Jofre-Harada bouts

They may well affect his ratings with some people i guess.A few reasons why he isn't criticised too harshly:

Harada was a great himself, at his peak and displayed a great deal of ability in the fights.

Jofre also fought well and for the most part looked damn good as well.The first bout is a truly great fight.IF he had looked like **** in a dull fight things may be different.

Jofre was generally considered at the time to be a bit past his best as a Bantam and struggling to make weight.

The fights were highly competetive and controversial...even though most seem to think Harada won the first, it was still close enough where it wouldn't have been the worst decision in the world had it gone to Jofre.The second was very,very close.

 

Yeah, haven't properly scored it, but from my recollection Jofre may've been a bit unlucky to have lost the decision in the rematch.

A point regarding your Olivares/Castillo analogy. What do you make of his bouts with Herrera, in which he was stopped in the first and lost on points in the rematch? That would seem a bit more detrimental, no? Yet he's still placed as highly as he is.

 

Summed up well. I do think Jofre and Harada both look great in the fights, especially the way Jofre comes back from the 4th round and battles back well.

I disagree, I thought Harada won the rematch clearer than the first one. I thought the first was a very even fight and brilliant but the second was slower and more tactical.

I dont have my notes on the fight handy, will get them tommorow, but heres my scorecards.

Eder Jofre vs Fighting Harada I

Jofre: 3,5,8,10,12,13,14
Harada: 1,2,4*,6,7,9,11,15
Total: 143-141 Harada (8-7)

*=10-8 round


Eder Jofre vs Fighting Harada II

Jofre: 1,2,4,7,10,12
Harada:3,5,6,8,9,11,13,14,15
Total: 144-141 Harada (9-6)

 

it would be nice to get a forum consensus on the two Jofre-harada fights at some point.

I don't think Harada ever looked quite as sharp at Bantam again, as he did in that first fight.Still a great fighter in the other defences, but its amazing he got as much done as he did, with the way he was eating himself through the divisions like a japanese Hatton.Just one of the sports great natural talents.

 

I noticed a difference in both of them in the second fight,neither was as sharp or really as willing in it as the first IMO.

 

I though Harada won both when I watch them,

I dont have the score cards, first fight was close, and as said, the rematch was more clear for Harada imo.

I didnt think Jofre was able to keep up with the Henry Armstrong like work Harada brought in there bouts.

As for the ranking, and the effects. Not sure, loseing to Harada is no shame, Harada at worse is a near top 50, Me, myself, I have him around 25 or 30 ish.

 

I thought Jofre got off to a bad start in the first fight culminating into the dreadful (for Jofre) round 4, so he was always having to 'make up ground' in the fight, and after the 4th round the fight was very very close and as he was playing catch up he just lost because of the slow start.

 

Harada fought a lot like Armstrong in there, so were Jofre may have been more pin point in his shots, Harada just swarm him, hench the reason why I belive Jofre point wise, could not keep up.

 

I agree in Harada's case, though not in Jofre's. I thought he looked in top form, ready to avenge the loss from the first fight. Kind of a role reversal from the first fight, in my opinion.

 

He also boxed very well, in fact he got the better of Jofre on the outside for many stretches, boxing on his toes behind a rapier jab.

 

Fair enough, I get what you are saying. What I most liked was the way Harada adapted mid way through into a more 'boxing' style behind his jab.

 

I'll have to re-watch it again, I got the impression Harada wasnt that sharp and Jofre couldnt quite pull the trigger the same and had lost some of his sharpness. When I get my notes it should jog my memory.

 

The Castillo rematch was extremely close as well, moreso than the cards would've suggested, anyway. Excellent bout.