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

I don't see what the problem is Divac. I have covered what Stonehands has said and added a bit of my own feelings. Lets simplify it. Any fighter who steps into a ring and makes his opponent miss yet lands clean effective punches of his own has a good defense. Trust me my friend, it's that simple.

Whats wrong with making an opponent miss, then making him pay. An exchange is when both fighters are opening up at the same time. Yes, very good fighters who can stand in harms way, get into exchanges, and avoid punches have a damn excellent defense. But the bottom line is that if you can avoid incoming traffic and return effective offense then your doing well.

I have clearly pointed out that it takes a special defensive fighter to stand within range, exchange punches, and avoid whats coming towards him. And I have agreed with Stonehands on my last post about it.

But a fighter who uses lateral movement and even lets his hands go while backing up in a straight line is also among a rare breed.

Whitaker avoided exchanges against Nelson through the vast majority of their fight. You trying to tell me he wasn't effective? I'll tell you one thing. Whitaker at one point backed up in a straight line. ________ like that, looking to avoid an exchange, and at the same time cracked right through Nelson's guard with three clean jolting jabs. You don't see many fighters do that.

 

I appreciate the credit -especially because a poster with the caliber of Divac doesn't speak out of the wrong end.

A post script: it's getting redundant for me to keep harping on, but boxing fans, even the more knowledgeable ones at ESB confuse skill with youthful athleticism. Duran's demonstration of skillful defense in Montreal far exceeded Leonard's in New Orleans -and that may be the line that divides the camps here -I'd welcome any opposition on that one.

Here's another example: I for one am far less impressed with a Michael Nunn jumping around to avoid shots than I am by Mike McCallum slipping and countering Julian Jackson's bombs -operating like a surgeon inside the perimeter. There is no comparison, but people like showy things, not subtle skill.

 

Yeah, Duran showed that he could bull forward and slip punches. Leonard said after the fight he found Duran hard to hit cleanly. Most of the punches brushed off Duran or missed altogether, and at times Leonard landed. Duran's defense was not just brilliant inside, but he also countered well from the outside in Montreal. He stepped in effectively so to speak. Much of Duran's long range work was choosen carefully. He timed his shots extremely well. A great example was when Duran rocked Leonard back into the ropes near the end of the 2nd round. He slipped Leonard's jab with head and waist movement, then came back with a right hand followed by a half left hook/uppercut. Beautiful.

 

A good defense is enchanced further with the ingredients of youthful athleticism. It's not about being confused. It's about aknowleding both skill, which I assume you mean defensive skill, and athleticism.

Leonard's defense in New Orleans was basic, but effective. He was hit far less for as long as the fight lasted than Duran was in Montreal over the first 8 rounds. Obviously they were both showing different styles in each fight. This ties in with what I said about it being harder for a fighter to stand in harms way and totally avoid punches than it is at long range while on your bicycle.

I do tend to agree that Duran's defense was complex and varied. Their are so many aspects to a fighters defensive game that he can use to avoid punches while hitting his opponent. Slipping punches, feinting, countering, lateral movement, blocking punches, covering up, waist movement. Duran showed a little bit of everything in Montreal, with Leonard only ticking a few boxes. Lateral movement being the strongest aspect of his defense in New Orleans.

 

Leonard's defense in New Orleans may have been "effective" but it was only because he was "hit far less often" -and that was only because he was usually out of harm's way against a man who was half-asleep.

You're right about it being a demonstration of a different form of defense -a less impressive and less skilled form of defense.

 

I have always been a fan of boxers; Holmes, Hearns, Whitaker, etc. But Duran is one those aggressive fighters I appreciate to the core. Not many aggressive bulls are among my favourite fighters, but Duran happens to be at the very top. Number one actually.

Duran and Whitaker come hand in hand although they are polar opposites. Whitaker's offense and inside fighting gets overlooked, as does Duran's defense and boxing ability. And it you swap those attributes around with each fighter, thats exactly whats comes to mind first and foremost when we think of either.

 

:good

Duran-Leonard in Montreal is a prime example of exellent defense within what I would call boxing parameters.

I've made myself clear on numerous occasions.....some people appreciate extreme lateral movement to avoid getting hit.
I just dont consider that true boxing within its parameters.

DLH-Trinidad, Hagler-Leonard, being prime examples of extreme lateral movement for the sake of avoiding having to box within parameters.

Let me just add that both DLH and Leonard did well in those fights when they actually slowed down somewhat to actually try some boxing.
.....the problem for me was that so much of the rounds were loaded with long stretches of pure lateral motion without the boxing.
Its elementary in scenario's such as this that the faster footed fighter will avoid getting hit......but is he avoiding getting hit while boxing within the parameters that could be called boxing?
I say no to both DLH vs Trinidad, and Leonard vs Hagler.

Let me add also that not so long ago, I revisited the Duran-Leonard rematch, and found that through the first six rounds, Leonard was'nt doing much more than DLH did against Trinidad......

.....Duran imo who was in **** poor shape for a fight of that magnitude, had visibly lost some of his steam during his chase of Leonard, that I noticed his punches were far from sharp and were dragging.....it was during the 7th round I believe that Leonard noticed this as well and got brave enough to stop some of his lateral running and stop some to fight.
So visible was Duran's fatigue, that Leonard was even mocking him.

In the state of physical shape Duran was in that night, he had no business competing with Leonard.
It is at that point that Duran himself realized it and said, "no mas!"


Extreme lateral movement is boxing?
Leonard-Duran in New Orleans is yet another example that judges dont consider it to be.....despite Duran looking like crap, the judges scorecards after at the time of Duran quitting had Leonard up by only 1 point on one card and two points on the other two cards.
.....proof yet again right there that professional judges dont appreciate extreme lateral running and dont equate it to good defense.

 

I agree with this post now don't get me wrong Oscar probably did win the fight essentially because no way in hell did Tito win 7 rounds, but for any boxing fan to act as if the case for a draw in this fight is non-existant is simply not judging the fight by a round by round basis which is what one is suppose to do when a fight goes to a decision especially when they are'nt any knockdowns that would swing the fight in any fighter favor. In some of the rounds that were difficult to judge, they were difficult to judge because Oscar would land a combination and take a minute break then try to go on the attack again and take another 45 second to 1 minute break while Tito continued to be the agressor even though alot of his punches were only partially landing but still in that scenario I can see if a judge or fan would score that round for Tito.

 

You and Stonehands 89 are making very lucid and interesting points. But what it sounds like is a very long overview of your own subjective view of what true boxing is. I agree that a great boxer can slip punches on the inside while landing with pin-point accuracy but in no way does this take away credit from those who use lateral movement and distance to control the pace of the fight. Doing what it takes to win is what it comes down to, three judges' scorecards or a knockout if it happens. What difference does it make how the boxer pulls it off so long as its legal? Truth is, some fighters it would be murderous to trade with and if you have the distance fighting skills of a Leonard or Hoya than you should use it.

 

I have no problem with fighters who use their leg speed and footwork to to keep distance......

.....for instance, In Marco Antonio Barrera's rematch with Rocky Juarez, he ran circles with lateral movement, Juarez on the chase unable to cut the ring against a faster footed fighter......

How did I score that fight? Although I agreed with the live crowd that night and would have booed MAB, clearly imo, MAB did just enough consistently thoughout most rounds with his jab to merit the rounds.

Unlike DLH, MAB thoughout consistently pumped his jab as he retreated.
.....and as for Rocky Juarez, unlike Trinidad, he was'nt even landing one punch at a time.....Juarez was just chasing, and that was it.

Tommy Morrison against George Foreman is another case where alot of lateral movement beat the stalker.......Morrison, unlike DLH, on a consistent round by round basis consistently pumping the jab and keeping his hands busy without long lapses in punch output.

The runner in these cases beat the stalker.

In punchoutput and punches landed, there was a monumental disparity in these fights and more importantly, consistently throughout the rounds, that there is no choice but to reward the runner.

Running is the key that cost DLH the Trinidad fight. To have won that fight, he would have had to overwhelmingly had a punchoutput disparity consistently round by round.
Kept his hands busy without the long stretches of not throwing punches.

DLH did'nt do that, like Benny Blanco described it a few posts above, and imo its the reason that he lost the fight.....DLH would throw a combination and then coast for a minute or so before even attempting to mount another offensive move.....

An average of two combinations per round, alot of which does'nt land, and coasting with pure lateral motion, with no intent to mount an offense during the endless time he spent running circles, is not going to get it done.

 

Rewatched this fight with the sound off, I had it

Round 1 - Tito (close)
Round 2 - Dela Hoya (close)
Round 3 - Dela Hoya (clear)
Round 4 - Tito (clear)
Round 5 - Dela Hoya (clear)
Round 6 - Dela Hoya (clear)
Round 7 - Dela Hoya (clear)
Round 8 - Dela Hoya (clear)
Round 9 - Dela Hoya (clear)
Round 10 - Tito (close)
Round 11 - Tito (clear)
Round 12 - Tito (clear)

Close but clear decision for Dela Hoya, theres a case it could possibly be a draw but you would have to be reaching for Tito, to have Tito winning you gotta be insane and reaching out of your ass the best you can for Trinidad.

I thought it was a great fight though, just a bad ending.

 

So what about a fighter like RJJ who backpedals quite often, doesn't let the other guy land, while creating a lot of time between his one punch at a time attacks? I think this whole situation comes down to what you like. Hagler fans don't like that Leonard didn't fight in the pocket so Hagler could've knocked him out, Hoya fans don't like that Mayweather didn't exchange in the pocket so Hoya could've knocked him out, and Trinidad fans were booing cuz Hoya wasn't letting Trinidad fight a Trinidad style fight. Leonard in the first Duran fight was a great fighter but he lost that one, when he fought on the backfoot not only did he win but he made Duran look terrible. I don't think a fighter should always fight this way but when it is the best way to fight given the circumstance then by all means do it. But I agree, you should look good while doing it. I personally think the reason Hoya tired so much in this fight was all the damn bouncing and moving he did, the energy he wasted was tremendous compared to the energy Trinidad was using.

 

Trinidad beats DLH Monday Through Saturday and twice on Sunday in a 15 round fight. DLH knew what he was dealing with and he barely made it through with a decision win. (thats what happens when you let it rock back that close, the judges **** you in the ass almost as hard as DLH ****ed himself in the ass that night)


I had DLH up by 2..... You could have him winning by 1 point if you were ridiculously biased scoring for Tito.

 

some good points but you forget that oscar was tired in 10th and 11th. he fought trinidad differently than when chavez fought rosario. moving around the ring consumed energy

oscar should of rallied in the 12th. he seemed to get his second wind then. he would of got a knockdown i still reckon he won easily though

 

Well said!