Who won Trinidad-De La Hoya?

Tito was outside his weight class, that fight was not Tito's biggest plus oscar was a MUCH bigger draw than Hopkins and p4p#1 I think when Tito fought him so yes, the fight against oscar was by far tito's biggest fight, and oscar's biggest.

 

The problem is how anyone can give Tito more than 2 rounds in the first 9. Both rounds were close that tito won but could have been 10-10 or 10-9 oscar rounds. The rounds Oscar won were clearly oscar rounds. Round 5 was one of them I think they scored for tito where Oscar blitzed Tito a 2-3 times with amazing combos that did damage and also kept popping tito's head back with that jab. Tito landed a couple right hands, one of them big (one of his only clean, hard shots of the fight) and they give tito that round? Complete bull****. Oscar won many of these early rounds just with his jab alone IMO, but you add in his sharp right hand crosses, body and head combo's and Oscar CLEARLY wins those. Tito was literally just one punch at a time, and most of them missing. I think up until round 6 or 7, they showed titos connect % and normally about 40% at that point in an average fight and in his fight was only 28%! Yet they had him winning 2-3 of those rounds. Oscar's connect was 45% approximately, which was right on with his average fight. lol something very wrong with the scoring when you factor in all of the above. Watching the fight it was a clear oscar win, looking at the numbers were even more telling how dominate Oscar was, there's just nothing anyone can say to warrant Tito winning EXCEPT to say Tito was coming forward, but coming forward and landing 28% of your punches compared to your opponent who's landing 45% and in much higher volume, it just doesn't make any sense how tito was in the fight at all, unless there was a knock down, which there wasn't even close to being one. Neither men were truly hurt but I believe Oscar was breaking TIto down, a couple of those combo's jarred tito and almost looked like his legs were getting weak. The only thing Oscar did wrong was not closing the show and stepping on the gas around rounds 8-9 and trying to get tito out of there. Obviously he and corner felt there was no need to go after a guy when you''re dominating the fight. Oscar went right at Quartey, a man who legit hurt Oscar in their fight and had him on the canvas. But there was no desperation in the Tito fight and no need to engage anymore, except Oscar didn't realize the judges were paid off and he was never going to win on the cards no matter what.

 

Judging is based off appearance, when you make the decision you want to be minimally engaging with an opponent (box them) you have to win your rounds very clearly. And clearly won't be based off simply out landing your opponent, it will still be based on who looked to have done the more overall damage. In other words, you have to clearly do overall damage to your opponent than he does you.

This is because of the appearance that a minimally engaging opponent gives from the get go, the judges will quickly assume that his opponent is stronger than him and that his shots must be significantly more damaging and that's why he wants to do the least engaging as possible. The judging, and much of the unvested opinions of the entire AP gave Tito a lot of credit for what he landed, and apparently not a whole lot for what DLH landed, be it right, or be it wrong. The fact remains that many unvested people did in fact have this opinion, and that does not speak to paid off judges, a robbery, incompetency etc.

 

Did you see the fight? Did you see Tito's busted up face and oscar's face without a scratch? It was CLEAR AS DAY who was inflicting the damage. Oscar was landing POWER PUNCHES every round in volume, Trinidad was not. The amount of clean hard punches Tito landed were very few and far between, which is why when you watch any highlight video of that fight, its 90% oscar landing on Tito and making Tito miss. There just wasn't barely any Tito highlights in that fight because he was missing so often.
We have some very knowledgeable boxing fans here at eastside and 90% of them have Oscar clearly winning that fight. The few that think tito won are also the same guys that have Oscar losing every close fight he ever fought, even the ones he won. lol
Every single aspect of what you need to do to win a fight on the cards oscar did. Tito did not do any thing to warrant the decision.
Ring Generalship - Oscar
Defense - Oscar
Damage - Oscar
Jab war - Oscar
Power punches - Oscar
Overall punches landed - Oscar
Connect % - Oscar

What the hell did tito do to win the fight? All he had was aggression, moving forward which was ineffective even in the rounds Oscar gave him, because Tito couldn't mount any type of effective attack and land on oscar nearly consistently enough.

 

Also, If this were true, Floyd would have lost to Maidana in their 1st fight along with Castillo, along with oscar and list goes on..
The judges were BOUGHT off in the tito fight. I believe Don King even admitted to meeting with one of them right before the fight behind closed doors although didn't admit to anything else.

 

The only time the other factors in the scoring criteria matter other effective aggression is when a round is close, so unless you thought the rounds were close none of that other stuff matters. And the judging of effective aggression will be judged on a round by round basis, not at the end of a fight, and it will not be judged on facial damage. It's all judged on perceived head rattling damage and body damage. No one cares whether skin can hold up/what damage it takes, what people want to know is who would've been able to continue or not had the fight progressed.

And it's known that bruising or swelling is not typically what is going to stop a fighter from fighting (unless they quit or are externally stopped) , it's KO's or brain swelling and so it's the one who was more likely to have caused that, that is declared the winner...it may all sound brutal but that is the nature of what is going on when scoring in our sport. That is rightly, and typically giving to the guy landing the heavier blows unless the other guy is landing at high volume with respectable power throughout.

You are simply going to have a hard case that you won your rounds clearly when the punch you dominated your opponent with is the jab, which is seen as a low damage punch in the first place, it happens all the time. I'm not sure how many more times I will have to see the one guy who clearly "out boxed, dominated, handed out a lesson to" etc. "get robbed" before people get it. People first off need to throw out all the scoring criteria that confuses them so. You will see that time and again none of it matters, it's a fight, the only thing people care about who is getting their ass kicked more, that's it. If that's hard to determine then you go to the rest of the criteria.

It seems that the scoring criteria is continually used as a basis to claim robbery because it's easy to do since it grays everything allowing people to skew things to the way they want to see them. You will get far more enjoyment from the sport if you realize that is not how judges are scoring the fight, that is simply their "get out of jail free card" for rounds that are close. If you thought DLH did more overall damage then fine, that's your right, just don't gray every single round over with the scoring criteria so as to act as if there's "something people aren't getting" that's insulting.

 

This is how I view the fight.

DLH fought Trinidad to cautiously. Not just cautious, but so caustious that one senseed he was afraid.
I dont think there was anytime in the fight where DLH put himself at risk.
I dont care who you are, a fighter that throws punches meant to be effective puts himself on the line and is at risk of some kind.
DLH with so much lateralling around the ring never put himself in position to be at risk.
Correction, he did put himself at risk just a little, and its for about 15 seconds in a couple of the rounds where he actully busted Tito up.
DLH did that damage in a matter of seconds in no more than two rounds.

WHAT OF THE OTHER 10 ROUNDS???

For most of the remainder of the fight, DLH pranced around the ring playing "you cant catch me"
Its as if DLH's mindset was, unless you can cut the ring off and pin me to a corner, I'm not fighting back at you.
In the meantime I'll just dance around the ring like a fairy and pretend I'm boxing like Muhumad Ali.

Trinidad was laning punches as one would think any fighter might against someone running away and not fighting.
Landing punches to the head or body, one punch at a time.


DLH fought scared and the judges took that into account when scoring so many of the uneventful rounds which were most.

 

I don't think any of us needed to look at the stats of the fight to see how cleary Oscar was outboxing Trinidad. It was trinidads head that was snapping back round after round countless times, it was trinidad who was bleeding and face swollen, it was trinidad who couldn't land a significant punch sometimes over 1-2 rounds and who couldn't land more than 1 at a time.
And it wasn't just Oscar's jab, Oscar also landed way more power punches and did better body work! LOL And no the rounds weren't even close that oscar won. But any of the earlier rounds that tito did win were close. Only ones that weren't were the final ones oscar gave away.
And bruising, swelling and blood IS damage. It is the only way a judge can without doubt know the other guy is landing clean,meaningful punches. If you asked anyone who won that fight (who didn't actually watch it) just based on facial damage every single person would assume tito lost because his face got messed up and oscars didnt have a scratch.
You're going to have to make a hard, rationale case why Tito won that fight and the only thing you can point to is saying he came forward, well gee so did oscar vs. Floyd, or Maidana vs. floyd. There is no rationale case to why Tito won, nothing, because intelligent boxing fans that are unbiased can easily see what happened that night.
Every single factor goes against tito and this is why this fight is rated in top 3 worst decisions in boxing history.

 

Here's a good example of a round the judges gave to Trinidad. A round where he actually did land a couple clean right hands and one of his best punches of the fight, yet you have Oscar landing his jab consistently, a couple right of his own, but 2 beautiful combo's at middle and at the end of the round which should have easily won him the round, because they were the best punches of the round, easy as that. And the last one made tito back up and not want to fire back
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAV1n1f7rZI
34:10 round 5 starts. Tito did win the previous round on my cards, one of the only 2 in 1st 10 I gave him.

 

Question for the Oscar***uals;

If you honestly believe Ole Fishnets won the Trinidad fight then you should have no problem admitting Oscar LOST the Whitaker fight. What say you?

 

honestly what fight were you watching Whitiker didn't do enough to win that fight had he focused on offense more so then defense he may have pulled it out ..And what do you think Tito won ?

 

Why do I think Trinidad won? Tito came to FIGHT. Ole Fishnets, OTOH, came to do his best Jessie Owens impersonation. Too bad for Ole Fishnets that the contest was a professional prize fight instead of a track meet.

 

Yeah but he didn't fight for 8 rds he was getting schooled for the majority of the fight coming to fight and not actually fighting are two different things .Call what you want but Tito did nothing to get that W

 

I say Baldomir should have won against Mayweather. All Mayweather did was run, right? Sure Baldomir didn't land anything but he was moving forward. This is boxing, not track.

 

Lol.

Trinidad had Ole Fishnets running for deal life in the later rounds. I hate to point this out to you BUT a professional championship prizefight is *12* rounds. Anyone who thinks Ole Fishnets swept the first 8 rounds is either a de la Hoya Homer or doesn't know **** about how to properly score a prizefight.