The shoeshining came from DLH, not Whitaker. Whitaker just dodged all those shoeshines Floyd kept getting hit with from Oscar :good I struggle to remember any meaningful punches landing by either fighter. Whitaker may not have thrown many power punches, but DLH surely didn't land many cleanly. :rofl
Whitaker fought in spots and was brilliant in spots. De La Hoya fought the entire fight and although he was outclassed by Pernell on more than one ocassion, as any highlight reel shows, ultimately he did more work in enough rounds to count What is it with you and expecting everyone to research the thing for you? Review the fight and watch it, don't watch it with Sweet Pea eyes on, watch it with boxing eyes on, keep your own punch counter. I had Oscar winning 7-5. 115-113, 10-8 round, 114-113. Funnily enough, same as the scorecards were indicating.
It impresses me that no one has it by 5 or 6 points, which is a pretty big indictment on the judges. No one fan so far has it as wide as the judges had it.
Whitaker made it very close and made DLH look bad... but Oscar did enough... definitely a very close one but not a controversial. DLH by 1-2 points.
Whitaker fought throughout the fight, always behind a consistent jab, always dictating the pace. He may have given a round here or there, but otherwise Oscar didn't do well enough to take important rounds. You're constantly spouting what you have researched, and then when someone asks you for you conclusions, you respond with "Do the research yourself, I don't have to tell you anything, so nyeah!" Any particular reason other than the obvious assumption I've come to that you simply have not a single fact or tidbit to back up any of the nonsense that you spew? No, actually, as that was the most controversial part of it all, the amount Oscar won by, winning by up to 6 points on cards. C'mon man, do the research!:roll: