I saw somebody post that Ramirez deserved the decision in their bout. How many others feel that same way? I didn't see it that way at all but I want other opinions.
Yes that is the quote I was referring to. I honestly didn't see the fight that way AT all. I saw it as yet another time he was robbed.
If it was the Popkins quote, then yeah, he was probably being sarcastic. From what I've seen, Popkins is much too sensible to say that and mean it. (Of course, I could be wrong...) Personally, I think you pretty much have to fall into one of two categories to truly believe Ramirez won that fight: you either have to hate defensive fighting to the extent that you think it's impossible to win a match while going backwards, or you have to blinded by nationalism/fanboyism. Even for the very few guys that I've seen argue that either Ramirez or Chavez beat Whitaker, that's generally what it comes down to as far as reasons go.
Popkins was being sarcastic. However, Frankenfrank seems to believe that not only did Ramirez win the first fight, but the rematch as well. I asked him to explain himself and I don't think he ever really did, or if he did I don't think I could make out what he was trying to say given his posting style. "d Witaccre ran d hole fight aganst d Ramirez"
Ramirez won because he was d aggressor and Whitaker didn't do any damage , only ran for his dear life . 2nd fight was closer than d 1st , but Ramirez still won . 1 can't win by running all d time and not doing damage . D fact that Whitaker won d running contest doesn't turn d fight in2 such .