Lets dabble into the Floyd Hater mentality for a moment, just a dabble...

maybe, maybe not ..

It the floyd haters that put Zab on a pedestal and insisted that he would ether beat floyd or give him his sternest test ,even after his lost to Baldi when that didn't happen Zab was reduced to nothing more then a bum .
The same can be said about Baldi , everyone was on baldi dick before floyd beat him also.

 

Exaclty and that is the difference between a hater and a fight fan, Baldimor = Garbage
Zab = had potential but lacked mental tougness and in this game fighting on that level you need that tool.

However it still puts into perspective how good DLH was considering the out come of his fight with Floyd, being that DLH was about 10 years past his best days, he was still able to compete in a close fight with the best P4P fighter in the world, i mean a single point SD is not being dominated at all.

I think people all to often when it comes to scoring, they are just like the judges ringside, they score based on what they see during the fight as the judges did for DLH PBF.

if you have a guy comming forward and throwing shots, and one guy in reverse trying to counter as a judge you have to ask yourself who is in command?

what dose that judge see?

the man pressing forward making the fight, and the other man moving away reacting to what the man comming forward is doing.

or is it

The man in reverse is baiting the other guy in and playing off of his mistakes?

So in reality its not just what you and or I see during the fight its what the judges might be looking at as well. you cant really say either man had control of that fight there.
However here is a perfect example

De La Hoya vs Whitaker

I wont lie at first I thought Oscar won this fight, Honestly! But after re watching the fight on tape, you could see that the shots DLH did throw most missed but were so fast and so close they looked like actual scoring shots, meaning the judges may have been mislead by Whitakers performance here.
but as a judge they can only score based on what they see, its not like they can wake up in the morning and review the tape and change the outcome.
it all depends on what the is witnessed in the eyes of the judges in that moment. sure its wrong sure bad out comes happen as a result but its not a perfect system it never will be.
however to base your opinion on who you thought or felt one the fight is one thing, but to say the judges dont know ****:nono like I said it all depends on how they view the fight as its taking place.

 

Agree with you that the fighter coming forward doesn't alway equate that he/she winning the fight but it also depend if the guy retreating is dictating the action. if the guy is in full retreat only throwing shots to keep the other guy off of him and not really trying to gain a tactical advantage then I can see making a case for the aggressor.

In the floyd vs Oscar fight .. What I saw was Oscar flailing away widely , while floyd would counter in-between Oscar wild punches , then baiting Oscar in to be counter with ether a straight right or uppercut. Floyd also keeps his guard tight and close and it looks like he was get hit with shot that he really wasn't .

I also agree on judging because its really hard to tell what there looking for , are they looking for most punches thrown which is something that done in the amateurs.
or are the looking for ring general ship, and effective aggression which has alway been associated with pro boxing .

 

I hope I'm not the only one who notices that, whenever a post starts this way, with "Are you saying.....", that what they think is being said is rarely ever what's actually being said. It's like what I've been complaining about of late, you guys read what you want, twist it, and respond too much to what you THINK is being said. atsch

 

I insult you because you think you're some intelligent poster, insult others, yet all you do it talk **** and post his resume. atsch

 

You two look the same age bro. Which one are you and which is the kid.

 

He was born when I was 14

 

Exactly which can be a hard thing for a judge to figure out when most of the Judges these days are so old they hear God calling them to come to him.
I mean we dont exactly have the youngest judges in scoring fights, and I think that is also another big problem. But its really hard to call when it comes to scoring becuase a judge may be influenced by the aggressor and it does happen all to often.
I Honestly though Oscar won the fight, it was close to be honest it should have been ruled a draw because Floyd IMO didnt do enough to take the title and Oscar did too little defending it, However I almost always favor the aggressor especially if the fight is close like this was and especially if that aggressor is the champion he should get the beinifit of the doubt on the cards.
it dont always work that way though in the end fights that are written in the books officialy are always debatable but debating the scoring of a fight never changes the official ruling.

 

Talking like a gansta don't mean **** m8. U must be a Zab Judah fan walking around with your ****in PITbull. Didn't expect anything less from a ****wit that likes these stupid ass dogs (only for cowards who are too scared to fight for themselves or ****s with little dicks, you my friend would fall into at least one, if not both, of these catagories). Mum jokes are for little kids m8. Did you think that would insult me? Nothing you just posted disproves that you are, as I stated before, a FUKING IDIOT.

PS. I hope your pit mutilates one of your loved ones some day. :good

 

You old dog you. Thats pretty cool though bro. You two would have a close friendship, like brothers almost, hey? Are you the short one or the tall one?

 

good post!!!!:good

 

man Look at you trying to sound all tuff and **** over the internet you go girl.

let me guess what kind of dog you like "chiwawa" I guess your lass boyfriend had a pitbull and he had a tiny dick right ? Well don't worry when you have a ******* like soup bowl like yourself , even the biggest dick seem tiny .

Kick rock son with your wanna be tuffguy/ psychiatry bit , your **** is slow son.. Your Just like allot of these rock heads on ESB, when you don't know what the **** your talking about you resort to name calling ,which is a true ***** move .. my dog won't be mutilating my loved one but he will be ****ing your mom , in the mouth !!!:yikes

 

this is where I disagree ,, I felt floyd did more then enough to win the fight and really deserved a majority decision .. He landed more of the effective punches between the two and he contained and limited Oscar offense and took away his most effective weapons with defense and counter punching .

Oscar on the other hand, could do little else but come forward flail way and hope for the best. he had no answer for floyd's lateral movement and when he tried cutting off the ring he would end up eating counter for all his trouble . Then when ever Floyd would decide to let his hand go , Oscar would back out quick instead taking advantage of the supposedly smaller weaker fighter standing directly in-front of him throwing punches.

sorry but Oscar seem to not have a game plan, other then being the supposedly bigger and stronger fighter.

 

If what your saying is true then that means Floyd didnt counter as often as you claimed he did so which is it?

 

This is were we can agree to disagree , I feel floyd did more then enough to win a majority decision. the show box number kind show that he did throw less then oscar but landed more (Ring generalship).. I think a lot of viewers, were looking at the fight with emotion , rather than logically by the rules if that make since.