd winning the last 4 rounds
the guy that had it for oscar should have his eyes checked and his head examined
I felt Floyd won between 7-8 rounds, and that was giving Oscar anything close, knowing the crowd was influencing the judges, bigtime. When Kaczmarek gave Oscar 7 rounds, I was thinking "another black eye for boxing."
Another example of terrible judging, which allowed people to scream "robbery."
Posted:
#5
No No No it was not terrible judging. Brian Kinney from ESPN had it 6-6. I had Mayweather also, and lets be honest it DEPENDS how you judge a fight. If you strictly judge for landed punches, Mayweather. But, if you judge for the fighter FIGHTING, throwing MORE punches, and CONTROLLING the pace of the fight, De La Hoya. Lets be honest, it was a tough fight to judge. Also, remember De La Hoya was the champ. Dont you have to BEAT the champ to take the belt? Before the compubox stat days fighters like Ali, Hagler, Leonard, Holmes, HELL all of them, they would get more credit for being the aggressor rather than the point system. Most judges in the past gave more credit to the aggressor and the one controlling and dictating the fight. How can you say De La Hoya was getting beat when he CONTROLLED the fight? I say Mayweather won, but slightly EDGED him. He definitely was not in control of this fight. He was defensive from start to finish. Landing one punch and running away would get you crushed ten years ago in the score system
Posted:
#6
Agree totally NJDevils. I was in shock when the scorecard was read and De La Hoya was the winner on the first card read. However, I was disappointed with the way Mayweather fought so cautiously and didn't really take it to Oscar like I think he was capable of doing. Just9012 makes some good points but I disagree with throwing more punches being any kind of a factor. How many land and what effect they have matter, amount of punches thrown is irrelevant, as was proven in this fight where Oscar wore out throwing a lot of harmless punches and missing with most.
Posted:
#7
Landing one punch and running away would get you crushed ten years ago in the score system
Obviously you've never heard of Pernell Whitaker, or saw Leonard-Hagler. Moving forward doesn't mean you are winning the fight. It just means you are moving forward. There's a difference between "effective aggression" and forward movement.
Hot Forum Topics
