How many gifts did Chavez get?

Boxing Monthly. November, 1995.

Graham Houston's words. He's been a journalist for 35 years and still going strong today. Now and again you might see his articles on ESPN.com.

His report on Chavez-Kamau.

"Many around me at ringside (journalists) made this a desperately close fight, no more than a one-point win for Chavez or even a draw. But it seemed to be me that Chavez, hard-pressed though he had been throughout the fight, had won beyond reasonable doubt"

 

Whats your point with this Robbi?
Houston is actually saying that there were those at ringside that may have wanted to create controversy, when in fact it was'nt there.
That sounds alot like the American media in a Chavez fight to me! :nut


Houston's stating what I already did, that it was a close fight that Chavez in the eyes of many won clearly!

That seems about right to me.
There was'nt any cry from anyone in the boxing world making a stink that there was something fishy about the judging of the fight.
In fact, I've wrote about Chavez' mindset going into the Kamua fight more than once in this forum.......

Chavez at that point in his career was on the downslide of it, and by his own admission, was cutting corners in his preparation for fights.....
The Kamau fight was one that Chavez openly pointed to spanish speaking reporters that he was worried about going in.
Chavez thought that Kamau's height and reach could trouble him, and that he wished he had a couple more weeks of training for him.

From what I can recall, it was a close fight almost throughout, but one that through his experience, Chavez pulled out at the end.
In fact, in the late rounds, Chavez was able to close distance and punish Kamau to the head and body. Chavez pulled out that fight by stunning Kamau on several occasions and working him over in those late rounds.

 

Divac. I thought I'd just share it with you. It wasn't necasserily put forward to disagree with you or to create havoc. Just sharing the fact that others seen it as close. Houston himself had Chavez a comfortable winner.

 

Fair enough Robbi, but Houston's opinion on the fight actually proved my point.......by how Houston described it, there seems to be alot of media credentialed observers who chomp at the bit to create controversy, afterall, it does sell newspapers!

Imo, the Whitaker fight and Randall fights are the only fights for Chavez that can be pointed too as controversial.....anything beyond that imo are Chavez haters grasping at straws.

 

Yes it does prove your point. Because I replied with it doesn't mean Houston's take was siding with me. As I said, I'll have to score the fight properly via a round by round basis.

I'm not a Chavez hater.

Hopkins is one of my active favs, yet I had him losing to Taylor over both fights. Duran, my all-time personal fav, I have losing to Whitaker via decision at 135lbs. Leonard is a fighter I dislike, but had him edging Hagler.

No bias here.

 

You just have too much personal like for Pernell Whitaker to convince me that there is'nt any bias against Chavez......I could be wrong, I'll have to study up on your past and future Chavez posts, but it just seems to me, that a Chavez admirer that has'nt scored the Kamau fight, would point to it as a gift decision.

Btw Robbi, let me test your unbiased views.......
How did you score the first Whitaker-Rivera fight?

 

I actually watched it for the first time a couple of years ago. Never scored it properly, but Whitaker was fortunate to get the decision IMO. The rounds were competitive. If I had to give anyone the nod on watching the 12 rounds without scoring the rounds individually, then Rivera would get my vote. HBO scored it for Rivera, I think.

I think a draw for Whitaker would be the for best him. Close fight though, no question.

Regarding the Whitaker-Chavez fight. I never watched the fight and said to myself "close fight, however I'll just think what I want to think and live in my own world and say Whitaker won easily" that would be bias. I scored that for Whitaker, 8-4 or 9-3-1. Can't mind exactly.

Ohhh, and forget the Whitaker avatars on influencing you further when considering me as bias. I have avatars of Leonard on here often, simply because stripping away my personal dislike for him I can appreciate his greatness.

 

Its not secret you're a huge Whitaker fan.....if you're of the thinking that the Rivera fight was competitive (I thought Rivera won clearly) but if you thought it was competitive and anywhere near close, I dont understand how a Pea fan does'nt score that fight proper.

Why did'nt you score it proper Robbi?


Actually Robbi, its not a slight on you, but I think that alot of this forum are in the same boat you're in.......and I can actually understand there preference to view the fight as its happening without scoring.
When you're in a big group watching a fight, scoring it with so many distrations from others can sometimes be difficult......then comes the issue that probably most fans who are watching a big fight, are probably drinking.
I'm not a drinker, so thats never been a problem with me.

There are many instances that a fight may seem to be going in the direction of a particular fighter, when in fact, if you do a proper round by round scoring, it would translate to a much closer fight on a scorecard.

Example, as I always do for a big fight.....I scored the Mayweather-DLH fight a draw on my scorecard. When I added up my scorecard, I was suprised to learn that I had it a draw. In my mind, Mayweather overall was more effective and clearly did more damage......I thought I would have had him at least a couple of points ahead.

Had I not scored it on my scoresheet, I'd have sworn that Mayweather clearly had won the fight, and that anyone that had it within a point was a biased observer.

It can also go the other way. You can also see a fight as razor close, but having scored it proper which is round by round, find yourself that your scorecard is'nt representative of a close fight.

 

Anyone got a round by round for Whitaker-Rivera I?

I do.

115-115: Draw.

Rounds 1,3,5,8 and 9 for Whitaker.
Rounds 6,7,10,11 and 12 for Rivera.
Rounds 2 and 4 even.

I look forward to calls that I'm biased, and I look forward to calling out people on which rounds they think I'm biased on, and then I look forward to youtubing the said rounds and the conversation ending shortly thereafter :good

 

I am not a Whitaker fan but I scored the Chavez fight 9-3 in his favour. Divac, props to you for sticking to your original scorecard, but I am amazed that you scored it for Chavez the first time around. I cannot fathom how you got that scorecard.

 

Tap and run, tap and run.....in many instances Whitaker getting credit for taps on punchstat that did'nt really land.

For too many of the rounds, Whitaker was'nt even attempting to land anything stiff.

......alot of what he did in the Chavez fight, Whitaker repeated in the DLH fight.

A fighter that purposely holds back on the stiffness of which he normally throws a shot, just is'nt my cup of tea.

Roy Jones Jr did the same vs Felix Trinidad in the first half of that fight, doing just about zilch offensively, thus why I gave Trinidad most of the early rounds vs Jones.

Now, you might not agree, but thats the reason why I scored how I did!
.......and I stand by my scorecards and will defend them without any reservation of it going against the grain, imo a grain that is molded and heavily influenced by how the TV commentators call a fight.



......btw, I did not score for Chavez.
I scored the Chavez-Whitaker fight a draw on first view, and I stand by that score!

 

Thats the thing though, despite Whitaker only 'tapping' Chavez, Chavez wasn't doing anything in return that would justify him winning the rounds.

 

In my view he was. Not the thudding clean shots that Chavez is accustomed to landing, but alot of unappreciated bodywork and partial connects that imo were more effective than Whitaker's taps.

Thats the dillema of this fight, how to credit Whitaker's taps that were in no way effective, to that of Chavez' partial connects that had more steam behind them.
In such instances, I regularly side with the fighter who's aggressive and is putting forth a better punching effort.

I always here in forums like these that Chavez' offense was ineffective.......
Round by round now, because Whitaker did have two rounds in that fight where he did damage on Chavez......but on a round by round basis, Whitaker with his light tapping and running imo was less effective than Chavez was.

Those that scored big for Whitaker only look at that Chavez was'nt as effective at landing as crisp a shot as he normally does.....but they dont hold the same standard for Whitaker.

Scoring round by round and using the same effectiveness criteria for both fighters, you'll find that it was a much closer fight than you realized.

.....and I've said this before with others when arguing this fight PL.....
...dont just look at it from Pernell Whitaker's defensive point of view and just give credit to Pernell for defense......you'll find that except for two rounds in that fight, Chavez' defense was just as effective.
In Whitaker, you had a fighter who was holding back in the tenacity of which he threw his punches, yet he missed quite alot of those taps he attempted to land.
Overall Chavez own defense was superb in that Whitaker fight!

 

Hello, there. It has been a while since I joined an interesting thread which leads to Divac against the world on the Whitaker-Chavez subject :good

Just wanted to say hi, so go on guys.

 

How are you my friend?
Nice of you to chime in!

However jyuza, its no longer me against the forum on this issue of Chavez vs Whitaker......

.....in recent times, more posters have had the guts to come out of the closet with an opinion on Chavez-Whitaker that goes against the grain!

Imo, there are more fight fans now that are seeing the light!

Nice to hear from you my friend!:good :hi: