The Hopkins Pascal fight is definitely this week's big talking point. Virtually everybody thinks Hopkins won the fight. How does it compare to other drawn robberies?
Make your choice below.
Printable View
The Hopkins Pascal fight is definitely this week's big talking point. Virtually everybody thinks Hopkins won the fight. How does it compare to other drawn robberies?
Make your choice below.
Whitaker vs Chavez, not only for the lineal WW title but for the mythical title of p4p the best. I had Whitaker winning 10 out of 12 rounds.
On another note the fight was at a catchweight of 145 pounds. But since it's not Pacquiao, it's okay for others to fight at catchweights.:p
Funeka/Guzman, I was well pissed off at the time. Funeka put his all into that.
Whitaker-Chavez for me, I re-watched it a few weeks ago and scored it 118-110 Whitaker, and I don't even think many of the rounds were particularly close
I'm quite surprised I don't see Pacquiao-Marquez 1 on the poll. Maybe the hobbit forgot to add it.
That's another fight in boxing history that could have either way. But no way in hell that was robbery.
It's really tough to say but I feel it was worse than Lewis Holyfield 1. As you know, I had a feeling at about round 6 it would be draw. This was more because I was watching Hopkins win the fight so easily that the best the judges could do for Pascal was give a draw. I remember a lot of rounds in the Lewis Holyfield fight that could be scored either way based on interpretation. In this fight, almost every round bar 10 and 12 was very easy to score and those two were a debate between 10-10 or 10-9 to Hopkins. As a result I scored it 112-114 Hopkins
Funeka vs Guzman!
Most recent because that still pisses me off.
Chavez vs Whitaker has got to be all time though.
Martinez-Cintron for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by :::PSL:::
I wasn't about to give the haters another chance to slate Manny :)
Completely forgot Chavez Whittaker though
Oh and Cintron Martinez. I need to write this out again lol
Lewis-Holyfield all the way for me. Even if I gave all the close rounds to Evander I would still have had Lewis winning 8-4. My score card was 10-2 for Lewis.
I don't think Taylor-Wright was any where near being a robbery. As when anybody fight Winky they all out work him and he takes lots of punches just standing there with his gloves over his face. This also gives him a chance to complain after the fight that nothing landed. I call BS. I had it a draw all the way.
I think it easily has to be Whittaker Chavez all time, it was such a big fight for boxing and you could make a case that Chavez didn't win a single round.
Draws are horrid. You have the type like Chavez vs Whitaker that are contrasting styles and leave it to interpretation for judges, to respect the smooth boxing and look past just coming forward as being enough.
Then you have a Funeka vs Guzman or a Hopkins vs Pascal that turn really physical as they progress. You can see damage being done, mental and physical on one fighter. One seems to be just 'lasting' out an attack and you just see momentum shifting big time. Fenech vs Nelson 1 ?
You always hear some say "Well at least they didn't call it a loss for him" when speaking of draws. Almost like its a consolation prize but really in an odd way I say F that. Its almost insult to injury to be 'given' a draw when you, fans feel same guy won it. I mean if your going to screw him,just call it what it was and make it more glaring and obvious. Like trying to have it both ways. Put that 'L' on him so he can identify it as full on crap, fans and fighter know thats what it is in the first place. A draw is a win for Pascal last night. Let him see that 'w' on record and know its bullshit. Twisted ,I know. Hopkins lost...time, opportunity, history. There are legit draws...this was not one!
funeka/guzman guzman gets busted up dominated and yet somehow he got a draw. The one that's even more bizarre is Martinez-Cintron, Cintron gets kod but bitches it was a phantom headbutt so gets to continue without losing a point or anything, and then supposedly fought martinez to a draw...it's the kind of shit that makes you hate boxing and you feel the urge to sling something at the the tv.
Casamayor-Santa Cruz wasn't a draw stupid.
And I go with Agapito Sanchez-Manny Pacquiao. Should of been a TKO in favor of Sanchez after Pacquiao quit. Martinez-Cintron out of the ones listed
Side-note: Just noticed the fool left out Martinez-Cintron
haha yeah you are quite right. Can't believe we got to page two before anyone picked up on that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent Demise
It seems like I pretty much ballsed up this poll completely to be fair ;D
Had to go with my immediate thought when I saw the title; Lewis-Holyfield I. Eugenia Williams actually scored this fight for Holyfield, including a round in which Lewis kept Holyfield pinned on the ropes and Holy landed maybe 3 or 4 punches. Oddly, the second fight, a Lewis UD, was much closer, IMHO.
In recent history, John-Juarez I was a head scratcher, as many Juarez decisions have been.
I know I have a very unpopular opinion here but I don’t think you can call robberies fights like Pascal - Hopkins , it was a much more close fight than Dorin – Spadafora for example … Just to mention another bad draw decision.
You also forgot SRL Vs Hearns 2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrddI...eature=related
I really think Whitaker's performance against Chavez was one of the best of his career, Chavez had no idea how to handle him. The result was a travesty of boxing justice, no rematch was even a greater travesty.
Did they do catchweight fights all the time, or at least most, like Pacquiao? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
MannyQuote:
Originally Posted by ChinoDid they do catchweight fights all the time, or at least most, like Pacquiao? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
57 fights
2 catchweights
Oscar
45 fights
2 catchweight
B Hop
59 fights
3 catchweights
BHop and Oscar are the catchweight kings of our era.
I didn't know Hopkins had 3 catchweight fights.
Good info there Bilbo.
And Sugar Ray Leonard was the catchweight king of his era with 3.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboMannyQuote:
Originally Posted by ChinoDid they do catchweight fights all the time, or at least most, like Pacquiao? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
57 fights
2 catchweights
Oscar
45 fights
2 catchweight
B Hop
59 fights
3 catchweights
BHop and Oscar are the catchweight kings of our era.
To be fair to Hopkins though, in all 3 occasions he was the guy having to cut down in weight to come to a fair CW.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboMannyQuote:
Originally Posted by ChinoDid they do catchweight fights all the time, or at least most, like Pacquiao? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
57 fights
2 catchweights
Oscar
45 fights
2 catchweight
B Hop
59 fights
3 catchweights
BHop and Oscar are the catchweight kings of our era.
I also thought that the Calzaghe fight had Warren put in a catchweight limit of like 173?
I think it's the guy who asks for the catchweight who should become the 'catchweight king'.
Anyway back to your original point, it's got to be Whitaker-Chavez, I've never had that closer than 10-2 when scoring it. It was a clinic.
And can you count how many times they have asked for a catchweight, thank you;)Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboMannyQuote:
Originally Posted by ChinoDid they do catchweight fights all the time, or at least most, like Pacquiao? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
57 fights
2 catchweights
Oscar
45 fights
2 catchweight
B Hop
59 fights
3 catchweights
BHop and Oscar are the catchweight kings of our era.
Manny only twice if that's what you mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcore_crashAnd can you count how many times they have asked for a catchweight, thank you;)Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboMannyQuote:
Originally Posted by ChinoDid they do catchweight fights all the time, or at least most, like Pacquiao? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
57 fights
2 catchweights
Oscar
45 fights
2 catchweight
B Hop
59 fights
3 catchweights
BHop and Oscar are the catchweight kings of our era.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinTo be fair to Hopkins though, in all 3 occasions he was the guy having to cut down in weight to come to a fair CW.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboMannyQuote:
Originally Posted by ChinoDid they do catchweight fights all the time, or at least most, like Pacquiao? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
57 fights
2 catchweights
Oscar
45 fights
2 catchweight
B Hop
59 fights
3 catchweights
BHop and Oscar are the catchweight kings of our era.
I also thought that the Calzaghe fight had Warren put in a catchweight limit of like 173?
I think it's the guy who asks for the catchweight who should become the 'catchweight king'.
Anyway back to your original point, it's got to be Whitaker-Chavez, I've never had that closer than 10-2 when scoring it. It was a clinic.
More often than not the bigger guys wins though. It's actually quite rare for the smaller guy to win a catchweight fight, and when they do they were nearly always the big pre fight favourite in the first place. The rampant weight draining from catchweight fights that captures the imaginations of the Saddo critics has very rarely been witnessed in the ring.
I'm going with Manny and his goons.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboManny only twice if that's what you mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcore_crashAnd can you count how many times they have asked for a catchweight, thank you;)Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboMannyQuote:
Originally Posted by ChinoDid they do catchweight fights all the time, or at least most, like Pacquiao? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
57 fights
2 catchweights
Oscar
45 fights
2 catchweight
B Hop
59 fights
3 catchweights
BHop and Oscar are the catchweight kings of our era.
It wasn't just twice, not even in the last year it was twice.
HATE to turn this into a Manny thread but everyone just seems to love arguing the same facts, they just keep some under wraps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboQuote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinTo be fair to Hopkins though, in all 3 occasions he was the guy having to cut down in weight to come to a fair CW.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboMannyQuote:
Originally Posted by ChinoDid they do catchweight fights all the time, or at least most, like Pacquiao? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
57 fights
2 catchweights
Oscar
45 fights
2 catchweight
B Hop
59 fights
3 catchweights
BHop and Oscar are the catchweight kings of our era.
I also thought that the Calzaghe fight had Warren put in a catchweight limit of like 173?
I think it's the guy who asks for the catchweight who should become the 'catchweight king'.
Anyway back to your original point, it's got to be Whitaker-Chavez, I've never had that closer than 10-2 when scoring it. It was a clinic.
More often than not the bigger guys wins though. It's actually quite rare for the smaller guy to win a catchweight fight, and when they do they were nearly always the big pre fight favourite in the first place. The rampant weight draining from catchweight fights that captures the imaginations of the Saddo critics has very rarely been witnessed in the ring.
Not exactly how it works.
Let's break down some catchweight fights
Ray Leonard vs Donny Lalonde @ 168 - smaller guy won
Arturo Gatti vs Micky Ward I, II, III @ 142 - smaller guy 2 bigger guy 1
Oscar De La Hoya vs Bernard Hopkins @ 157 - bigger guy
Bernard Hopkins vs Winky Wright @ 170 - bigger guy
Oscar De La Hoya vs Steve Forbes - bigger guy
Joe Calzaghe vs Bernard Hopkins - smaller guy
Bernard Hopkins vs Kelly Pavlik - bigger guy
Manny Pacquiao vs Miguel Cotto - smaller guy
Manny Pacquiao vs Antonio Margarito - smaller guy
So if we count the Gatti-Ward trilogy as a single win for smaller it's 5-4 in the end of the smaller guy. Does that mean they were weight drained. No, not in my opinion.
In all those cases, with the possible exceptions of Calzaghe/Hopkins & Gatti/Ward I, the guy who I think we would all say is the better, more talented boxer won. I think that's what it's really about. I don't agree with draining opponents, because if you'd ever boxed you'd understand every pound when making a weight limit is a pain in the arse, but I don't think that's why they lost those fights. The one exception there maybe being SRL/Lalonde because he had to drop 7lbs which is way too much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinQuote:
Originally Posted by BilboQuote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinTo be fair to Hopkins though, in all 3 occasions he was the guy having to cut down in weight to come to a fair CW.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboMannyQuote:
Originally Posted by ChinoDid they do catchweight fights all the time, or at least most, like Pacquiao? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
57 fights
2 catchweights
Oscar
45 fights
2 catchweight
B Hop
59 fights
3 catchweights
BHop and Oscar are the catchweight kings of our era.
I also thought that the Calzaghe fight had Warren put in a catchweight limit of like 173?
I think it's the guy who asks for the catchweight who should become the 'catchweight king'.
Anyway back to your original point, it's got to be Whitaker-Chavez, I've never had that closer than 10-2 when scoring it. It was a clinic.
More often than not the bigger guys wins though. It's actually quite rare for the smaller guy to win a catchweight fight, and when they do they were nearly always the big pre fight favourite in the first place. The rampant weight draining from catchweight fights that captures the imaginations of the Saddo critics has very rarely been witnessed in the ring.
Not exactly how it works.
Let's break down some catchweight fights
Ray Leonard vs Donny Lalonde @ 168 - smaller guy won
Arturo Gatti vs Micky Ward I, II, III @ 142 - smaller guy 2 bigger guy 1
Oscar De La Hoya vs Bernard Hopkins @ 157 - bigger guy
Bernard Hopkins vs Winky Wright @ 170 - bigger guy
Oscar De La Hoya vs Steve Forbes - bigger guy
Joe Calzaghe vs Bernard Hopkins - smaller guy
Bernard Hopkins vs Kelly Pavlik - bigger guy
Manny Pacquiao vs Miguel Cotto - smaller guy
Manny Pacquiao vs Antonio Margarito - smaller guy
So if we count the Gatti-Ward trilogy as a single win for smaller it's 5-4 in the end of the smaller guy. Does that mean they were weight drained. No, not in my opinion.
In all those cases, with the possible exceptions of Calzaghe/Hopkins & Gatti/Ward I, the guy who I think we would all say is the better, more talented boxer won. I think that's what it's really about. I don't agree with draining opponents, because if you'd ever boxed you'd understand every pound when making a weight limit is a pain in the arse, but I don't think that's why they lost those fights. The one exception there maybe being SRL/Lalonde because he had to drop 7lbs which is way too much.
That's exactly what I meant. I can't think of any big catchweight upsets where the bigger guy was the favourite and lost due to being weight drained. If you look at your list in the light of that Manny's catchweight wins look very very impressive imo they clearly go against the historical grain. Can you think of any much much smaller fighters who have catchweights like he has? I'm scratching my head.
Calzaghe was a big favourite over Hopkins too. Weight had nothing whastsoever to do with it. Now age on the other hand....
Like I said, the only one where I think weight played a part in the outcome was the SRL/Lalonde fight. Perhaps the ODLH/Forbes fight as well, as Oscar looked really listless & out of it & I thought it was much closer than the final scorecards against an opponent he should have boxed rings round. I don't think any of the others would have changed much given that extra couple of pounds. I certainly don't think the Pacquiao fights would have.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboQuote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinQuote:
Originally Posted by BilboQuote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinTo be fair to Hopkins though, in all 3 occasions he was the guy having to cut down in weight to come to a fair CW.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboMannyQuote:
Originally Posted by ChinoDid they do catchweight fights all the time, or at least most, like Pacquiao? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
57 fights
2 catchweights
Oscar
45 fights
2 catchweight
B Hop
59 fights
3 catchweights
BHop and Oscar are the catchweight kings of our era.
I also thought that the Calzaghe fight had Warren put in a catchweight limit of like 173?
I think it's the guy who asks for the catchweight who should become the 'catchweight king'.
Anyway back to your original point, it's got to be Whitaker-Chavez, I've never had that closer than 10-2 when scoring it. It was a clinic.
More often than not the bigger guys wins though. It's actually quite rare for the smaller guy to win a catchweight fight, and when they do they were nearly always the big pre fight favourite in the first place. The rampant weight draining from catchweight fights that captures the imaginations of the Saddo critics has very rarely been witnessed in the ring.
Not exactly how it works.
Let's break down some catchweight fights
Ray Leonard vs Donny Lalonde @ 168 - smaller guy won
Arturo Gatti vs Micky Ward I, II, III @ 142 - smaller guy 2 bigger guy 1
Oscar De La Hoya vs Bernard Hopkins @ 157 - bigger guy
Bernard Hopkins vs Winky Wright @ 170 - bigger guy
Oscar De La Hoya vs Steve Forbes - bigger guy
Joe Calzaghe vs Bernard Hopkins - smaller guy
Bernard Hopkins vs Kelly Pavlik - bigger guy
Manny Pacquiao vs Miguel Cotto - smaller guy
Manny Pacquiao vs Antonio Margarito - smaller guy
So if we count the Gatti-Ward trilogy as a single win for smaller it's 5-4 in the end of the smaller guy. Does that mean they were weight drained. No, not in my opinion.
In all those cases, with the possible exceptions of Calzaghe/Hopkins & Gatti/Ward I, the guy who I think we would all say is the better, more talented boxer won. I think that's what it's really about. I don't agree with draining opponents, because if you'd ever boxed you'd understand every pound when making a weight limit is a pain in the arse, but I don't think that's why they lost those fights. The one exception there maybe being SRL/Lalonde because he had to drop 7lbs which is way too much.
That's exactly what I meant. I can't think of any big catchweight upsets where the bigger guy was the favourite and lost due to being weight drained. If you look at your list in the light of that Manny's catchweight wins look very very impressive imo they clearly go against the historical grain. Can you think of any much much smaller fighters who have catchweights like he has? I'm scratching my head.
Calzaghe was a big favourite over Hopkins too. Weight had nothing whastsoever to do with it. Now age on the other hand....
LMAO
Why do you think in all of those catch weight fights no one lost due to being drained??
IT BECAUSE NEITHER FIGHTER WHO ASKED FOR THE CATCH WEIGHT DID IT FOR ADVANTAGEOUS REASONS.
They did it as a median, not to have as many advantages over the other fighter, or take hope that fighter won't be at there best.
hahahaha. This is the type of response I was talking about in other threads about people being inconsistent about criticizing catchweight bouts. It's alright for other guys to demand catchweights such as DLH, Leonard, Chavez, because they weren't looking to do it for advantageous reasons, they only did it as a median. LMFAO!Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcore_crash
Hearns - Leonard II
Listen, when you spend the last TWO YEARS asking for catch weights for EVERYONE around 140-154 then there is a difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldoghahahaha. This is the type of response I was talking about in other threads about people being inconsistent about criticizing catchweight bouts. It's alright for other guys to demand catchweights such as DLH, Leonard, Chavez, because they weren't looking to do it for advantageous reasons, they only did it as a median. LMFAO!Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcore_crash
For forbes, de la hoya asked for 150 because he was planning on fighting at a weight he hadn't fought in over a decade.
He looked fat and out of shape for Felix, so the Bernard fight he did look more in shape at a catch weight.
NO ONE and I mean NO ONE has asked for as much catch weights as Pacquioa.
And the reason I said he uses it to his advantage is this,,,,
Pac was ok to fight DLH at 147, then Hatton at 140, all of a sudden he needs a fight with the champ at 145 with Cotto, Next fight its ok at 147.
As much as you like to think you are subjective you are really not, and spend a lot more time defending Pacquiao than you would like to admit.
Pacquiao only has fought at 2 catchweight fights the same as De La Hoya. So it's okay for DLH to ask for catchweight fights but not Pacquiao? Right! And Leonard fought at 3 catchweight fights more than Pacquiao has. That's actually1 of the most in modern times.Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcore_crashListen, when you spend the last TWO YEARS asking for catch weights for EVERYONE around 140-154 then there is a difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldoghahahaha. This is the type of response I was talking about in other threads about people being inconsistent about criticizing catchweight bouts. It's alright for other guys to demand catchweights such as DLH, Leonard, Chavez, because they weren't looking to do it for advantageous reasons, they only did it as a median. LMFAO!Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcore_crash
For forbes, de la hoya asked for 150 because he was planning on fighting at a weight he hadn't fought in over a decade.
He looked fat and out of shape for Felix, so the Bernard fight he did look more in shape at a catch weight.
NO ONE and I mean NO ONE has asked for as much catch weights as Pacquioa.
And the reason I said he uses it to his advantage is this,,,,
Pac was ok to fight DLH at 147, then Hatton at 140, all of a sudden he needs a fight with the champ at 145 with Cotto, Next fight its ok at 147.
As much as you like to think you are subjective you are really not, and spend a lot more time defending Pacquiao than you would like to admit.
It's either are catchweight fights are okay or not? Not try to say it's okay for certain boxers while it's not okay for another. You're either for it, against it or don't really care.
At least some posters here like Miles are consistent, that they criticize any boxer that uses it not try to find some excuse why it's okay for their favorite fighter to use it and then criticize another for doing the same thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcore_crash
This must surely go down as one of the greatest comments ever made on Saddo's imo. So all the other catchweights in history were amicable, fair, favouring neither man, apart from Manny's ;D
Cotto who had to give up a single pound in weight.
Margarito who was actually allowed to move up a weight class and weigh 4 lbs MORE than he did against Margarito.
Brilliant. You couldn't make this kind of hate up :)
Oh fuck yeah! Good choice!!Quote:
Originally Posted by :::PSL:::
I mean, when you knock a guy out and then continue to beat if shit out of him and still only get a draw, you know something is seriously wrong.