Rescoring De La Hoya-Trinidad....what is your new scorecard

Because Trinidad is an explosive puncher, and a split second concentration lapse on De La Hoyas part (most likely when he's tired in the last couple of rounds) could cost him the fight - He played it safe.

Katsidis decided to try and finish off Casamayor in similar circumstances and got caught and knocked out.

By the way, one judge actually scored the 12th round in De La Hoyas favour.

 

So to is Mike Tyson an explosive puncher, I did'nt see that stopping Evander Holyfield from continueing to lay a can of whoop ass, despite the fact that 100% of those watching had him well in front.
Holyfield clearly showed his superiority over Tyson, and thank God for fighters like Holyfield who fight consciously knowing that there are people out there who are paying good money to see him at work!!!

Yeah, damn Katsidis for trying to live to his end of the bargain and entertaining the viewer by trying to finish the show.:roll:

Bottom line, there was not a whole lot of Boxing media that were upset with this decision, because they knew that DLH had not done enough even in the early rounds to make it clear that he was winning those rounds.

I've said this about Pernell Whitaker also, at the end of the day, history has shown us that judges dont reward the fighter that fights timidly cautious!


Can you imagine the state of boxing today, if every fighter who thought he was winning rounds, just went out and played it safe???

Open your minds friends, there is a good reason why judges normally dont reward cautiousness, it would completely ruin boxing.

........and the saddest part about DLH's performance against Trinidad is that he was supposed to have been "THE DRAW" the fighter that people pay to see.
Point blank, that performance by DLH was not one from a GREAT fighter!

 

I give Holyfield credit for finishing off Tyson. But the fact is Tyson was poorly conditioned, rendered senseless by the headbutt in the 3rd round, and being badly beaten. Trinidad was still fresh and a genuine threat at any point of the fight. He was outboxed but not brutalized.

I'm not glorifying what De La Hoya did - I'm just saying I can understand it.

Katsidis fought valiantly, and deserves to be commended for that, but even he seemed remorseful for the way he fought late on in the fight in the postfight interview, citing inexperience for his rash offense.

If I was his trainer I certainly would've told him not to take chances in the late rounds. And he'd be an undefeated titlist and on the verge of a much bigger payday in the future had he fought that way.

 

Nothin Tito done actually won him any rounds, it was all what Oscar threw away. Imo if trinindad only got the last 3 rounds that would be totally fair. De La Hoya was quicker, landed more blows more often and hardly took any damge at all over 12.

Blatant win for Oscar, disgusting decision.

 

I just watched it again.

First of all, the commentators -all of them- Merchant, Foreman, Lampley, and even Lederman were shameless in their cheerleading. In round 6, Oscar was running and running and fans are booing, and Lampley says "they don't know that they are witnessing a superb boxing exhibition." Now hear this: Dancing around safely outside of the perimeter and skipping backwards as your opponent comes in -is not "superb boxing".

Lederman says "Oscar is moving beautifully -that's ring generalship." That is not only erroneous, it drives home the point. And the point is that it is most assuredly NOT superb boxing and it is NOT ring generalship -by definition!

I would ask those of you are consider this fight a disgrace to first define what great boxing is. I think that we have a problem of definition.

I think it likely that "safety first" boxing has been inflated since the days of Ali (who moved like Sugar Ray Robinson although Sugar was not "safety first", but a mobile assassin), and reached their fruition with Ray Leonard. The American media is thus complicit in glorifying something that really is a second-rate skill -running and dancing outside of the danger zone. They did it because they had wet dreams about Leonard.

First rate defensive skill is not staying out of harm's way -it is operating within harm's way and effectively avoiding shots by inches (not by feet).

Ring generalship is this and delivering textbook shots effectively inside, mid-range, outside, and combining the different skill sets you need that include but are not limited to mobility!

Now don't misunderstand. Tito fought like Duran in New Orleans -he fought like a narcoleptic. Single digit punches in a round is pathetic. It is not effective aggression. However, some rounds of the Tito-DLH had one man coming forward, throwing and missing single shots and the other man running right, left, and backwards and throwing and missing combinations. The former is fighting, albeit ineffectively -the latter is running. That ain't great boxing!

 

Even though I scored it for DLH, I don't see this great big robbery that people are talking about. There were indeed some close rounds.

Rounds 1, 4, 8, 9....close rounds. Hell, even Tito's rounds late were close.

[YT]gS_D0I2ZtMI[/YT]

[YT]dfNhA8rx5s0[/YT]

[YT]GsAPiTLO7yM[/YT]

[YT]g9y4FJyBRFc[/YT]

[YT]s_FyQqDKBpo[/YT]

 

I would say first rate defensive skill can be staying out of harms way as long as your landing as well and doing effectively with a sufficent amount of offense while doing so. By a fighter letting his hands go he's always vulnerable to be being countered. So if he a boxer can judge his distance well, keep on the move; avoid exchanges, and score with clean accurate punches. Then thats first rate defense.

However, the even tougher way is what you said above. Operating within harms way and still doing as good a job as what I mentioned above. More boxers are prone to being hit when standing within range, mid-distance and inside, but not hit cleanly if they are good. Top of the head, gloves, hips, and low blows. Toney and Whitaker were both brilliant at covering up inside.

What is great defense? Making your opponent miss altogether or blocking his punches and not taking anything that would count as 'scoring' type punches?. If you can combine both then IMO you have a very varied defense. It's a lot harder to make an opponent hit fresh air up close then it is at long range. Obviously as you can see punches coming which are further away from you, thus giving you time to react.

Not disagreeing with you, just adding more to what you posted. More questions being asked so to speak.

 

One round I have watched many times is the 9th. After viewing this round and watching intently I think De La Hoya wins that round.

 

Is that because you thought it was more one sided or because you thought DLH-Tito was a bigger event?

In pure boxing terms it was in no way shape or form bigger than Chavez vs. Whitaker. There you had two fighters of a higher calibre, ranked no.1 and no.2 p4p at the time squaring off. And they certainly displayed more skill and ability than DLH and Tito did in their fight.

Now in terms of capturing the imagination of the public, DLH vs. Tito probably was bigger, even thought Chavez vs. Whitaker was fought in front of 56,000 fans.

 

Great post,

Also I will add, and I believe this will be disagreed with, blatant running like De la Hoya's in the last 3 rounds warrants 10-8 scoring regardless of what the agressor does (as long as he keeps pressing). There should be a strong deterent for fighters who refuse to fight.

 

I scored the fight same way, 7 to 4 with one draw for Oscar. I love Trinidad but just don't think he deserved the win just cuz Oscar got tired. The fact that Trinidad could not close off the ring to an extremely fatigued boxer is very telling. Had Trinidad tired in the tenth Oscar would have knocked him out, just better at controlling the ring. Trinidad should have been able to knock Hoya out, instead he chased while missing most punches. Therefore he sure as hell does not deserve that win.

 

By simply throwing punches. When you have a fighter that is bring the fight to the other fighter and hes not doing anything but running, then you pretty much dominated the round by throwing. It was a combination of what Trinidad did and what Oscar didn't do. Its not something that i agree with, but thats the way they scored the fight. Like i stated, i had Oscar winning by unanimous decision.

 

Awesome post Stonehands!
You beautifully and eloquently described what I consider boxing just about to a tee!:good


I'm baffled that so many posters around here would consider great defense as someone who is just avoiding getting hit.

I think you will agree that avoiding getting hit in a scoring sense is worthless, if its not going to lead to you putting yourself in position to score.


I've got to pay you the ultimate compliment Stonehands, I cant remember reading a better post around here!
Great Post!!!:good

 

Keep on the move and avoid exchanges???
I could'nt disagree anymore with your view of what boxing is and should be.

Stonehands described it beautifully, and I agree with him 100%.

Boxing to me is all about the exchanges, and hitting while avoiding being hit during them.
Great defense is avoiding your opponent to cleanly and effectively hit you while at the same time putting yourself in a position to effectively hit.


I respect you and your opinions Robbi, but on this matter we're on complete opposite ends!:?