Looking back at old controversial fights.... (Updated) Jones vs. Tarver I

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SweetPea

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.

---

damn............ i just watched this fight like 3 days ago again and deleted from my cpu.
i remember thinking pernell won it somewhat convincingly, but didnt keep score.
guess i gotta redownload it, watch it again, and score it



to be continued

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SweetPea

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.

---

115-113 Whitaker. That's only because he gave the last round away while showboating. Oscar could never land a good punch, Oscar landed more power shots but I swear I never saw them as Whitaker was able to elude him all night. I think prime on prime Whitaker would have probably dominated him like he did Chavez. There was a small mouse under Whitakers eye due to a thumb. Whitaker landed 50 more punches and was the ring general in the fight. During the fight you could tell Whitaker was more skilled despite the physical deteriation due too old age. One of boxing's all time greatest boxers, deserved a rematch that Oscar promised in the interview after the fight, but it never happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brazilianbomber

115-113 Whitaker.

---

Do you have a round-by round scoring?
One more thing, each fighter had a point deducted, Whitaker because of a stupid head butt rule, and De La Hoya because of a knockdown (admittedly a cheap knockdown).
I know both points basically cancel each other out there, but all scorecards should have the points deducted.
So if you have one fighter winning 7 rounds to 5, it would be 114-112. You could still have 115-113 if you had two rounds scored 10-10.
I should have mentioned this thing about the point deductions during my last post.

This is a great thread.. the ideas that both you (sweetpea) and killersheep are coming up with are f

fantastic ! see if you can get CutmeMick or Wacko to sticky this thread ! ~LG O0

Thanks LG, CC for ya, but give the credit to Sweetpea, this is all his baby.

Whitaker / de la Hoya 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cn6TEHHyyA

Whitaker / de la Hoya 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMPQBCLa-jk

Whitaker / de la Hoya 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQTiXwIFkm8

Whitaker / de la Hoya 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5lLxrTIL2g

Whitaker / de la Hoya 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeTpdN7javQ

Whitaker / de la Hoya 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y260CEVE840

Whitaker / de la Hoya 7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwNhyRRqJK8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killersheep

Thanks LG, CC for ya, but give the credit to Sweetpea, this is all his baby.

Whitaker / de la Hoya 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cn6TEHHyyA

Whitaker / de la Hoya 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMPQBCLa-jk

Whitaker / de la Hoya 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQTiXwIFkm8

Whitaker / de la Hoya 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5lLxrTIL2g

Whitaker / de la Hoya 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeTpdN7javQ

Whitaker / de la Hoya 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y260CEVE840

Whitaker / de la Hoya 7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwNhyRRqJK8

---

o yeah brother.. Sweetpea got his coolclick too O0 !! nice idea to post the links for the current match ! ;), one thing i love about this board is its all about team work everyone pitches in with ideas . and it evolves and becomes better and better !

Good fight - always creates a good debate ;)

De La Hoya Whitaker

9 1 10
10 2 9
10 3 8 (Point deducted for but)
9 4 10
9 5 10
10 6 9
10 7 9
10 8 9
8 9 10
10 10 9
9 11 10
10 12 9

114 - 113


I think if you were scoring more for power punches, you may give the edge to De La Hoya, if you were scoring for all punches landed, you may give the edge to Whitaker. I tried to be objective and take both into consideration and think that De La Hoya nicked it by virtue of the last round

The but and the knockdown cancelled each other out

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total
Whitaker | 10 | 10 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 9 | 114
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX
de la Hoya | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 8 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 112


round 1 -Whitaker able to keep his distance and outland ODLH
round 2 -ODLH adjusting and looking better, still Sweetpea more in control
round 3 -ODLH had the more effective punches, Whitaker loses a point for head butt
round 4 -ODLH controlling the action
round 5 -Whitaker's jab took that round
round 6 -ODLH landing some great hooks
round 7-Whitaker able to match and exceed ODLH's punches
round 8-ODLH landed some good power shots, but whitaker landed cleaner
round 9 -ODLH Knocked down
round 10-ODLH countering effectively had a few good flurries
round 11-Whitaker's defense was incredible making Oscar miss like crazy
round 12-Sweetpea looks slow Oscar takes full advantage

I could definately see how judges could see most of these rounds going either way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Good fight - always creates a good debate ;)

De La Hoya Whitaker

9 1 10
10 2 9
10 3 8 (Point deducted for but)
9 4 10
9 5 10
10 6 9
10 7 9
10 8 9
8 9 10
10 10 9
9 11 10
10 12 9

114 - 113


I think if you were scoring more for power punches, you may give the edge to De La Hoya, if you were scoring for all punches landed, you may give the edge to Whitaker. I tried to be objective and take both into consideration and think that De La Hoya nicked it by virtue of the last round

The but and the knockdown cancelled each other out

---

I think you're math is wrong you should have 112 for Sweet pea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killersheep

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Good fight - always creates a good debate ;)

De La Hoya Whitaker

9 1 10
10 2 9
10 3 8 (Point deducted for but)
9 4 10
9 5 10
10 6 9
10 7 9
10 8 9
8 9 10
10 10 9
9 11 10
10 12 9

114 - 113


I think if you were scoring more for power punches, you may give the edge to De La Hoya, if you were scoring for all punches landed, you may give the edge to Whitaker. I tried to be objective and take both into consideration and think that De La Hoya nicked it by virtue of the last round

The but and the knockdown cancelled each other out

---

I think you're math is wrong you should have 112 for Sweet pea

---

:-[

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total

Whitaker | 10 | 9 | 10| 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 |10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 113
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX
Oscar | 9 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |10 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 114

Wow sitting down and watching this fight again and actually scoring the bout.. How I see things differently then what I remember.. O0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lords Gym

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total

Whitaker | 10 | 9 | 10| 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 |10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 113
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX
Oscar | 9 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |10 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 114

Wow sitting down and watching this fight again and actually scoring the bout.. How I see things differently then what I remember.. O0

---

i wanna see mick's official scorecard on this one

I didn't see Oscar winning 5 straight rounds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by P.G.H Angel Eyes

I didn't see Oscar winning 5 straight rounds

---

he was the more effective fighter in those rounds.. very close.. but when you ask yourself who was more effective it was Oscar.

Oscar was 'aggressive' but it wasnt effective aggressiveness.

But Whitaker is my favorite fighter of all time so I may be a little biased ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by P.G.H Angel Eyes

Oscar was 'aggressive' but it wasnt effective aggressiveness.

But Whitaker is my favorite fighter of all time so I may be a little biased ;D

---

hehe.. I'm huge on Peat also , one of my favorite fighters of all time ! when i saw this fight live ,I thought Whitaker won the fight by several rounds.. but sitting down today and actually scoring the fight, i was amazed at my scorecard.. nothing like a remember the fight. O0

Gonna make this a 'sticky' as the thread has gotten great responses & the debates are great.....

CC#63 SweetPea......

Thanks Mick ! O0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CutMeMicK

Gonna make this a 'sticky' as the thread has gotten great responses & the debates are great.....

CC#63 SweetPea......

---

Agreed. These are good debatable pieces.

:coolclick: Thweet Pea. Good stuff. ;)

De La Hoya rds: 2,3,6,7,8,10 & 12 = 114

Whitaker rds: 1,4,5,9,11 = 112

*1 point deducted for Pernell in rd. 3 a 10-8 rd for ODLH.
**1 point deducted for ODLH in rd. 9 a 10-8 rd for Pernell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by P.G.H Angel Eyes

I didn't see Oscar winning 5 straight rounds

---

No neither did i. ::**

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brazilianbomber

Whitaker Vs De La Hoya
Whitaker Vs Ramirez
Whitaker Vs Chavez
Trinidad Vs De La Hoya
De La Hoya Vs Sturm
Quartey Vs De La Hoya
Hagler Vs Leonard
Holyfield Vs Lewis 1
Griffin Vs Toney 1 and 2
Jones Vs Tarver 1
Taylor Vs Hopkins 1
And that horrible Byrd Victory are all fights I would like to revisit.

---

Every single Ruiz fight. Except those are too painful to go back, revisit, and try to score round by round.

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total

Whitaker | 10 | 9 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 114
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Oscar | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 112

Of all the fights I've tried to score over the last couple years, I think this fight is the toughest. There are just so many close rounds where neither guy lands any major punches. I change my mind all the time about the 4th and 10th rounds. You could score them both for Oscar, split them, or have them both for Whitaker. I've watched this fight several times over the years, and sometimes I think Whitaker won, and sometimes I have it a draw.

I don't think it's a robbery that De La Hoya won. I think the problem I have, like most people, is that there's no way the fight was the way the judges scored it. There's no way a judge could watch that fight and score it 9 rounds to 3, which is how two of the judges had it. That's a really bad scorecard. If DLH had won by one point on a split decision, I don't think there would have been as much controversy. But because the scores were so lopsided, you wonder if the judges were even paying attention.
Also, I think a lot of the controversy had to do with the fact that people who scored it for Whitaker thought that this was the THIRD time in his career that he got robbed in a title fight. If Whitaker hadn't gotten robbed against Ramirez and Chavez, I doubt there would have been as much complaining. But since he got robbed those two times, losing a close fight to DLH stung even more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SweetPea

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total

Whitaker | 10 | 9 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 114
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Oscar | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 112

Of all the fights I've tried to score over the last couple years, I think this fight is the toughest. There are just so many close rounds where neither guy lands any major punches. I change my mind all the time about the 4th and 10th rounds. You could score them both for Oscar, split them, or have them both for Whitaker. I've watched this fight several times over the years, and sometimes I think Whitaker won, and sometimes I have it a draw.

I don't think it's a robbery that De La Hoya won. I think the problem I have, like most people, is that there's no way the fight was the way the judges scored it. There's no way a judge could watch that fight and score it 9 rounds to 3, which is how two of the judges had it. That's a really bad scorecard. If DLH had won by one point on a split decision, I don't think there would have been as much controversy. But because the scores were so lopsided, you wonder if the judges were even paying attention.
Also, I think a lot of the controversy had to do with the fact that people who scored it for Whitaker thought that this was the THIRD time in his career that he got robbed in a title fight. If Whitaker hadn't gotten robbed against Ramirez and Chavez, I doubt there would have been as much complaining. But since he got robbed those two times, losing a close fight to DLH stung even more.

---

Well said. Agreed. The same can be said for the first 2 losses of ODLH. The saddest irony is the ODLH fight against Tito looked very similar to the SweetPea and ODLH fight. I suppose judges in Vegas give rounds to the aggressor...whether he/she is an effective aggressor or not. Anyways CC for the insight and profound words.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SweetPea

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total

Whitaker | 10 | 9 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 114
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Oscar | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 112

Of all the fights I've tried to score over the last couple years, I think this fight is the toughest. There are just so many close rounds where neither guy lands any major punches. I change my mind all the time about the 4th and 10th rounds. You could score them both for Oscar, split them, or have them both for Whitaker. I've watched this fight several times over the years, and sometimes I think Whitaker won, and sometimes I have it a draw.

I don't think it's a robbery that De La Hoya won. I think the problem I have, like most people, is that there's no way the fight was the way the judges scored it. There's no way a judge could watch that fight and score it 9 rounds to 3, which is how two of the judges had it. That's a really bad scorecard. If DLH had won by one point on a split decision, I don't think there would have been as much controversy. But because the scores were so lopsided, you wonder if the judges were even paying attention.
Also, I think a lot of the controversy had to do with the fact that people who scored it for Whitaker thought that this was the THIRD time in his career that he got robbed in a title fight. If Whitaker hadn't gotten robbed against Ramirez and Chavez, I doubt there would have been as much complaining. But since he got robbed those two times, losing a close fight to DLH stung even more.

---

Veteran fighters have a hard time winning on the cards vs. a highly profiled heavily promoted up and comer .. Its boxing’s way of pushing them out, and making way for new blood.. However after watching this fight again , I got the over all feeling that Oscar did more to win the fight out right… but no question those official score cards were absolute bullshit !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spekterscript

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SweetPea

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total

Whitaker | 10 | 9 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 114
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Oscar | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 112

Of all the fights I've tried to score over the last couple years, I think this fight is the toughest. There are just so many close rounds where neither guy lands any major punches. I change my mind all the time about the 4th and 10th rounds. You could score them both for Oscar, split them, or have them both for Whitaker. I've watched this fight several times over the years, and sometimes I think Whitaker won, and sometimes I have it a draw.

I don't think it's a robbery that De La Hoya won. I think the problem I have, like most people, is that there's no way the fight was the way the judges scored it. There's no way a judge could watch that fight and score it 9 rounds to 3, which is how two of the judges had it. That's a really bad scorecard. If DLH had won by one point on a split decision, I don't think there would have been as much controversy. But because the scores were so lopsided, you wonder if the judges were even paying attention.
Also, I think a lot of the controversy had to do with the fact that people who scored it for Whitaker thought that this was the THIRD time in his career that he got robbed in a title fight. If Whitaker hadn't gotten robbed against Ramirez and Chavez, I doubt there would have been as much complaining. But since he got robbed those two times, losing a close fight to DLH stung even more.

---

Well said. Agreed. The same can be said for the first 2 losses of ODLH. The saddest irony is the ODLH fight against Tito looked very similar to the SweetPea and ODLH fight. I suppose judges in Vegas give rounds to the aggressor...whether he/she is an effective aggressor or not. Anyways CC for the insight and profound words.

---

That would be a good fight to do in the future ODLH -vs.- Trinidad

Oscar lost those last rounds vs. Tito because he was backing up and doing nada ! simply running.. ( anyone that goes out intentionally gives the last few rounds away in a championship bout is in big troubles) ! its makes a horrible impression.. I believe that was the worst advise I ever heard coming from Gil Clancy ( Oscar’s trainer at that time ) .

A couple other points:
I'm not that disappointed that there was never a rematch. I think if they fought a second time, DLH would have won again. It would have been very close again, but I think DLH would've done better the second time around.
DLH would've been older and more experienced in a second fight, and would have been more prepared for all of Whitaker's tricks.
Whitaker would've been older, but in a bad way, and his personal problems would have taken more out of him in the time in between fights.
I do think Whitaker would've clearly beaten DLH if they fought in their primes, he would've just been too fast and too good for Oscar. And that's not meant to put down Oscar. You could count on one hand the fighters who could beat a prime Whitaker at 135 or 147.

And the last thing, is that if Whitaker was going to lose by a controversial decision, I'm glad he lost to someone like DLH, who's a great champion too. It would have been a lot worse if Whitaker lost his belt on a bad decision against some journeyman. At least he lost it to a rising star who went on to fight all the other great welterweights like Quartey, Tito, Mosley, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SweetPea

A couple other points:
I'm not that disappointed that there was never a rematch. I think if they fought a second time, DLH would have won again. It would have been very close again, but I think DLH would've done better the second time around.
DLH would've been older and more experienced in a second fight, and would have been more prepared for all of Whitaker's tricks.
Whitaker would've been older, but in a bad way, and his personal problems would have taken more out of him in the time in between fights.
I do think Whitaker would've clearly beaten DLH if they fought in their primes, he would've just been too fast and too good for Oscar. And that's not meant to put down Oscar. You could count on one hand the fighters who could beat a prime Whitaker at 135 or 147.

And the last thing, is that if Whitaker was going to lose by a controversial decision, I'm glad he lost to someone like DLH, who's a great champion too. It would have been a lot worse if Whitaker lost his belt on a bad decision against some journeyman. At least he lost it to a rising star who went on to fight all the other great welterweights like Quartey, Tito, Mosley, etc.

---

Agreed 100% on all counts ! excellent read ! Cool Click in 24 my brother ! O0

i gotta download this fight so gimme while and ill tell you my scorecard tommorow

Wow sweetpea..Props on getting your topic pinned..
I'll have to stick a few cards up on here from time to time..
CC Peace

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CutMeMicK

De La Hoya rds: 2,3,6,7,8,10 & 12 = 114

Whitaker rds: 1,4,5,9,11 = 112

*1 point deducted for Pernell in rd. 3 a 10-8 rd for ODLH.
**1 point deducted for ODLH in rd. 9 a 10-8 rd for Pernell.

---

Exactly the same score as me bruv (see previous page ) ;)

Round 1-Whitaker
Round 2-De La Hoya
Round 3-De La Hoya
Round 4-Whitaker
Round 5-De La Hoya
Round 6-De La Hoya
Round 7-Tie
Round 8-De La Hoya
Round 9-Whitaker
Round 10-De La Hoya
Round 11-Whitaker
Round 12-De La Hoya

115-112 De La Hoya

I favor neither fighter. I like them both. I think Whitaker put on a great defensive performance making Oscar miss as much as he did. But Whitaker was just horrible offensively. That knock down was not a knock down. Anybody can see that It's hard for me to give this fight to Whitaker as much as I like him. Whitaker should of gotten the win in both his fights against Chavez and Ramirez. Both he should of took a loss in both his fights against Wilfredo Rivera. People seem to forget that when they scream Whitaker was robbed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

Both he should of took a loss in both his fights against Wilfredo Rivera. People seem to forget that when they scream Whitaker was robbed.

---

Whitaker-Rivera I is going to get looked at in this thread at some point soon. A couple people have suggested it.
I actually thought that Whitaker narrowly won the first fight and then won again in easier fashion in the second fight.
I thought Whitaker was really 44-0 when he fought Trinidad and got his first obvious defeat.
But we'll get a chance to look at the Rivera fights down the road.

Seem to have missed this thread thus far but a CC to SweetPea for a cracking idea

rd1 whitaker 10-9
rd2 oscar 10-9
rd3 oscar 10-8
rd4 oscar 10-9
rd5 whitaker 10-9
rd6 oscar 10-9
rd7 this round was razor thin i just give it to whitaker 10-9
rd8 oscar 10-9
rd9 whitaker 10-8
rd10 whitaker 10-9 oscar done flurry at end but i still think whitaker done enough for this round
rd11 whitaker 10-9
rd12 oscar 10-9

114= whitaker 114= oscar DRAW 8) i think it should of been draw it was too close to call so many close rounds i think draw would of been fair if i watched this tommorow id prolly change my mind thats what kind of fight it is

Whitaker-Chavez should be looked at.

Id happily put my scorecard to that on here.

Just to show everyone how robbed Pernell was.

I am ready for another one ! O0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SweetPea

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | total

Whitaker | 10 | 9 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 114
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Oscar | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 112

---

Nice card. Mirrors mine, but I had round 7 even, making it 114-113 Pea.

I think rounds 4,7 and 10 are the most debateable in the fight.

BTW, check out this clip where it shows Oscar's flurry in round 10 from a different angle than the one shown in the fight. It's incredible how Pea contorts himself to make Oscar miss just about every shot he throws. Seeing that that flurry was pretty ineffectual, i think Whitaker takes round 10.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atONMjfkxso

Good discussion on Whitaker-De La Hoya. We will definitely see both of those guys in this thread again in other fights at a later date.

Next fight:

April 6, 1987. Marvin Hagler (62-2-2, 52 KO) vs. Sugar Ray Leonard (33-1, 24 KO) for Hagler's Middleweight Title.

Leonard was fighting for the first time in 3 years and for the first time ever at middlweight. All his previous fights were at 147 or 154.
Halger had not been defeated in over a decade, over a span of 37 fights, and had reigned as the champ at 160 for 7 years. Hagler was a 3-to-1 favorite going into the fight.

The judges' scorecards were 118-110 Leonard, 115-113 Hagler and 115-113 Leonard.
Leonard won by SD. Hagler would never fight again.

I've never watched this fight, so I am interested to see how it goes.

Loving this thread - CC Sweetpea

Here is how I had it


Leonard 10 ROUND1 Hagler 9
Leonard 10 ROUND2 Hagler 9
Leonard 10 ROUND3 Hagler 9
Leonard 10 ROUND4 Hagler 9
Hagler 10 ROUND5 Leonard 9
Leonard 10 ROUND6 Hagler 9
Hagler 10 ROUND7 Leonard 9
Hagler 10 ROUND8 Leonard 9
Hagler 10 ROUND9 Leonard 9
EVEN 10 ROUND10 EVEN 10
Leonard 10 ROUND11 Hagler 9
Hagler 10 ROUND12 Leonard 9



Leonard 115- 114 Hagler


Could've quite easily gone to Hagler or been a draw - can't see how so many people think Hagler was robbed though, it was asclose as you can get imo. One judge had it 10 rounds to 2 to Leonard :o

Round 9 has now gone on my list of Great all time rounds!!