i watched this fight again last night and granted i was not completely sober but i got a strong feeling that something was very fishy about the fight... has anyone else ever gotten that feeling about this particular fight? it seemed like a set-up to me most of it was just a general feeling that i was having, but there are a few specific moments: lou duva telling pernell that a point was about to be deducted from vasquez during a break when pernell mysteriously had to get the tape on his glove fixed, the two points deductions themselves obviously, the compubox numbers seemed totally off to me, the ridiculous margins on the final scorecards
Enter Seamus.... Nick, did you think the end result (Whitaker winning) was contentious? I agree Whitaker got some judge/ref bias in this fight (almost of Chavezian proportions) but I think the end result was clear: a Whitaker win. About the ref telling Duva and Pernell that he'll take a point from Vasquez next time he fouls and not to retaliate, whilst the ref shouldn't have said it, it's not exactly corrupt as I see it. Vasquez had his warning for hitting behind the head and knew he was in danger of losing a point. Whitaker and Duva knew it too, even without the ref saying it. So he was just telling them something they already knew. Why did he say it? Bias to Pernell probably.
with the 2 point deductions i had pernell winning 113-112 or 114-111 (the 2nd round was really close)... i didn't have a problem with pernell winning, i think he won the fight but the constellation of factors and my state of mind while watching it strongly suggested to me that something was not kosher, that it had been predetermined that pernell was going to win the fight regardless of what happened in the ring... the bias in the commentary i can understand because pernell was important to HBO at the time, but it was something above and beyond that related to the referee's actions, the judges' scoring, the compubox numbers, the conversations between duva and pernell and the referee, and even the pace and rhythm of the fight itself with pernell not looking like he was trying particularly hard in rounds 10-12 when it was still unclear whether or not he had accumulated an insurmountable advantage (which it turned out he did, but both lederman and merchant had it much closer)
The judges certainly seemed to have it decided before the fighters even walked in the ring. No way was it that wide for Pea. Strangely enough, if I remember correctly, Vasquez came to terms with the loss and clapped Pernell when he got the decision. Was that the case? My memory of it isn't that clear, but I think that's what happened.
yes you are correct, vasquez applauded the decision, i read that as being slightly sarcastic, like the applause from a man resigned to his fate, knowing that it was inevitable that he was going to lose... i'm not suggesting that he or pernell knew of the back room machinations (if any) but it certainly seems like duva was in on it
as one who was there, me friend nic foxx is more than on to something... vasquez was the boss in this fight and on my card won despite the dubious deductions. sweat pea would win 20 seconds of a round but JCV would win the rest. he hit harder, even Clancy said he had the harder jabs and WON the jabbing contest... I mean, I heard **** there I could not believe. All Whitaker had to do was end the night on his feet and it was a done deal.
