Peterson vs Garcia - Thoughts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron Swanson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Peterson should have walked him down earlier... if he fought for an extra 10-20 seconds extra in the 3rd, 4th and 5th, he would have won easily.

He has a lot left in the tank in the end... he should have just won earlier rounds.

I have seen fighters try this late rounds model before, it can backfire as it did last night: Don't wait for the 6th or 7th to turn up, and the 8th if you are splitting the rounds prior in your mind, is just too late if you have something left in the tank.

If you have a strategy for the long haul, try to win at least two of the first five rounds. Just try...

---

I don't mean to be rude but quite simply you, like the judges, don't know what you saw. You didn't see what actually happened. Peterson did win early rounds. He just didn't do it the way you wanted. But that is supposed to be irrelevant. There are scoring criteria and by the scoring criteria Peterson won those rounds.

It's sad how many phony terms have been made up to cheat the proper scoring system like "fought negative" or "ran". There are rules, people need to stop making crap up and follow the rules. Peterson won that fight by the rules, that's why Garcia resorted to so much fouling. He knew he wasn't winning by the rules.

And even Gacia said "I lost, I lost" because Peterson first out boxed him, then he beat him up. He had Garcia any way he wanted him. He was the Ring General(a real scoring criteria)

---

Ron, you should send a complaint to those two judges that gave the win to Garcia.
I agree with you that Peterson should have won, but he came to the fight with a boneheaded fight plan and stuck to it.
I don't know who came up with that, but they should never admit to it. What's wrong with the tried and true fight plan of trying to win every round as they come up? I can't imagine telling a fighter, "Hey kid, get in there and dazzle everyone with your speed and mobility while you wear him out, after 6 or 7 rounds go ahead and KO him. You might lose some or all of those dazzling 6 or 7 rounds, but don't worry about it because you're going to KO him, right?"
Ron, please don't talk to me about scoring criteria because my intolerance for stupidity and boring, boring fights trumps anything you have to say. To begin with Peterson should have lost the fight for trying to bore everyone to death for 6 rounds.
Not one of the three judges had Peterson winning, doesn't that register or tell you something? It tells me that judges don't like to see fighters dancing and prancing around the ring during a professional boxing match.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlimTrae

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris6878

Garcia was swinging and missing. Lamont showed his blackness and had to much rhythm for Garcia. Garcia was the guy in the club holding up the wall, while lamont was in the middle of the dance floor with a crowd around him.

Lamont whooped dGarcia ass, I guarantee garcia wants no parts of a rematch

---

Showed his Blackness? Does that mean Garcia wasn't showing his Puerto Ricaness?

---

not at all, he look like he was born in Iowa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

It seems Garcia is the house fighter that they want to keep undefeated and set up for Floyd Mayweather.

I have not seen the fight but this looks like a marketing ploy to keep Garcia relevant.

---

I have always supported Danny Garcia but I'm starting to think that he is just holding the belt for someone else...?

Broner has recently called out Garcia so hopefully we can iron out the best at 140 before Garcia leaves the division.

After floyd beats manny twice this year a fight with Garcia could be his 50th fight early 2016.

Garcia has to show he completely owns this division!

---

Damn it man, your comment was good until you inserted floyds cock in mouth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris6878

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

It seems Garcia is the house fighter that they want to keep undefeated and set up for Floyd Mayweather.

I have not seen the fight but this looks like a marketing ploy to keep Garcia relevant.

---

I have always supported Danny Garcia but I'm starting to think that he is just holding the belt for someone else...?

Broner has recently called out Garcia so hopefully we can iron out the best at 140 before Garcia leaves the division.

After floyd beats manny twice this year a fight with Garcia could be his 50th fight early 2016.

Garcia has to show he completely owns this division!

---

Damn it man, your comment was good until you inserted floyds cock in mouth

---

Another gay Midget revealing his stupidity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beenKOed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron Swanson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Peterson should have walked him down earlier... if he fought for an extra 10-20 seconds extra in the 3rd, 4th and 5th, he would have won easily.

He has a lot left in the tank in the end... he should have just won earlier rounds.

I have seen fighters try this late rounds model before, it can backfire as it did last night: Don't wait for the 6th or 7th to turn up, and the 8th if you are splitting the rounds prior in your mind, is just too late if you have something left in the tank.

If you have a strategy for the long haul, try to win at least two of the first five rounds. Just try...

---

I don't mean to be rude but quite simply you, like the judges, don't know what you saw. You didn't see what actually happened. Peterson did win early rounds. He just didn't do it the way you wanted. But that is supposed to be irrelevant. There are scoring criteria and by the scoring criteria Peterson won those rounds.

It's sad how many phony terms have been made up to cheat the proper scoring system like "fought negative" or "ran". There are rules, people need to stop making crap up and follow the rules. Peterson won that fight by the rules, that's why Garcia resorted to so much fouling. He knew he wasn't winning by the rules.

And even Gacia said "I lost, I lost" because Peterson first out boxed him, then he beat him up. He had Garcia any way he wanted him. He was the Ring General(a real scoring criteria)

---

Ron, you should send a complaint to those two judges that gave the win to Garcia.
I agree with you that Peterson should have won, but he came to the fight with a boneheaded fight plan and stuck to it.
I don't know who came up with that, but they should never admit to it. What's wrong with the tried and true fight plan of trying to win every round as they come up? I can't imagine telling a fighter, "Hey kid, get in there and dazzle everyone with your speed and mobility while you wear him out, after 6 or 7 rounds go ahead and KO him. You might lose some or all of those dazzling 6 or 7 rounds, but don't worry about it because you're going to KO him, right?"
Ron, please don't talk to me about scoring criteria because my intolerance for stupidity and boring, boring fights trumps anything you have to say. To begin with Peterson should have lost the fight for trying to bore everyone to death for 6 rounds.
Not one of the three judges had Peterson winning, doesn't that register or tell you something? It tells me that judges don't like to see fighters dancing and prancing around the ring during a professional boxing match.

---

You can't score a fight.

Peterson didn't lose every round he moved around in.

It was a pretty close fight, if Peterson would have come with a bit more pressure right at the start of the fight, he would have gotten it. In my opinion, it is a bad decision but I wouldn't go as far as a robbery.

Chris is my private stalker..I have learnt to love him.

Some great points made by you guys.
I hope Garcia gives Peterson the rematch so the right man can win or fight Maidana so he can wreck him and shut Silly Angel Garcia up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nameless

It was a pretty close fight, if Peterson would have come with a bit more pressure right at the start of the fight, he would have gotten it. In my opinion, it is a bad decision but I wouldn't go as far as a robbery.

---

It was a robbery.

Garcia got worked over.

He didn't win enough rounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corvette

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nameless

It was a pretty close fight, if Peterson would have come with a bit more pressure right at the start of the fight, he would have gotten it. In my opinion, it is a bad decision but I wouldn't go as far as a robbery.

---

It was a robbery.

Garcia got worked over.

He didn't win enough rounds.

---

I agree. I don't see how Garcia won that fight. Even if you score generously you can't give Garcia enough rounds to deserve the W.

If you think it's close then just watch and decide which fighter would you have rather been in that fight. I'd be Peterson because Garcia was clueless and got embarrassed, whilst Peterson dictated everything.

Tough call cause Peterson came out strong in the second half but gave away rounds in the first. Not sure which round (maybe 11) but Peterson may have earned a 10-8 round when he had Garcia rock.

I thought Peterson should of won but Garcia getting the decision is hard to argue with. Close fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron Swanson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Peterson should have walked him down earlier... if he fought for an extra 10-20 seconds extra in the 3rd, 4th and 5th, he would have won easily.

He has a lot left in the tank in the end... he should have just won earlier rounds.

I have seen fighters try this late rounds model before, it can backfire as it did last night: Don't wait for the 6th or 7th to turn up, and the 8th if you are splitting the rounds prior in your mind, is just too late if you have something left in the tank.

If you have a strategy for the long haul, try to win at least two of the first five rounds. Just try...

---

I don't mean to be rude but quite simply you, like the judges, don't know what you saw. You didn't see what actually happened. Peterson did win early rounds. He just didn't do it the way you wanted. But that is supposed to be irrelevant. There are scoring criteria and by the scoring criteria Peterson won those rounds.

It's sad how many phony terms have been made up to cheat the proper scoring system like "fought negative" or "ran". There are rules, people need to stop making crap up and follow the rules. Peterson won that fight by the rules, that's why Garcia resorted to so much fouling. He knew he wasn't winning by the rules.

And even Gacia said "I lost, I lost" because Peterson first out boxed him, then he beat him up. He had Garcia any way he wanted him. He was the Ring General(a real scoring criteria)

---

Peterson says the same thing here, around the 2.24 mark.

https://youtu.be/LCIhIjj9vR0?t=2m24s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manos de Piedra

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corvette

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nameless

It was a pretty close fight, if Peterson would have come with a bit more pressure right at the start of the fight, he would have gotten it. In my opinion, it is a bad decision but I wouldn't go as far as a robbery.

---

It was a robbery.

Garcia got worked over.

He didn't win enough rounds.

---

I agree. I don't see how Garcia won that fight. Even if you score generously you can't give Garcia enough rounds to deserve the W.

If you think it's close then just watch and decide which fighter would you have rather been in that fight. I'd be Peterson because Garcia was clueless and got embarrassed, whilst Peterson dictated everything.

---

I think it is a bit severe here; to me, a robbery is when it is litterally VERY obvious that one of the fighter won and the other lost. It wasn't SO obvious here. I think that it is a bad decision, that Peterson did deserve the win, but a Robbery is of another magnitude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corvette

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beenKOed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron Swanson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Peterson should have walked him down earlier... if he fought for an extra 10-20 seconds extra in the 3rd, 4th and 5th, he would have won easily.

He has a lot left in the tank in the end... he should have just won earlier rounds.

I have seen fighters try this late rounds model before, it can backfire as it did last night: Don't wait for the 6th or 7th to turn up, and the 8th if you are splitting the rounds prior in your mind, is just too late if you have something left in the tank.

If you have a strategy for the long haul, try to win at least two of the first five rounds. Just try...

---

I don't mean to be rude but quite simply you, like the judges, don't know what you saw. You didn't see what actually happened. Peterson did win early rounds. He just didn't do it the way you wanted. But that is supposed to be irrelevant. There are scoring criteria and by the scoring criteria Peterson won those rounds.

It's sad how many phony terms have been made up to cheat the proper scoring system like "fought negative" or "ran". There are rules, people need to stop making crap up and follow the rules. Peterson won that fight by the rules, that's why Garcia resorted to so much fouling. He knew he wasn't winning by the rules.

And even Gacia said "I lost, I lost" because Peterson first out boxed him, then he beat him up. He had Garcia any way he wanted him. He was the Ring General(a real scoring criteria)

---

Ron, you should send a complaint to those two judges that gave the win to Garcia.
I agree with you that Peterson should have won, but he came to the fight with a boneheaded fight plan and stuck to it.
I don't know who came up with that, but they should never admit to it. What's wrong with the tried and true fight plan of trying to win every round as they come up? I can't imagine telling a fighter, "Hey kid, get in there and dazzle everyone with your speed and mobility while you wear him out, after 6 or 7 rounds go ahead and KO him. You might lose some or all of those dazzling 6 or 7 rounds, but don't worry about it because you're going to KO him, right?"
Ron, please don't talk to me about scoring criteria because my intolerance for stupidity and boring, boring fights trumps anything you have to say. To begin with Peterson should have lost the fight for trying to bore everyone to death for 6 rounds.
Not one of the three judges had Peterson winning, doesn't that register or tell you something? It tells me that judges don't like to see fighters dancing and prancing around the ring during a professional boxing match.

---

You can't score a fight.

Peterson didn't lose every round he moved around in.

---

I don't want to score a fight, I want to see a fight!

Who said he lost every round he moved around in, not me!
None of the judges had Peterson winning the fight and two judges had Peterson definitely losing.
The sad truth is that Peterson would have won the fight, easily, if he had left his super duper, dazzling footwork in the gym and come out fighting in the 1st round like he did in the 7th round.
We can agree on that can't we?

I see people critiquing Peterson's fight plan. I think he had a good framework for fighting Garcia. If he went toe to toe and turned it into a brawl I think the fight would have swung in Garcia's favor. I really thought Danny was going to be a big deal and I like his personality but he is really not performing as I was hoping he would. People are saying he is in line for Floyd. That would be a joke, I would be surprised if he hit Floyd at all during the fight. I wouldn't waste my time watching it. Danny needs to dump his father and get a new trainer. I guess having family in your camp can be a bad thing. I don't think his father would be willing to acknowledge reality and it would be tough to fire your on father. Peterson is a good fighter and I like the guy but Danny made him look much better than he is.