-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by Missy
if a fighter sags down through being tied does it score? If you take a knee because you're tired I'd score it.
No, a knockdown is supposed to be a fighter going to the canvas as the result of a punch. Replays clearly showed that no punch landed. Barrera went to throw a short hook, but clearly missed over the top of Morales head. Morales leaned down and went to clinch, but Barrera fell forward into him and the impact of Barrera's body knocked Morales to one knee. It was a push/slip, not a knockdown.
I believe this cheap knockdown was the only one of Morales' career until the 2nd Pacquiao fight, correct?
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total
Barrera | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 115
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Morales | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 8 | 112
115-112 Barrera . I remember when the decision was announced there was uproar . Nobody agrred with it and its a shame cuz after such a great fight there was booing around the arena . Barrera bossed it early with better speed and swept the 1st 3 rounds . Morales worked his way back into it but was hurt in the 5th. I still gave Morales that round though cuz he outworked Barrera for the 1st two . Morales took the next 3 rounds to make it an even fight and this is where Barreras better defence was apparent . Plus he was doing more damage and Morales was often staggered . Barrera was taking the later rounds knowing when to up the pace and finish rounds strong . Morales always answered attacks and occassionally flustered Barrera . He'd clawed his way back into the argument and I had him a round down going into the 12th . Barrera really worked hard though and Morales was floored due to exhaustion which should have put it beyond doubt . Dispite the bad decision Barrera beat Morales twice over after that fight so it put things right . Great fight though .
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
floyd says hes the best of all times the main thing he bases that on is becouse he never lost and will never lose but he did lose and i'm not debating this jose luis castillo 1st fight even a newbie would agree if they are being honest with themselfs and us hows that for controversial??????!!!!!!
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Dispite the bad decision Barrera beat Morales twice over after that fight so it put things right.
You'd find plenty of people who would question whether Barrera really beat Morales in their second fight. Hmmmm, sounds like a good idea for a thread.....
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Dispite the bad decision Barrera beat Morales twice over after that fight so it put things right.
You'd find plenty of people who would question whether Barrera really beat Morales in their second fight. Hmmmm, sounds like a good idea for a thread.....
I assumed it was coming next ;D Barrera had a much easier fight next time round . He emerged unmarked but Erik looked like he had been in a war . No where near as good as the 1st fight . Rematches usually arent but then it picks up again in the decider
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I assumed it was coming next ;D Barrera had a much easier fight next time round . He emerged unmarked but Erik looked like he had been in a war . No where near as good as the 1st fight . Rematches usually arent but then it picks up again in the decider
Ya you're right, the second fight is often the least eventful one in a trilogy. Not always, but a lot of the time it is.
The first fight was the biggest brawl of the 3 fights, but I actually think their third fight was the best of the 3. That one had great technical boxing and lots of toe-to-toe action. I also think the third fight is the only one that didn't have a controversial decision. Barrera got a close decision, and that was the right decision.
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I assumed it was coming next ;D Barrera had a much easier fight next time round . He emerged unmarked but Erik looked like he had been in a war . No where near as good as the 1st fight . Rematches usually arent but then it picks up again in the decider
Ya you're right, the second fight is often the least eventful one in a trilogy. Not always, but a lot of the time it is.
The first fight was the biggest brawl of the 3 fights, but I actually think their third fight was the best of the 3. That one had great technical boxing and lots of toe-to-toe action. I also think the third fight is the only one that didn't have a controversial decision. Barrera got a close decision, and that was the right decision.
Yeah in the 3rd Barrera settled all arguments . It was a good close fight. This how I view the trilogy
1st fight - Amazing . Best fight ive ever seen . Barrera was robbed but it couldnt cloud a great fight
2nd fight - Not as good , havent seen it for a while . From what I remember Barrera just plain outboxed him in a pretty uneventful battle and people werent happy .
3rd fight - Back to war . Both had good spells . Barreras extra class and skills clinched it for him .
I think Morales moved up in weight and Barrera followed him . He didnt need to . The extra pounds suited Erik more but Ironically it was Barrera who seemed more comfortable .
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I assumed it was coming next ;D Barrera had a much easier fight next time round . He emerged unmarked but Erik looked like he had been in a war . No where near as good as the 1st fight . Rematches usually arent but then it picks up again in the decider
Ya you're right, the second fight is often the least eventful one in a trilogy. Not always, but a lot of the time it is.
The first fight was the biggest brawl of the 3 fights, but I actually think their third fight was the best of the 3. That one had great technical boxing and lots of toe-to-toe action. I also think the third fight is the only one that didn't have a controversial decision. Barrera got a close decision, and that was the right decision.
Yeah in the 3rd Barrera settled all arguments . It was a good close fight. This how I view the trilogy
1st fight - Amazing . Best fight ive ever seen . Barrera was robbed but it couldnt cloud a great fight
2nd fight - Not as good , havent seen it for a while . From what I remember Barrera just plain outboxed him in a pretty uneventful battle and people werent happy .
3rd fight - Back to war . Both had good spells . Barreras extra class and skills clinched it for him .
I think Morales moved up in weight and Barrera followed him . He didnt need to . The extra pounds suited Erik more but Ironically it was Barrera who seemed more comfortable .
At least give Morales a victory GAME. 3 was decisive but I thought Morales took 1 and 2. But at least give him something.
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazilianbomber
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I assumed it was coming next ;D Barrera had a much easier fight next time round . He emerged unmarked but Erik looked like he had been in a war . No where near as good as the 1st fight . Rematches usually arent but then it picks up again in the decider
Ya you're right, the second fight is often the least eventful one in a trilogy. Not always, but a lot of the time it is.
The first fight was the biggest brawl of the 3 fights, but I actually think their third fight was the best of the 3. That one had great technical boxing and lots of toe-to-toe action. I also think the third fight is the only one that didn't have a controversial decision. Barrera got a close decision, and that was the right decision.
Yeah in the 3rd Barrera settled all arguments . It was a good close fight. This how I view the trilogy
1st fight - Amazing . Best fight ive ever seen . Barrera was robbed but it couldnt cloud a great fight
2nd fight - Not as good , havent seen it for a while . From what I remember Barrera just plain outboxed him in a pretty uneventful battle and people werent happy .
3rd fight - Back to war . Both had good spells . Barreras extra class and skills clinched it for him .
I think Morales moved up in weight and Barrera followed him . He didnt need to . The extra pounds suited Erik more but Ironically it was Barrera who seemed more comfortable .
At least give Morales a victory GAME. 3 was decisive but I thought Morales took 1 and 2. But at least give him something.
i agree game i normally like your post and we normally agree i know your big fan on mab but i think your bit biased mate
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazilianbomber
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I assumed it was coming next ;D Barrera had a much easier fight next time round . He emerged unmarked but Erik looked like he had been in a war . No where near as good as the 1st fight . Rematches usually arent but then it picks up again in the decider
Ya you're right, the second fight is often the least eventful one in a trilogy. Not always, but a lot of the time it is.
The first fight was the biggest brawl of the 3 fights, but I actually think their third fight was the best of the 3. That one had great technical boxing and lots of toe-to-toe action. I also think the third fight is the only one that didn't have a controversial decision. Barrera got a close decision, and that was the right decision.
Yeah in the 3rd Barrera settled all arguments . It was a good close fight. This how I view the trilogy
1st fight - Amazing . Best fight ive ever seen . Barrera was robbed but it couldnt cloud a great fight
2nd fight - Not as good , havent seen it for a while . From what I remember Barrera just plain outboxed him in a pretty uneventful battle and people werent happy .
3rd fight - Back to war . Both had good spells . Barreras extra class and skills clinched it for him .
I think Morales moved up in weight and Barrera followed him . He didnt need to . The extra pounds suited Erik more but Ironically it was Barrera who seemed more comfortable .
At least give Morales a victory GAME. 3 was decisive but I thought Morales took 1 and 2. But at least give him something.
Which 1's though ? He got the decision in the 1st fight but everyone in the arena thought he lost . Nuthin really happend in teh second fight and I cant recall Erik landing anything big . The 3rd fight was decisive for barrera so although Erik made the trilogy close he never actually did enough to win .
The asked these questions to the sky experts on the Juarez - Barrera bill when they asked them to seperate Barrera and Erik. It was close in almost every department but Barrera took it in every question criteria , be it about class , ability to change , strategy etc .
ICECOLD - This is how I see it . The judges agreed in the last two fights and in the 1st fight everyone in teh studio and Vegas disagreed with the decision
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazilianbomber
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I assumed it was coming next ;D Barrera had a much easier fight next time round . He emerged unmarked but Erik looked like he had been in a war . No where near as good as the 1st fight . Rematches usually arent but then it picks up again in the decider
Ya you're right, the second fight is often the least eventful one in a trilogy. Not always, but a lot of the time it is.
The first fight was the biggest brawl of the 3 fights, but I actually think their third fight was the best of the 3. That one had great technical boxing and lots of toe-to-toe action. I also think the third fight is the only one that didn't have a controversial decision. Barrera got a close decision, and that was the right decision.
Yeah in the 3rd Barrera settled all arguments . It was a good close fight. This how I view the trilogy
1st fight - Amazing . Best fight ive ever seen . Barrera was robbed but it couldnt cloud a great fight
2nd fight - Not as good , havent seen it for a while . From what I remember Barrera just plain outboxed him in a pretty uneventful battle and people werent happy .
3rd fight - Back to war . Both had good spells . Barreras extra class and skills clinched it for him .
I think Morales moved up in weight and Barrera followed him . He didnt need to . The extra pounds suited Erik more but Ironically it was Barrera who seemed more comfortable .
At least give Morales a victory GAME. 3 was decisive but I thought Morales took 1 and 2. But at least give him something.
Which 1's though ? He got the decision in the 1st fight but everyone in the arena thought he lost . Nuthin really happend in teh second fight and I cant recall Erik landing anything big . The 3rd fight was decisive for barrera so although Erik made the trilogy close he never actually did enough to win .
The asked these questions to the sky experts on the Juarez - Barrera bill when they asked them to seperate Barrera and Erik. It was close in almost every department but Barrera took it in every question criteria , be it about class , ability to change , strategy etc .
ICECOLD - This is how I see it . The judges agreed in the last two fights and in the 1st fight everyone in teh studio and Vegas disagreed with the decision
thats fine mate if you see it that way i had it draw because of 10-8 round in 12th round
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazilianbomber
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I assumed it was coming next ;D Barrera had a much easier fight next time round . He emerged unmarked but Erik looked like he had been in a war . No where near as good as the 1st fight . Rematches usually arent but then it picks up again in the decider
Ya you're right, the second fight is often the least eventful one in a trilogy. Not always, but a lot of the time it is.
The first fight was the biggest brawl of the 3 fights, but I actually think their third fight was the best of the 3. That one had great technical boxing and lots of toe-to-toe action. I also think the third fight is the only one that didn't have a controversial decision. Barrera got a close decision, and that was the right decision.
Yeah in the 3rd Barrera settled all arguments . It was a good close fight. This how I view the trilogy
1st fight - Amazing . Best fight ive ever seen . Barrera was robbed but it couldnt cloud a great fight
2nd fight - Not as good , havent seen it for a while . From what I remember Barrera just plain outboxed him in a pretty uneventful battle and people werent happy .
3rd fight - Back to war . Both had good spells . Barreras extra class and skills clinched it for him .
I think Morales moved up in weight and Barrera followed him . He didnt need to . The extra pounds suited Erik more but Ironically it was Barrera who seemed more comfortable .
At least give Morales a victory GAME. 3 was decisive but I thought Morales took 1 and 2. But at least give him something.
Which 1's though ? He got the decision in the 1st fight but everyone in the arena thought he lost . Nuthin really happend in teh second fight and I cant recall Erik landing anything big . The 3rd fight was decisive for barrera so although Erik made the trilogy close he never actually did enough to win .
The asked these questions to the sky experts on the Juarez - Barrera bill when they asked them to seperate Barrera and Erik. It was close in almost every department but Barrera took it in every question criteria , be it about class , ability to change , strategy etc .
ICECOLD - This is how I see it . The judges agreed in the last two fights and in the 1st fight everyone in teh studio and Vegas disagreed with the decision
thats fine mate if you see it that way i had it draw because of 10-8 round in 12th round
So you had Erik 2 rounds up going into the 12th ? WTF . Are you an Erik fan or summat ? Glenn Mcrory and Ian Darke had it big for Barrera going into teh last and that knockdown should have clinched it . Cant complain though cuz it made for a classic trilogy . A trilogy in which Barrera learnt and adapted his style but Morales didnt appear to change much . If Erik had a better defence that would have made em much harder to score IMO
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazilianbomber
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I assumed it was coming next ;D Barrera had a much easier fight next time round . He emerged unmarked but Erik looked like he had been in a war . No where near as good as the 1st fight . Rematches usually arent but then it picks up again in the decider
Ya you're right, the second fight is often the least eventful one in a trilogy. Not always, but a lot of the time it is.
The first fight was the biggest brawl of the 3 fights, but I actually think their third fight was the best of the 3. That one had great technical boxing and lots of toe-to-toe action. I also think the third fight is the only one that didn't have a controversial decision. Barrera got a close decision, and that was the right decision.
Yeah in the 3rd Barrera settled all arguments . It was a good close fight. This how I view the trilogy
1st fight - Amazing . Best fight ive ever seen . Barrera was robbed but it couldnt cloud a great fight
2nd fight - Not as good , havent seen it for a while . From what I remember Barrera just plain outboxed him in a pretty uneventful battle and people werent happy .
3rd fight - Back to war . Both had good spells . Barreras extra class and skills clinched it for him .
I think Morales moved up in weight and Barrera followed him . He didnt need to . The extra pounds suited Erik more but Ironically it was Barrera who seemed more comfortable .
At least give Morales a victory GAME. 3 was decisive but I thought Morales took 1 and 2. But at least give him something.
Which 1's though ? He got the decision in the 1st fight but everyone in the arena thought he lost . Nuthin really happend in teh second fight and I cant recall Erik landing anything big . The 3rd fight was decisive for barrera so although Erik made the trilogy close he never actually did enough to win .
The asked these questions to the sky experts on the Juarez - Barrera bill when they asked them to seperate Barrera and Erik. It was close in almost every department but Barrera took it in every question criteria , be it about class , ability to change , strategy etc .
ICECOLD - This is how I see it . The judges agreed in the last two fights and in the 1st fight everyone in teh studio and Vegas disagreed with the decision
thats fine mate if you see it that way i had it draw because of 10-8 round in 12th round
So you had Erik 2 rounds up going into the 12th ? WTF . Are you an Erik fan or summat ? Glenn Mcrory and Ian Darke had it big for Barrera going into teh last and that knockdown should have clinched it . Cant complain though cuz it made for a classic trilogy . A trilogy in which Barrera learnt and adapted his style but Morales didnt appear to change much . If Erik had a better defence that would have made em much harder to score IMO
So how did you have the rounds?
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazilianbomber
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I assumed it was coming next ;D Barrera had a much easier fight next time round . He emerged unmarked but Erik looked like he had been in a war . No where near as good as the 1st fight . Rematches usually arent but then it picks up again in the decider
Ya you're right, the second fight is often the least eventful one in a trilogy. Not always, but a lot of the time it is.
The first fight was the biggest brawl of the 3 fights, but I actually think their third fight was the best of the 3. That one had great technical boxing and lots of toe-to-toe action. I also think the third fight is the only one that didn't have a controversial decision. Barrera got a close decision, and that was the right decision.
Yeah in the 3rd Barrera settled all arguments . It was a good close fight. This how I view the trilogy
1st fight - Amazing . Best fight ive ever seen . Barrera was robbed but it couldnt cloud a great fight
2nd fight - Not as good , havent seen it for a while . From what I remember Barrera just plain outboxed him in a pretty uneventful battle and people werent happy .
3rd fight - Back to war . Both had good spells . Barreras extra class and skills clinched it for him .
I think Morales moved up in weight and Barrera followed him . He didnt need to . The extra pounds suited Erik more but Ironically it was Barrera who seemed more comfortable .
At least give Morales a victory GAME. 3 was decisive but I thought Morales took 1 and 2. But at least give him something.
Which 1's though ? He got the decision in the 1st fight but everyone in the arena thought he lost . Nuthin really happend in teh second fight and I cant recall Erik landing anything big . The 3rd fight was decisive for barrera so although Erik made the trilogy close he never actually did enough to win .
The asked these questions to the sky experts on the Juarez - Barrera bill when they asked them to seperate Barrera and Erik. It was close in almost every department but Barrera took it in every question criteria , be it about class , ability to change , strategy etc .
ICECOLD - This is how I see it . The judges agreed in the last two fights and in the 1st fight everyone in teh studio and Vegas disagreed with the decision
thats fine mate if you see it that way i had it draw because of 10-8 round in 12th round
So you had Erik 2 rounds up going into the 12th ? WTF . Are you an Erik fan or summat ? Glenn Mcrory and Ian Darke had it big for Barrera going into teh last and that knockdown should have clinched it . Cant complain though cuz it made for a classic trilogy . A trilogy in which Barrera learnt and adapted his style but Morales didnt appear to change much . If Erik had a better defence that would have made em much harder to score IMO
i like both equally i dont pick favourites i liked busier guy which morales was imo and i had him up 2 in last round and 10-8 round secured draw on my card even though it wasnt a legit knockdown you still have have to say it was 10-8 round
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazilianbomber
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I assumed it was coming next ;D Barrera had a much easier fight next time round . He emerged unmarked but Erik looked like he had been in a war . No where near as good as the 1st fight . Rematches usually arent but then it picks up again in the decider
Ya you're right, the second fight is often the least eventful one in a trilogy. Not always, but a lot of the time it is.
The first fight was the biggest brawl of the 3 fights, but I actually think their third fight was the best of the 3. That one had great technical boxing and lots of toe-to-toe action. I also think the third fight is the only one that didn't have a controversial decision. Barrera got a close decision, and that was the right decision.
Yeah in the 3rd Barrera settled all arguments . It was a good close fight. This how I view the trilogy
1st fight - Amazing . Best fight ive ever seen . Barrera was robbed but it couldnt cloud a great fight
2nd fight - Not as good , havent seen it for a while . From what I remember Barrera just plain outboxed him in a pretty uneventful battle and people werent happy .
3rd fight - Back to war . Both had good spells . Barreras extra class and skills clinched it for him .
I think Morales moved up in weight and Barrera followed him . He didnt need to . The extra pounds suited Erik more but Ironically it was Barrera who seemed more comfortable .
At least give Morales a victory GAME. 3 was decisive but I thought Morales took 1 and 2. But at least give him something.
Which 1's though ? He got the decision in the 1st fight but everyone in the arena thought he lost . Nuthin really happend in teh second fight and I cant recall Erik landing anything big . The 3rd fight was decisive for barrera so although Erik made the trilogy close he never actually did enough to win .
The asked these questions to the sky experts on the Juarez - Barrera bill when they asked them to seperate Barrera and Erik. It was close in almost every department but Barrera took it in every question criteria , be it about class , ability to change , strategy etc .
ICECOLD - This is how I see it . The judges agreed in the last two fights and in the 1st fight everyone in teh studio and Vegas disagreed with the decision
thats fine mate if you see it that way i had it draw because of 10-8 round in 12th round
So you had Erik 2 rounds up going into the 12th ? WTF . Are you an Erik fan or summat ? Glenn Mcrory and Ian Darke had it big for Barrera going into teh last and that knockdown should have clinched it . Cant complain though cuz it made for a classic trilogy . A trilogy in which Barrera learnt and adapted his style but Morales didnt appear to change much . If Erik had a better defence that would have made em much harder to score IMO
i like both equally i dont pick favourites i liked busier guy which morales was imo and i had him up 2 in last round and 10-8 round secured draw on my card even though it wasnt a legit knockdown you still have have to say it was 10-8 round
Yeah im glad weve established clarity on that cuz some were saying it wasnt a proper knockdown so they werent guna reflect it in their scoring . I agree if the ref calls it a KD then like it or not we have to go along with it or whats the point , anyone can refuse to score any given knockdown.
I do think Erik was a great fighter but Barreras style was a bad mix for him . He was a boxer that loved to brawl and Barrera was a brawler who loved to box . Marco seemed to have the extra handspeed , defence and ringsmarts . He was better built for fighting aswel in his crouched atacking style but when he boxed Erik he allowed it to be closer than it should be . When he was n the front foot Erik had much more problems . I believe Erik was at his best in his superbantam days . He made a great superfeather too . I dont think a move up to lightweight at this stage would be a sensible move TBH
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Whichever way you look at it,in all those 3 fights,none can be considered robberies. 36 of some of the closest and best rounds. I remember watching the first fight and thinking MAB won but it was one of the first fights I saw(and my favourite) but I didn't really know what to look for. Now I know more about boxing,I'll watch it again! All I know is,I called the third fight a draw.
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Barrera -vs- Morales
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | Total
Barrera | 10| 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 |10 | 113
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Morales | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 10 |10 | 10 | 10 | 8 | 115
Excellent fight to watch again... great action ! O0
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
bump cant wait for the next one sweet
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Ok, I thought the Morales-Barrera discussion went well. Good points made on both sides. We definitely need to examine Morales-Barrera II at some point, but I'd like to switch things up right now. I don't really want to look at the same two fighters twice in a row. We'll look at their second fight down the road.
For our second fight, we'll look at a fight that should be easier to score. The fight that I want to select third is going to bring lots of arguments (at least I think it will), so for our second fight we'll do one that we should be able to score in agreement.
March 13, 1999- Madison Square Garden
Lennox Lewis (34-1, WBC Heavyweight Champion) vs. Evander Holyfield (36-3, WBA & IBF Heavyweight Champion) for the Undisputed Heavyweight Championship
The three scorecards were 115-113 Holyfield, 116-113 Lewis, 115-115 Draw
My scorecard:
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total
Lewis | 10 | 10 | 10| 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 118
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX
Holyfield | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 110
118-110 Lewis, 10 rounds to 2. I could've scored it 11-1 or even 12-0. Holyfield looked incredibly slow and did hardly anything the whole fight. Lewis didn't even look like he was trying that hard. He peppered Holyfield with jabs and right hands all night. Terrible decision by the judges.
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Ok, I thought the Morales-Barrera discussion went well. Good points made on both sides. We definitely need to examine Morales-Barrera II at some point, but I'd like to switch things up right now. I don't really want to look at the same two fighters twice in a row. We'll look at their second fight down the road.
For our second fight, we'll look at a fight that should be easier to score. The fight that I want to select third is going to bring lots of arguments (at least I think it will), so for our second fight we'll do one that we should be able to score in agreement.
March 13, 1999- Madison Square Garden
Lennox Lewis (34-1, WBC Heavyweight Champion) vs. Evander Holyfield (36-3, WBA & IBF Heavyweight Champion) for the Undisputed Heavyweight Championship
The three scorecards were 115-113 Holyfield, 116-113 Lewis, 115-115 Draw
My scorecard:
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total
Lewis | 10 | 10 | 10| 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 118
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX
Holyfield | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 110
118-110 Lewis, 10 rounds to 2. I could've scored it 11-1 or even 12-0. Holyfield looked incredibly slow and did hardly anything the whole fight. Lewis didn't even look like he was trying that hard. He peppered Holyfield with jabs and right hands all night. Terrible decision by the judges.
you surprise me with that... I got to watch and score that again... I think I had Lewis winning the first fight but not by that margin. , and thought Holyfield won the second fight by several rounds. both fights controversial....
I will watch this in a few moments and score it ! O0 :coolclick: #49
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Ok, I thought the Morales-Barrera discussion went well. Good points made on both sides. We definitely need to examine Morales-Barrera II at some point, but I'd like to switch things up right now. I don't really want to look at the same two fighters twice in a row. We'll look at their second fight down the road.
For our second fight, we'll look at a fight that should be easier to score. The fight that I want to select third is going to bring lots of arguments (at least I think it will), so for our second fight we'll do one that we should be able to score in agreement.
March 13, 1999- Madison Square Garden
Lennox Lewis (34-1, WBC Heavyweight Champion) vs. Evander Holyfield (36-3, WBA & IBF Heavyweight Champion) for the Undisputed Heavyweight Championship
The three scorecards were 115-113 Holyfield, 116-113 Lewis, 115-115 Draw
My scorecard:
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total
Lewis | 10 | 10 | 10| 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 118
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX
Holyfield | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 110
118-110 Lewis, 10 rounds to 2. I could've scored it 11-1 or even 12-0. Holyfield looked incredibly slow and did hardly anything the whole fight. Lewis didn't even look like he was trying that hard. He peppered Holyfield with jabs and right hands all night. Terrible decision by the judges.
It would be better if you put this in a fresh new thread for people to post on.
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... (Updated) Lewis vs. Holyfield I
ill watch it tommorow and tell you my scorecard but i disagree with lewis winning 3rd round i think that was holyfields best round in the entire fight
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
My scorecard:
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total
Lewis | 10 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 117
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX
Holyfield | 9 | 9 | 10| 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10| 9 | 112
I had it 5 rounds to Lewis . He boxed cautiously throughout but still did enough IMO . He hurt Evander in round two but didnt take advantage when Evander was blocking on the ropes with his leg raised . The 3rd was a big effort from Evander and he took it on aggression alone but pretty much after that it was all Lennox. He got lazy around the 9th , 10th and 11th and I punished him for that with my scoring even though Evander didnt do too much himself . Lewis closed the show with first class boxing in the 12th and a right hand in the closing seconds through the middle seemed to hurt Evander . 117-112 Lewis but he could have got the K.O if he utilised his size .
BTW great thread ! Cool clicks to everyone whos posted
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... (Updated) Lewis vs. Holyfield I
Most people (including Lederman) score the 3rd for Holyfield. But even in that round, Lewis landed more punches and at a higher percentage.
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... (Updated) Lewis vs. Holyfield I
Are people having a hard time finding this fight to download??
Because if so, we can just skip this one and do a fight that's easier to find.
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... (Updated) Lewis vs. Holyfield I
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
I've been thinking of starting a new thread and wanted to gauge interest before I did so....
I wanted to do something where each week I'd name a big fight from the last 10-15 years, and then we'd all go back and watch the fight and post our round-by-round scoring.
I know there have been plenty of threads in the past about fights with close decisions, but it's mostly just people saying, "I thought this guy got robbed," or "the judges were corrupt," etc.
I want the new thread to be a place where you have to actually go back, watch the fight, and post a detailed scorecard to back up your argument.
I figure even if we just get 12-15 posters who would commit to watch the selected fight each week, it would make for some interesting discussion, especially during weeks where there are no fights on HBO, Showtime, etc.
If anyone's interested in doing something like this, post here, and if there's enough interest, I'll choose the first fight and start a thread for it tomorrow. I'd only pick fights that are easily available either on youtube or easy to find on the internet.
i watched that fight last week and decided to score it..so, i scored it 115-112 for lewis,7 rds to 4 with 1 even..lewis still clearly won,but it wasnt as one sided as HBO called it. lewis fought to causious,he should have know better than to leave his fate in the hands of incompetent and bias judges.for gods sake,he had holyfield badly hurt in i cant remember which rd,but he just toyed with evender when had he been more agressive,he could have koed the past his prime holyfield.Thats right i remember now,lewis had holyfield hurt against the ropes and did nothing except paw at him with a pathetic left jab when he should have just let his big guns blaze.ooh well ,he still won the fight :o
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazilianbomber
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Ok, I thought the Morales-Barrera discussion went well. Good points made on both sides. We definitely need to examine Morales-Barrera II at some point, but I'd like to switch things up right now. I don't really want to look at the same two fighters twice in a row. We'll look at their second fight down the road.
For our second fight, we'll look at a fight that should be easier to score. The fight that I want to select third is going to bring lots of arguments (at least I think it will), so for our second fight we'll do one that we should be able to score in agreement.
March 13, 1999- Madison Square Garden
Lennox Lewis (34-1, WBC Heavyweight Champion) vs. Evander Holyfield (36-3, WBA & IBF Heavyweight Champion) for the Undisputed Heavyweight Championship
The three scorecards were 115-113 Holyfield, 116-113 Lewis, 115-115 Draw
My scorecard:
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total
Lewis | 10 | 10 | 10| 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 118
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX
Holyfield | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 110
118-110 Lewis, 10 rounds to 2. I could've scored it 11-1 or even 12-0. Holyfield looked incredibly slow and did hardly anything the whole fight. Lewis didn't even look like he was trying that hard. He peppered Holyfield with jabs and right hands all night. Terrible decision by the judges.
It would be better if you put this in a fresh new thread for people to post on.
its funny how different people see the fight differently.I scored it 115-112for lewis which i think was a fair acessment.I mean ,you didnt even give enander the 3rd round?why not?He landed the cleaner punches,keep busy,and had lewis wobbled.I think 99% of the planet earth gave holy that round,quite fairly!...Maybe you should apply for a job with HBO,there score card was just as ridiculous as yours.No offence,but be fair,evender won 4 rounds to 7 and one even on my very unofficial score card.If i remember correctly ,i gave holyfield rds-3-9-10-11 and cant remember wich one was even,but im not going to watch it again anyways,cause it was a pretty forgetable fight!
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanky-banky
its funny how different people see the fight differently.I scored it 115-112for lewis which i think was a fair acessment.I mean ,you didnt even give enander the 3rd round?why not?He landed the cleaner punches,keep busy,and had lewis wobbled.I think 99% of the planet earth gave holy that round,quite fairly!...Maybe you should apply for a job with HBO,there score card was just as ridiculous as yours.
In the 3rd round, Lewis landed more punches, and at a higher percentage. Holyfield just seemed to be incredibly active in that round because he did next to nothing in the first two rounds. He was so inactive in the first 2, that it made him seem overly active in the 3rd just because he let his hands go for a few combinations.
Holyfield landed one decent combo early on in that round that did knock Lewis back and forced him to cover up, but Lewis steadied himself and outworked Evander the rest of the round.
Watch the fight, at the end of the 3rd, Holyfield walks back to the corner looking pretty deflated, because he had released his big flurry, yet still Lewis had outlanded him.
Who won the 3rd is certainly debatable (that's why we have this thread), but it's hardly "ridiculous" to score it for Lewis.
By the same token, it's not ridiculous to have the fight scored as a lopsided victory for Lewis. He dominated that fight. Look at the round-by-round compubox numbers, they are staggering.
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... (Updated) Lewis vs. Holyfield I
My scorecard:
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total
Lewis | 10 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 117
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX
Holyfield | 9 | 9 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 111
This fight was a total schooling, what's the next one?
Once again Sweetpea, this is a top idea CC
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanky-banky
its funny how different people see the fight differently.I scored it 115-112for lewis which i think was a fair acessment.I mean ,you didnt even give enander the 3rd round?why not?He landed the cleaner punches,keep busy,and had lewis wobbled.I think 99% of the planet earth gave holy that round,quite fairly!...Maybe you should apply for a job with HBO,there score card was just as ridiculous as yours.
In the 3rd round, Lewis landed more punches, and at a higher percentage. Holyfield just seemed to be incredibly active in that round because he did next to nothing in the first two rounds. He was so inactive in the first 2, that it made him seem overly active in the 3rd just because he let his hands go for a few combinations.
Holyfield landed one decent combo early on in that round that did knock Lewis back and forced him to cover up, but Lewis steadied himself and outworked Evander the rest of the round.
Watch the fight, at the end of the 3rd, Holyfield walks back to the corner looking pretty deflated, because he had released his big flurry, yet still Lewis had outlanded him.
Who won the 3rd is certainly debatable (that's why we have this thread), but it's hardly "ridiculous" to score it for Lewis.
By the same token, it's not ridiculous to have the fight scored as a lopsided victory for Lewis. He dominated that fight. Look at the round-by-round compubox numbers, they are staggering.
ok my bad! i probably went a bit over board with the ridiculous statment,and yes lewis dominated with his left jab,but in the 3rd lewis did land more jabs but holfield landed more meaniful shots... i see ur argument,but when i score a fight, i take alot into acount like agression,who landed the bigger bombs,who was busyer,who backed who up and so on, and i gave holy field that round for such reasons......Now if it was an amature fight,lewis would have easily won the 3rd,but in the pros we have to take alot more into account
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanky-banky
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazilianbomber
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Ok, I thought the Morales-Barrera discussion went well. Good points made on both sides. We definitely need to examine Morales-Barrera II at some point, but I'd like to switch things up right now. I don't really want to look at the same two fighters twice in a row. We'll look at their second fight down the road.
For our second fight, we'll look at a fight that should be easier to score. The fight that I want to select third is going to bring lots of arguments (at least I think it will), so for our second fight we'll do one that we should be able to score in agreement.
March 13, 1999- Madison Square Garden
Lennox Lewis (34-1, WBC Heavyweight Champion) vs. Evander Holyfield (36-3, WBA & IBF Heavyweight Champion) for the Undisputed Heavyweight Championship
The three scorecards were 115-113 Holyfield, 116-113 Lewis, 115-115 Draw
My scorecard:
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total
Lewis | 10 | 10 | 10| 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 118
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX
Holyfield | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 110
118-110 Lewis, 10 rounds to 2. I could've scored it 11-1 or even 12-0. Holyfield looked incredibly slow and did hardly anything the whole fight. Lewis didn't even look like he was trying that hard. He peppered Holyfield with jabs and right hands all night. Terrible decision by the judges.
It would be better if you put this in a fresh new thread for people to post on.
its funny how different people see the fight differently.I scored it 115-112for lewis which i think was a fair acessment.I mean ,you didnt even give enander the 3rd round?why not?He landed the cleaner punches,keep busy,and had lewis wobbled.I think 99% of the planet earth gave holy that round,quite fairly!...Maybe you should apply for a job with HBO,there score card was just as ridiculous as yours.No offence,but be fair,evender won 4 rounds to 7 and one even on my very unofficial score card.If i remember correctly ,i gave holyfield rds-3-9-10-11 and cant remember wich one was even,but im not going to watch it again anyways,cause it was a pretty forgetable fight!
:coolclick: #2 I pretty much agree with you . The thing is, most of the tall heavyweights are just kind of boring and forgettable in general.. I never find myself looking for old Lewis ,or Klitchko fights , most heavyweights over 6”4 are just boring. plain and simple. They do just enough to win and that’s it. Never really risk anything.. Just makes for a horrible watch over all .
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... (Updated) Lewis vs. Holyfield I
BUT I THINK I SPEAK FOR EVERONE ON HERE WHEN I SAY, LEWIS CLEARLY WON AND IT WAS FUN DEBATING............SO WHATS THE NEXT FIGHT?
HOW ABOUT HAGLER V'S LEONARD! I SCORED IT FOR LEONARD BUT ILL HAVE TO WATCH IT AGAIN IN DETAIL AND SCORE IT :D
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... (Updated) Lewis vs. Holyfield
i have this fight on tape somewhere cant find it though but from what i remember i gave lewis first 2 rounds i gave holyfield 3rd round and maybe 4th then lewis dominated until 9th and holyfield won 2 rounds with one even then lewis won 12 th round so ill try do score card from what i remember
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total
Lewis | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 116
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX
Holyfield | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 113
i cant remember which round i had even it was either round 9 10 or 11 i had even so ill just say 11 but i dont think anyone on planet unless there something wrong with them had this fight a draw
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... Morales vs. Barrera I
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lords Gym
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanky-banky
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazilianbomber
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Ok, I thought the Morales-Barrera discussion went well. Good points made on both sides. We definitely need to examine Morales-Barrera II at some point, but I'd like to switch things up right now. I don't really want to look at the same two fighters twice in a row. We'll look at their second fight down the road.
For our second fight, we'll look at a fight that should be easier to score. The fight that I want to select third is going to bring lots of arguments (at least I think it will), so for our second fight we'll do one that we should be able to score in agreement.
March 13, 1999- Madison Square Garden
Lennox Lewis (34-1, WBC Heavyweight Champion) vs. Evander Holyfield (36-3, WBA & IBF Heavyweight Champion) for the Undisputed Heavyweight Championship
The three scorecards were 115-113 Holyfield, 116-113 Lewis, 115-115 Draw
My scorecard:
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total
Lewis | 10 | 10 | 10| 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 118
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX
Holyfield | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 110
118-110 Lewis, 10 rounds to 2. I could've scored it 11-1 or even 12-0. Holyfield looked incredibly slow and did hardly anything the whole fight. Lewis didn't even look like he was trying that hard. He peppered Holyfield with jabs and right hands all night. Terrible decision by the judges.
It would be better if you put this in a fresh new thread for people to post on.
its funny how different people see the fight differently.I scored it 115-112for lewis which i think was a fair acessment.I mean ,you didnt even give enander the 3rd round?why not?He landed the cleaner punches,keep busy,and had lewis wobbled.I think 99% of the planet earth gave holy that round,quite fairly!...Maybe you should apply for a job with HBO,there score card was just as ridiculous as yours.No offence,but be fair,evender won 4 rounds to 7 and one even on my very unofficial score card.If i remember correctly ,i gave holyfield rds-3-9-10-11 and cant remember wich one was even,but im not going to watch it again anyways,cause it was a pretty forgetable fight!
:coolclick: #2 I pretty much agree with you . The thing is, most of the tall heavyweights are just kind of boring and forgettable in general.. I never find myself looking for old Lewis ,or Klitchko fights , most heavyweights over 6”4 are just boring. plain and simple. They do just enough to win and that’s it. Never really risk anything.. Just makes for a horrible watch over all .
agreed lords i can think of few exciting 6 foot 4 and over that are quite exciting
riddick bowe
andrew golota from what ive seen from his looks to be quite exciting fighter
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... (Updated) Lewis vs. Holyfield I
At some point I'd like for us to do Mayweather Castillo I, before Castillo - Hatton
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... (Updated) Lewis vs. Holyfield I
could we also do do a scoring debate on rjj-tarver 1 in the future? thanks
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... (Updated) Lewis vs. Holyfield I
One more thing Sweetpea, hope I'm not running your idea too much, but
You should modify the first post to have a spot that says
how many people voted each way and then list the peoples score card totals underneath
i.e.
Lewis UD -
Scores
Game: Lewis 117-Holyfield 112
Killersheep: Lewis 117 - Holyfield 111
ICE COLD BOXING: Lewis 116 - Holyfield 113
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... (Updated) Lewis vs. Holyfield I
Quote:
Originally Posted by killersheep
One more thing Sweetpea, hope I'm not running your idea too much, but
You should modify the first post to have a spot that says
how many people voted each way and then list the peoples score card totals underneath
i.e.
Lewis UD -
Scores
Game: Lewis 117-Holyfield 112
Killersheep: Lewis 117 - Holyfield 111
ICE COLD BOXING: Lewis 116 - Holyfield 113
That's a very good idea. I'll do that.
Mayweather-Castillo I is on my short list of fights to cover, we'll definitely get to it in plenty of time for Castillo-Hatton.
And for the others who suggested fights, Hagler-Leonard and Jones-Tarver I are definitely on the list.
I'll have our next fight posted in the next couple hours.
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights..... (Updated) Lewis vs. Holyfield I
-
Re: Looking back at old controversial fights.... (Updated) Whitaker vs. De La Hoya
Our next fight:
April 12, 1997: Pernell Whitaker (40-1-1, 17 KO) vs. Oscar De La Hoya (23-0, 20 KO) for Whitaker's WBC Welterweight Championship.
This is 24-year-old DLH's first fight at 147 after vacating his 140 pound title. Whitaker, now 33, has been welterweight champion for over 4 years, ever since he originally defeated Buddy McGirt for the title at Madison Square Garden in March 1993.
Both fighters are considered undefeated going into this fight, as Whitaker's one loss and one draw are heavily disputed. Despite being the challenger, DLH is the clear betting favorite due to his advantage in punching power and his 9 year age advantage over a past-his-prime Whitaker.
De La Hoya won by a controversial unanimous decision, by the scores of 116-110, 116-110, 115-111.
One thing to enjoy during this fight is the sound of Lampley and Merchant arguing with each other for almost the entire 12 rounds.
