Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
I know, I know, this has been done and re-done. But it's been nearly 8 years now and people still debate it constantly with little sign of giving in. So I wanted to take another crack at this timeless debate and take a fresh look at this huge event in boxing history.
I saw the fight last night again and I saw some things that I may have noticed at the time but forgot about in the time since. Sometimes things go into the back of your mind and the details just get washed away with the passing of years.
Most of you know, if you have seen me post, who I think won. But I will do my very best to make this an objective post.
A few things I noticed that I kind of took for granted over time.
1. This fight was actually pretty damn good. I think the enormous hype that it caused made fans criticise the lack of action. This is understandable considering that at the time these were two of the biggest power punchers ever to step into a ring together and before this fight, DLH was considered a brawler doing justice to his Mexican heritage. Ignoring the huge expectations of the fight, it was very entertaining to watch even now.
2. A lot of these rounds were very close. I think there were only about four rounds that you could say were one sided. These were the 6th and 8th for DLH and the 10th and 11th for Tito.
3. Many times I said oh if DLH had not run or if Tito had put more pressure, this and that would have happend. But as I saw the fight, I really didn't see much room for improvement from either fighter. They both fought a near perfect fight. Some of you are probably looking at this post and thinking I am crazy. But what I mean is that anything that was lacking from one fighter was caused sheerly by the skill of the other. You could say that Tito should have been busier, but the fact is that Oscar's jab was simply too good and was not letting Tito set up to punch. You could say that DLH should have taken more risks and tried to hurt Tito, but the fact is that every time DLH stopped moving Tito was banging him with bombs.
Now I want to move to some common misconceptions.
1. "DLH ran all night long" This is total and utter nonesense. DLH boxed beautifully for most of the fight. He got tired at the end and stopped using the jab...hmm, this kind of sounds familiar. But he was doing a great job of hitting and moving and showing true ring generalship.
2. "DLH was landing on Tito at will" Also nonesense. The only punch that DLH was landind consistently was the jab. Tito was making DLH miss just as much as DLH was making Tito miss. With that said, both fighters still landed a decent amount of power shots.
3. "Tito hurt DLH and thats why he didn't engage at the end" I have no doubt that both Tito and DLH landed at times some hurtfull shots that would put most of todays WW on the canvas. However, at no time was either of them hurt. Both of these fighters, especially DLH, have good beards. DLH was tired. He said it himself in an interview some years after the fight. He had nothing left in the tank in the last two rounds. He kept a furious pace moving and moving and moving and this kind of boxing will take its toll.
4. "DLH clearly won the first nine rounds" This is by far the king of misconceptions. This idea I think is subject of very biased commentating on the part of Lampley and Foreman, and of replays shown between rounds throughout the fight of every punch DLH landed and hardly any replay of Tito's landed blows.
There is also something else that should be considered. If you look at the compubox numbers you will see that DLH is credited to landing 100 more punches than Tito. But you have to take into account that a good third of those pouches that DLH landed were jabs. Now I have no problem with scoring jabs, but they certainly should not have the same value as, say a left hook.
So if two guys are fighting and one of those guys lands 15 jabs, 4 right hands and 3 left hooks and the other guy lands 5 jabs, 7 left hooks and 8 right hands, who do you give the round to? It is not that easy is it. So no, hardly any of these rounds was clearly won by DLH. Please watch rounds 1 (where Tito threw more and landed more), 2 where DLH hardly threw anything other than a jab and round 4 where DLH fought in spurts and Tito did most of the work. Round nine was also extremely close and many believe Tito won this round. There are other close rounds but DLH certainly won them by most observers.
I also wanted to talk about the 11th round. This was by far the most one sided round of the entire fight. I might be wrong on the numbers but I believe DLH landed somewhere around 4 or 5 punches to Tito's close to 30. One could make a case that this was a 10 - 8 round. Of course hardly anyone uses this practice unless someone is noticeably hurt and near a knockout. But if someone told me they scored it a 10 - 8 round, I for won would not argue.
In conclusion, although I had Tito winning by one round, I strongly believe that this fight should have been scored a draw and a rematch should have been made immediately. Nither fighter should have been punished for this performance with a loss. Both did an excellent job, showed true boxing skill and gave us a great fight of two young elite fighters in the top of their game.
So this is my little tribute to IMHO the two best welterweights of the era and the night they put all on the line like few fighters do against the toughest and biggest challenge either of them had at the time.
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan
I know, I know, this has been done and re-done. But it's been nearly 8 years now and people still debate it constantly with little sign of giving in. So I wanted to take another crack at this timeless debate and take a fresh look at this huge event in boxing history.
I saw the fight last night again and I saw some things that I may have noticed at the time but forgot about in the time since. Sometimes things go into the back of your mind and the details just get washed away with the passing of years.
Most of you know, if you have seen me post, who I think won. But I will do my very best to make this an objective post.
A few things I noticed that I kind of took for granted over time.
1. This fight was actually pretty damn good. I think the enormous hype that it caused made fans criticise the lack of action. This is understandable considering that at the time these were two of the biggest power punchers ever to step into a ring together and before this fight, DLH was considered a brawler doing justice to his Mexican heritage. Ignoring the huge expectations of the fight, it was very entertaining to watch even now.
2. A lot of these rounds were very close. I think there were only about four rounds that you could say were one sided. These were the 6th and 8th for DLH and the 10th and 11th for Tito.
3. Many times I said oh if DLH had not run or if Tito had put more pressure, this and that would have happend. But as I saw the fight, I really didn't see much room for improvement from either fighter. They both fought a near perfect fight. Some of you are probably looking at this post and thinking I am crazy. But what I mean is that anything that was lacking from one fighter was caused sheerly by the skill of the other. You could say that Tito should have been busier, but the fact is that Oscar's jab was simply too good and was not letting Tito set up to punch. You could say that DLH should have taken more risks and tried to hurt Tito, but the fact is that every time DLH stopped moving Tito was banging him with bombs.
Now I want to move to some common misconceptions.
1. "DLH ran all night long" This is total and utter nonesense. DLH boxed beautifully for most of the fight. He got tired at the end and stopped using the jab...hmm, this kind of sounds familiar. But he was doing a great job of hitting and moving and showing true ring generalship.
2. "DLH was landing on Tito at will" Also nonesense. The only punch that DLH was landind consistently was the jab. Tito was making DLH miss just as much as DLH was making Tito miss. With that said, both fighters still landed a decent amount of power shots.
3. "Tito hurt DLH and thats why he didn't engage at the end" I have no doubt that both Tito and DLH landed at times some hurtfull shots that would put most of todays WW on the canvas. However, at no time was either of them hurt. Both of these fighters, especially DLH, have good beards. DLH was tired. He said it himself in an interview some years after the fight. He had nothing left in the tank in the last two rounds. He kept a furious pace moving and moving and moving and this kind of boxing will take its toll.
4. "DLH clearly won the first nine rounds" This is by far the king of misconceptions. This idea I think is subject of very biased commentating on the part of Lampley and Foreman, and of replays shown between rounds throughout the fight of every punch DLH landed and hardly any replay of Tito's landed blows.
There is also something else that should be considered. If you look at the compubox numbers you will see that DLH is credited to landing 100 more punches than Tito. But you have to take into account that a good third of those pouches that DLH landed were jabs. Now I have no problem with scoring jabs, but they certainly should not have the same value as, say a left hook.
So if two guys are fighting and one of those guys lands 15 jabs, 4 right hands and 3 left hooks and the other guy lands 5 jabs, 7 left hooks and 8 right hands, who do you give the round to? It is not that easy is it. So no, hardly any of these rounds was clearly won by DLH. Please watch rounds 1 (where Tito threw more and landed more), 2 where DLH hardly threw anything other than a jab and round 4 where DLH fought in spurts and Tito did most of the work. Round nine was also extremely close and many believe Tito won this round. There are other close rounds but DLH certainly won them by most observers.
I also wanted to talk about the 11th round. This was by far the most one sided round of the entire fight. I might be wrong on the numbers but I believe DLH landed somewhere around 4 or 5 punches to Tito's close to 30. One could make a case that this was a 10 - 8 round. Of course hardly anyone uses this practice unless someone is noticeably hurt and near a knockout. But if someone told me they scored it a 10 - 8 round, I for won would not argue.
In conclusion, although I had Tito winning by one round, I strongly believe that this fight should have been scored a draw and a rematch should have been made immediately. Nither fighter should have been punished for this performance with a loss. Both did an excellent job, showed true boxing skill and gave us a great fight of two young elite fighters in the top of their game.
So this is my little tribute to IMHO the two best welterweights of the era and the night they put all on the line like few fighters do against the toughest and biggest challenge either of them had at the time.
I have to disagree i didn't think the fight was that good at all i had Oscar winning last time i saw it.
So if two guys are fighting and one of those guys lands 15 jabs, 4 right hands and 3 left hooks and the other guy lands 5 jabs, 7 left hooks and 8 right hands, who do you give the round to?
But it wasn't like that at all if i remember right Oscar was landing more power punches through first 9 rounds and landing just overall loads more punches than Tito.
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
Good post The Rookie Fan and I agree with you that this was a very close fight, and could have been scored either way. Personally, I agree with the judges. I remember watching the fight and being annoyed by DLH trying to steal every round in the last 10 seconds and the crowd going crazy for nothing. ::** It's very similar to what was happening in the DLH/FMJ fight, and when you go back and watch it again the flurries were basically meaningless. I still watch this fight every couple of months and I can't see how anyone can actually claim this was a robbery. Could of gone either way, yes. Robbery no way in hell. May the sad clicks rain down upon me. :sitr:
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Good post The Rookie Fan and I agree with you that this was a very close fight, and could have been scored either way. Personally, I agree with the judges. I remember watching the fight and being annoyed by DLH trying to steal every round in the last 10 seconds and the crowd going crazy for nothing. ::** It's very similar to what was happening in the DLH/FMJ fight, and when you go back and watch it again the flurries were basically meaningless. I still watch this fight every couple of months and I can't see how anyone can actually claim this was a robbery. Could of gone either way, yes. Robbery no way in hell. May the sad clicks rain down upon me. :sitr:
Oscar could of done no worse than 6 rounds to 3 through first 9 rounds Oscar wasn't just trying to steal rounds at the end he was outboxing Tito through out the whole round.
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan
I know, I know, this has been done and re-done. But it's been nearly 8 years now and people still debate it constantly with little sign of giving in. So I wanted to take another crack at this timeless debate and take a fresh look at this huge event in boxing history.
I saw the fight last night again and I saw some things that I may have noticed at the time but forgot about in the time since. Sometimes things go into the back of your mind and the details just get washed away with the passing of years.
Most of you know, if you have seen me post, who I think won. But I will do my very best to make this an objective post.
A few things I noticed that I kind of took for granted over time.
1. This fight was actually pretty damn good. I think the enormous hype that it caused made fans criticise the lack of action. This is understandable considering that at the time these were two of the biggest power punchers ever to step into a ring together and before this fight, DLH was considered a brawler doing justice to his Mexican heritage. Ignoring the huge expectations of the fight, it was very entertaining to watch even now.
2. A lot of these rounds were very close. I think there were only about four rounds that you could say were one sided. These were the 6th and 8th for DLH and the 10th and 11th for Tito.
3. Many times I said oh if DLH had not run or if Tito had put more pressure, this and that would have happend. But as I saw the fight, I really didn't see much room for improvement from either fighter. They both fought a near perfect fight. Some of you are probably looking at this post and thinking I am crazy. But what I mean is that anything that was lacking from one fighter was caused sheerly by the skill of the other. You could say that Tito should have been busier, but the fact is that Oscar's jab was simply too good and was not letting Tito set up to punch. You could say that DLH should have taken more risks and tried to hurt Tito, but the fact is that every time DLH stopped moving Tito was banging him with bombs.
Now I want to move to some common misconceptions.
1. "DLH ran all night long" This is total and utter nonesense. DLH boxed beautifully for most of the fight. He got tired at the end and stopped using the jab...hmm, this kind of sounds familiar. But he was doing a great job of hitting and moving and showing true ring generalship.
2. "DLH was landing on Tito at will" Also nonesense. The only punch that DLH was landind consistently was the jab. Tito was making DLH miss just as much as DLH was making Tito miss. With that said, both fighters still landed a decent amount of power shots.
3. "Tito hurt DLH and thats why he didn't engage at the end" I have no doubt that both Tito and DLH landed at times some hurtfull shots that would put most of todays WW on the canvas. However, at no time was either of them hurt. Both of these fighters, especially DLH, have good beards. DLH was tired. He said it himself in an interview some years after the fight. He had nothing left in the tank in the last two rounds. He kept a furious pace moving and moving and moving and this kind of boxing will take its toll.
4. "DLH clearly won the first nine rounds" This is by far the king of misconceptions. This idea I think is subject of very biased commentating on the part of Lampley and Foreman, and of replays shown between rounds throughout the fight of every punch DLH landed and hardly any replay of Tito's landed blows.
There is also something else that should be considered. If you look at the compubox numbers you will see that DLH is credited to landing 100 more punches than Tito. But you have to take into account that a good third of those pouches that DLH landed were jabs. Now I have no problem with scoring jabs, but they certainly should not have the same value as, say a left hook.
So if two guys are fighting and one of those guys lands 15 jabs, 4 right hands and 3 left hooks and the other guy lands 5 jabs, 7 left hooks and 8 right hands, who do you give the round to? It is not that easy is it. So no, hardly any of these rounds was clearly won by DLH. Please watch rounds 1 (where Tito threw more and landed more), 2 where DLH hardly threw anything other than a jab and round 4 where DLH fought in spurts and Tito did most of the work. Round nine was also extremely close and many believe Tito won this round. There are other close rounds but DLH certainly won them by most observers.
I also wanted to talk about the 11th round. This was by far the most one sided round of the entire fight. I might be wrong on the numbers but I believe DLH landed somewhere around 4 or 5 punches to Tito's close to 30. One could make a case that this was a 10 - 8 round. Of course hardly anyone uses this practice unless someone is noticeably hurt and near a knockout. But if someone told me they scored it a 10 - 8 round, I for won would not argue.
In conclusion, although I had Tito winning by one round, I strongly believe that this fight should have been scored a draw and a rematch should have been made immediately. Nither fighter should have been punished for this performance with a loss. Both did an excellent job, showed true boxing skill and gave us a great fight of two young elite fighters in the top of their game.
So this is my little tribute to IMHO the two best welterweights of the era and the night they put all on the line like few fighters do against the toughest and biggest challenge either of them had at the time.
I have to disagree i didn't think the fight was that good at all i had Oscar winning last time i saw it.
So if two guys are fighting and one of those guys lands 15 jabs, 4 right hands and 3 left hooks and the other guy lands 5 jabs, 7 left hooks and 8 right hands, who do you give the round to?
But it wasn't like that at all if i remember right Oscar was landing more power punches through first 9 rounds and landing just overall loads more punches than Tito.
I understand what you are saying. I am by no means implying that this was a classic. What I am trying to say is that it was not exactly a borefest and had it not been such a hyped up fight between to well known undefeated champions it would be considered a decent fight. To be honest I think it was a better fight than DLH - Maywether, with a supperior performance from both fighters.
But it wasn't like that at all if i remember right Oscar was landing more power punches through first 9 rounds and landing just overall loads more punches than Tito.
I did not mean that the hole fight was like this. Oscar was clearly winning the fight after 9 rounds. I am mainly referring to some of the more closer rounds like the 5th and 9th. I also pointed out other rounds like the 1st, 2nd and 4th where DLH landed far fewer power shots compared to Tito. They were still feeling eachother out at this point and DLH was mainly just jabbing. Oscar was periodically landing some nice right hands though.
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Good post The Rookie Fan and I agree with you that this was a very close fight, and could have been scored either way. Personally, I agree with the judges. I remember watching the fight and being annoyed by DLH trying to steal every round in the last 10 seconds and the crowd going crazy for nothing. ::** It's very similar to what was happening in the DLH/FMJ fight, and when you go back and watch it again the flurries were basically meaningless. I still watch this fight every couple of months and I can't see how anyone can actually claim this was a robbery. Could of gone either way, yes. Robbery no way in hell. May the sad clicks rain down upon me. :sitr:
Oscar could of done no worse than 6 rounds to 3 through first 9 rounds Oscar wasn't just trying to steal rounds at the end he was outboxing Tito through out the whole round.
Obviously he could have done worse because 6 to 3 going into the 10th would have given him a draw and we all know that didn't happen. I have no problem with anyone that believes Oscar won because the fight, I just don't see it that way. Oscar boxed beautifully, but just because Trinidad didn't knock him out doesn't mean he wasn't holding his own in there. Tito was pressing the action the entire fight and it was so close that 1 decent punch or flurry could have changed who won the round. Both fighters were walking on pins and needles the whole fight and they respected each other so much neither wanted to take any unwarranted chances and get caught.
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Good post The Rookie Fan and I agree with you that this was a very close fight, and could have been scored either way. Personally, I agree with the judges. I remember watching the fight and being annoyed by DLH trying to steal every round in the last 10 seconds and the crowd going crazy for nothing. ::** It's very similar to what was happening in the DLH/FMJ fight, and when you go back and watch it again the flurries were basically meaningless. I still watch this fight every couple of months and I can't see how anyone can actually claim this was a robbery. Could of gone either way, yes. Robbery no way in hell. May the sad clicks rain down upon me. :sitr:
Oscar could of done no worse than 6 rounds to 3 through first 9 rounds Oscar wasn't just trying to steal rounds at the end he was outboxing Tito through out the whole round.
Obviously he could have done worse because 6 to 3 going into the 10th would have given him a draw and we all know that didn't happen. I have no problem with anyone that believes Oscar won because the fight, I just don't see it that way. Oscar boxed beautifully, but just because Trinidad didn't knock him out doesn't mean he wasn't holding his own in there. Tito was pressing the action the entire fight and it was so close that 1 decent punch or flurry could have changed who won the round. Both fighters were walking on pins and needles the whole fight and they respected each other so much neither wanted to take any unwarranted chances and get caught.
What im saying is that Oscar was atleast 3 rounds ahead at that point no way was Tito only 2 rounds behind or ect if you do round by round i actually find it hard for Tito win to be honest yes Tito was aggressor but was it affective aggression ?? through first 9 rounds it wasn't really Tito was landing very few in numbers and Oscar would just dance land jab few combos here and there and sometimes the right hand.
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
Well allright, we got a debate going. CC to both you guys for your opinions.
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Good post The Rookie Fan and I agree with you that this was a very close fight, and could have been scored either way. Personally, I agree with the judges. I remember watching the fight and being annoyed by DLH trying to steal every round in the last 10 seconds and the crowd going crazy for nothing. ::** It's very similar to what was happening in the DLH/FMJ fight, and when you go back and watch it again the flurries were basically meaningless. I still watch this fight every couple of months and I can't see how anyone can actually claim this was a robbery. Could of gone either way, yes. Robbery no way in hell. May the sad clicks rain down upon me. :sitr:
Oscar could of done no worse than 6 rounds to 3 through first 9 rounds Oscar wasn't just trying to steal rounds at the end he was outboxing Tito through out the whole round.
Obviously he could have done worse because 6 to 3 going into the 10th would have given him a draw and we all know that didn't happen. I have no problem with anyone that believes Oscar won because the fight, I just don't see it that way. Oscar boxed beautifully, but just because Trinidad didn't knock him out doesn't mean he wasn't holding his own in there. Tito was pressing the action the entire fight and it was so close that 1 decent punch or flurry could have changed who won the round. Both fighters were walking on pins and needles the whole fight and they respected each other so much neither wanted to take any unwarranted chances and get caught.
What im saying is that Oscar was atleast 3 rounds ahead at that point no way was Tito only 2 rounds behind or ect if you do round by round i actually find it hard for Tito win to be honest yes Tito was aggressor but was it affective aggression ?? through first 9 rounds it wasn't really Tito was landing very few in numbers and Oscar would just dance land jab few combos here and there and sometimes the right hand.
I understand what your saying, but it's not like DLH was landing at will or anything. Compubox numbers are one thing, and to tell you the truth I never go by those. Was Tito's aggression effective? It depends on how you look at it. It forced DLH to completely get away from his boxer/puncher style and rely on his movement and speed. He never even sat down on any of his punches. So in my eyes it was effective. I'm going to watch the fight again as a DLH fan and give hime the benefit of the doubt in the close rounds and see how I score it then.
P.S. CC's to both of you my first ones given. :)
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
Basically my point of this thread, asside from making you guys take another look at this fight and hopefully enjoy yourselves for a while watching this big event between two of our favorite fighters, is to say that the impression I get from some posts I have read is that many people feel DLH totally dominated Tito for 9 rounds. I think this is a big exageration. I did not get the impression whatching the fight that DLH ever dominated Tito. Oscar was outboxing him, yes, but Tito held his own, never lost composure and did enough to win some of those rounds and make most of them pretty close, even though he was being out boxed.
I think this was a damn close fight that could have gone either way and no one can complain that it was a robbery. Again, I say I wish it had been a draw.
I just think some people here put far too much enfasis on "boxers". Yes it is called boxing, yes it is about hit and not get hit. But some people take this WAY out of proportion. Like for example, those that actually think Spinks beat Taylor ??? I mean the guy only landed 17% of his shots. This ofcourse is an exagerated example and I am by no means trying to do a comparison. What I am saying is that just because a guy is outboxing the other, it does not necesarily mean that he is clearly winning every round.
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Good post The Rookie Fan and I agree with you that this was a very close fight, and could have been scored either way. Personally, I agree with the judges. I remember watching the fight and being annoyed by DLH trying to steal every round in the last 10 seconds and the crowd going crazy for nothing. ::** It's very similar to what was happening in the DLH/FMJ fight, and when you go back and watch it again the flurries were basically meaningless. I still watch this fight every couple of months and I can't see how anyone can actually claim this was a robbery. Could of gone either way, yes. Robbery no way in hell. May the sad clicks rain down upon me. :sitr:
Oscar could of done no worse than 6 rounds to 3 through first 9 rounds Oscar wasn't just trying to steal rounds at the end he was outboxing Tito through out the whole round.
Obviously he could have done worse because 6 to 3 going into the 10th would have given him a draw and we all know that didn't happen. I have no problem with anyone that believes Oscar won because the fight, I just don't see it that way. Oscar boxed beautifully, but just because Trinidad didn't knock him out doesn't mean he wasn't holding his own in there. Tito was pressing the action the entire fight and it was so close that 1 decent punch or flurry could have changed who won the round. Both fighters were walking on pins and needles the whole fight and they respected each other so much neither wanted to take any unwarranted chances and get caught.
What im saying is that Oscar was atleast 3 rounds ahead at that point no way was Tito only 2 rounds behind or ect if you do round by round i actually find it hard for Tito win to be honest yes Tito was aggressor but was it affective aggression ?? through first 9 rounds it wasn't really Tito was landing very few in numbers and Oscar would just dance land jab few combos here and there and sometimes the right hand.
I understand what your saying, but it's not like DLH was landing at will or anything. Compubox numbers are one thing, and to tell you the truth I never go by those. Was Tito's aggression effective? It depends on how you look at it. It forced DLH to completely get away from his boxer/puncher style and rely on his movement and speed. He never even sat down on any of his punches. So in my eyes it was effective.
I'm going to watch the fight again as a DLH fan and give hime the benefit of the doubt in the close rounds and see how I score it then.
P.S. CC's to both of you my first ones given. :)
This is kind of funny... do you have like a switch or something were you can just flick it and become somebody elsed fan LOL
BTW, congratz on 100 post.
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
How about, for the sake of argument, we give DLH rounds 3, and 5 through 8 and we give Tito rounds 10 to 12.
This gives us 5 rounds for DLH and 3 for Tito with 4 rounds left. These are 1, 2, 4 and 9. I think there was another round which was pretty close, don't remember now if it was the 5th or the 7th, but lets leave it this way just to narrow it down.
What is your opinion on how these four rounds went?
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Good post The Rookie Fan and I agree with you that this was a very close fight, and could have been scored either way. Personally, I agree with the judges. I remember watching the fight and being annoyed by DLH trying to steal every round in the last 10 seconds and the crowd going crazy for nothing. ::** It's very similar to what was happening in the DLH/FMJ fight, and when you go back and watch it again the flurries were basically meaningless. I still watch this fight every couple of months and I can't see how anyone can actually claim this was a robbery. Could of gone either way, yes. Robbery no way in hell. May the sad clicks rain down upon me. :sitr:
Oscar could of done no worse than 6 rounds to 3 through first 9 rounds Oscar wasn't just trying to steal rounds at the end he was outboxing Tito through out the whole round.
Obviously he could have done worse because 6 to 3 going into the 10th would have given him a draw and we all know that didn't happen. I have no problem with anyone that believes Oscar won because the fight, I just don't see it that way. Oscar boxed beautifully, but just because Trinidad didn't knock him out doesn't mean he wasn't holding his own in there. Tito was pressing the action the entire fight and it was so close that 1 decent punch or flurry could have changed who won the round. Both fighters were walking on pins and needles the whole fight and they respected each other so much neither wanted to take any unwarranted chances and get caught.
What im saying is that Oscar was atleast 3 rounds ahead at that point no way was Tito only 2 rounds behind or ect if you do round by round i actually find it hard for Tito win to be honest yes Tito was aggressor but was it affective aggression ?? through first 9 rounds it wasn't really Tito was landing very few in numbers and Oscar would just dance land jab few combos here and there and sometimes the right hand.
I understand what your saying, but it's not like DLH was landing at will or anything. Compubox numbers are one thing, and to tell you the truth I never go by those. Was Tito's aggression effective? It depends on how you look at it. It forced DLH to completely get away from his boxer/puncher style and rely on his movement and speed. He never even sat down on any of his punches. So in my eyes it was effective.
I'm going to watch the fight again as a DLH fan and give hime the benefit of the doubt in the close rounds and see how I score it then.
P.S. CC's to both of you my first ones given. :)
This is kind of funny... do you have like a switch or something were you can just flick it and become somebody elsed fan LOL
BTW, congratz on 100 post.
No not usually, but in this case I'll just get a pedicure and manicure, pluck my eyebrows and I should be good to go. ;)
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joerod
Good post The Rookie Fan and I agree with you that this was a very close fight, and could have been scored either way. Personally, I agree with the judges. I remember watching the fight and being annoyed by DLH trying to steal every round in the last 10 seconds and the crowd going crazy for nothing. ::** It's very similar to what was happening in the DLH/FMJ fight, and when you go back and watch it again the flurries were basically meaningless. I still watch this fight every couple of months and I can't see how anyone can actually claim this was a robbery. Could of gone either way, yes. Robbery no way in hell. May the sad clicks rain down upon me. :sitr:
Oscar could of done no worse than 6 rounds to 3 through first 9 rounds Oscar wasn't just trying to steal rounds at the end he was outboxing Tito through out the whole round.
Obviously he could have done worse because 6 to 3 going into the 10th would have given him a draw and we all know that didn't happen. I have no problem with anyone that believes Oscar won because the fight, I just don't see it that way. Oscar boxed beautifully, but just because Trinidad didn't knock him out doesn't mean he wasn't holding his own in there. Tito was pressing the action the entire fight and it was so close that 1 decent punch or flurry could have changed who won the round. Both fighters were walking on pins and needles the whole fight and they respected each other so much neither wanted to take any unwarranted chances and get caught.
What im saying is that Oscar was atleast 3 rounds ahead at that point no way was Tito only 2 rounds behind or ect if you do round by round i actually find it hard for Tito win to be honest yes Tito was aggressor but was it affective aggression ?? through first 9 rounds it wasn't really Tito was landing very few in numbers and Oscar would just dance land jab few combos here and there and sometimes the right hand.
I understand what your saying, but it's not like DLH was landing at will or anything. Compubox numbers are one thing, and to tell you the truth I never go by those. Was Tito's aggression effective? It depends on how you look at it. It forced DLH to completely get away from his boxer/puncher style and rely on his movement and speed. He never even sat down on any of his punches. So in my eyes it was effective. I'm going to watch the fight again as a DLH fan and give hime the benefit of the doubt in the close rounds and see how I score it then.
P.S. CC's to both of you my first ones given. :)
:coolclick: back i like good debate.
Re: Fresh look at Trinidad vs de la Hoya
This fight is very hard to judge . what I did is watch the entire fight in MUTE (works a lot better)
sometimes I have it a tied and some Tito by 1, One tome I saw it with sound I have it Oscar by 1
but after trying the Mute technique it was Tito by 1 everytime
