WHITAKER v CHAVEZ (Re-watched & scored)

Well, you only have 3 clear rounds, so I suppose that matches your perception of it being close.

 

Can't remember it exactly, but i know i thought the fight was closely contested but ultimately only won by one man. I only give Chavez 2 rounds and the rest to Pea, but like i said it didnt reflect the close nature of the bout.

 

I'm quite sure I scored rounds 1,2,5, and 9 for Chavez. The rest went to Whitaker.

 

Whitaker won the fight. 10-2-1, 9-3, 8-4, etc. It wasn't a draw.

 

It was scored:115-113 Whitaker; 115-115 and 115-115, thus it was a Majority draw!


Bit flippancy aside; I can understand the conspiracy; Whitaker did seem to have the better of the fight, not least because TV told us so; but Chavez was the King fighter; so.....

 

I saw it, but I didn't score it. All I know is that The Pea was robbed almost as bad as he was against Ramirez and should have walked away that night as the first to defeat Chavez.

 

This fight was clearly and by far not a draw, sweet pea won the fight.

 

TV told us? We knew it was bad because every report from teletext, news, newspaper and magazine had it that way too. We then watched it (on ITV delayed) and we agreed. Awful decision.

 

I am sure it was live on SKY; I am almost certain that, SKY had all the DKP Superbills of the early 90s.

It was one of them fights where the old great one, perhaps got one final break, and a fighter as good as Chavez was deserves that IMO...

It was a win/win situation, in that a thoroughly UN-TV friendly fighter (Whitaker), got the mainstream sports fans onside, to the point we are still talking about it about some 15+ years later.

 

I thought Whitaker deserved the decision, but the outcry of it as a "robbery" was way overblown IMO.

Basically, the way I saw the fight is that Whitaker won about 6 rounds clearly (ensuring him no less than a draw), Chavez won at least three clearly, and then about 2-3 rounds were close.

I don't agree that it was a blatantly fixed decision, more a case of the judges giving Chavez every benefit of the doubt and perhaps a little more. I usually have the fight scored roughly 7-4-1 in rounds for Whitaker and could possibly see it scored as close as 7-5 for him.

It's nowhere near among the worst decisions I've ever seen, and not even among the worst decisions I've seen called a draw. I think Lewis-Holyfield, Chi-Brodie, and Armstrong-Garcia, among others, were far worse than this.

If it wasn't for the fact that Whitaker was denied the distinction of being the first man to officially beat Chavez, I don't think there would've been quite the outcry against this decision that there was.

 

Chavez was schooled and was lucky (or unlucky) he was funding DKs kids through college, DKs mansions, DKs prostitution habit etc

You know its a bad decision when you can't find anyone who isn't amazingly unbiased scoring it to the 'gift fighter', only the most patriotic blind Mexicans had it a draw or to Chavez.

The judges were probably told to give it to JCC but felt it was so 1 sided they'd opt to give it a draw