Pernell whitaker vs Dela hoya.

So he embarassed him in a close fight? What was your score?

 

Well, the judges weren´t seeing what many many people saw.

 

Extremely close fight.

 

Poor Sweet Pea was robbed many times

 

Exaclty and watching it live it was hard to tell if those shots were connecting or not, it was more of Whitakers style that really hurt him, that series of shots there that the author of this thread described if your not looking very close they do look like shots scored.
Whitaker was a masterful boxer and had tremendous skills in there I thought DLH won it watching it live, but after watching the tape shortly after well he didnt win that fight, like I said officials can not go back and review the tape and change the out come of the fight.
I think Whitaker could have done a better job though of making it clear how often Oscar was missing.

 

I thought Whitaker won to be honest. De La Hoya looked like a clown at times, which just shows how good Whitaker was, even well past prime.

 

I had Oscar winning that fight by a pt or 2 not sure what I scored it ,although Pea was clowning Oscar he imo wasn't landing enough ..But then of course he was also going up against the Golden Boy ..So im sure the judges only cared for what Oscar landed more so then what Pea was doing or not doing for that matter .

 

Had Oscar winning by 1 point, just shows how great Whitaker really is.

 

I personally had Whitaker by 2 points, but I don't suppose that comes as a shock. Oscar landed plenty of clean shots, just not in combination. Oscar also showed underrated defense himself, as he made Pea miss quite a bit as well. Ultimately, it came down to the fact that Oscar was content to fight Pea's fight, and Pea controlled it for the most part with his much more efficient jab. I had him winning based on defense(which is a scoring criteria in case people have forgotten) and ring generalship for the most part. He did land more shots overall as well, and at a higher percentage according to Punchstat, which I'll be the first to admit isn't the most accurate.

 

disagree on the score, agree with you on oscars defensive abilities. at the time oscar was fascinated with willie pep and was trying emulate him against sweet pea, which was the reason the fight was very close

whitaker was doing far to much clowning and not enough punching. if whitaker had of upped the workrate, he could of nicked the decision against that very defensive oscar

if oscar had of been more aggresive, the decision would not of been in doubt today

 

Whitaker threw more, landed more, and landed at a higher percentage than Oscar. I think that qualifies as a good enough workrate. Also, if Oscar were to be more aggressive, it's possible he'd have left himself open a lot more. In fact, we saw what happened when Oscar did get aggressive with those flurries. Not too successful, so I can't say I agree.

 

It is almost impossible to win close fights on defense. You really need your offense to get it done.

 

spot onj