Who won, Whitaker or De La Hoya?

I had Pea in a close one, too.

 

Oscar fought well in the last round, after dropping middle round after middle round due to inactivity after expanding energy in rounds like the 6th, where he still got knocked down. Every time Oscar threw a meaningful combo, he'd have to reset too often and take too long to get back in to his groove to win rounds.

 

Do a break down of the round by round punch statistics. In the rounds Pea was good, he was very very good.

He has no one to blame but himself for not sustaining that throughout a series of rounds.

"Oh but but but"

Boxing is round by round, not "total amount of punches landed"

If I land 120 punches in a round, I expect to get the round, I don't expect to get the fight.

 

He was dropping rnds because of Quartey's jab. It had nothing to do with him fading down the stretch. He was just losing rnds. His come back was at the end of the fight. :deal The real talk about him fading down the stretch began with his fight with Tito, but I think he was just running. His first loss to Mosley was more about what Mosley was doing and not DLH fading. You can make the fading argument about the 2nd Mosley fight and by then he was not active enough and may have been past his best.

 

I think he has taken that into consideration

 

I've watched it twice.

First time: DRAW

Second time: De la Hoya, barely.

Close fight, no doubt, and not a robbery.

 

He was quite consistent throughout the fight. De La Hoya never had a spectacular or particularly proving round in the fight, whereas Whitaker had quite a few I thought.

I could not find the punchstats. Care to show them if you know them so well?

Same question as above. Don't forget to take into consideration Whitaker's 10-8 round.

 

He was dropping rounds due to inactivity from losing stamina. In the early rounds, he combated the jab of Quartey quite well, then when he started to slow and Quartey started to tale over the pace, he stopped using it.

His comeback was in the very last round. I stand by that he was having stamina problems in the mid rounds, due to how the first few rounds played out.

 

From my standpoint he was getting dominated by that jab and his comeback at the end won him the fight. The Tito fight may have been a better example, but I still say it happened because he was running. In fact he was running against Mosley in the 2nd fight and that may have been why he was trash at the end of the fight combined with the body shots Mosley landed. He stepped up in competition as he got older and he was a more skilled fighter between the ages of 27 -30.

 

I've always felt that if Whitaker had fought the same fight against anyone else he would have got the decision, but since it De La Hoya he lost.

 

:good

 

Once again, he threw more, landed more, landed at a higher percentage, and dropped De La Hoya. How is that not doing crap?

 

I guess Oscar hitting the air is more impressive

 

Seen the fight 1000 times, Oscar won. Pernell may have thrown more punches based on some stats machine, but who threw the more powerful and effective punches, thats right, it was de la hoya.

115-113 de la hoya

By the way, a prime whitaker would beat him, but it wouldnt be an outclassing. 115-113 sounds more accurate.

 

Seen the fight 1000 times, Oscar won. Pernell may have thrown more punches based on some stats machine, but who threw the more powerful and effective punches, thats right, it was de la hoya.

115-113 de la hoya

By the way, a prime whitaker would beat him, but it wouldnt be an outclassing. 115-113 sounds more accurate.