Cases where the better fighter ON THE NIGHT lost!!!

Doesn't matter what Whiskey was referring to, I think that even IF you scored it for Tito because of the last 4 rounds...Oscar looked to be the better fighter that night and it was more Oscar losing the fight than Tito winning it...

 

Most definitely...but Oscar looked more talented that night and was far more impressive with the exception of the last three rounds that he gave away...

 

agREED. Scoring-wise, I thought it was a draw, but it's near impossible to say that Tito was the better fighter that night. And considering where he ranks on my all time favorite list, and in what high regard I hold Oscar :: , everyone knows how much it pains me to admit such a thing.

 

If you say Oscar was the better fighter and lost because of poor judging, I accept it.

If you say Oscar's loss on scorecards was fair, but it was caused because his lack of stamina / lack of intelligence / whatever, then I can't say that he was the better man that night. He was that in many ways, but not enough.

Maybe you should have still one more thread about "fights where the guy that lost could have won by minor adjustments" ::

 

This is a myth as well. Oscar didn't lose the last three just like he didn't win the first eight.

 

Forget the last three, he lost the last FOUR.

Unless you're referring to one of the judges giving him the 12th, which round in the last three could you possibly give him?

 

I believe it's the 11th round that Oscar won. I forget if it's the 10th or 11th...it's been awhile since I've seen it.

The same is true for Oscar's rematch with Mosley. I thought Oscar won the 11th that night as well...regardless, I still had Mosley winning 7-5.

 

Not possible Muzse, Tito clearly swept the last 3, only the 9th round is somewhat debateable...but even then, Oscar did nothing in that round after the first 45 seconds or so....

 

When i first saw the Oscar-Mosley rematch I thought for SURE Oscar won 7 rounds, possibly 8. My wife, however, scored the fight for Shane 7-5. So I'm open to the possibilty that it is one of those decisions that is based upon personal perspective.

That fight actually boils down to how you score ROUND ONE, believe it or not. If you score that round for Shane....with the same logic you score the fight for him also. Same goes for if you score it for Oscar.

 

Yeah, I gave OScar the 9th, and Tito the final three. The "Oscar lost the last four" myth was started, oddly enough, by Arum (as was the 'Oscar swept the first eight rounds' theory), who actually mentioned it as an assumption - "Even if you say Oscar gave away the last four, it doesn't take away from the fact that Oscar was up 8-0 at that point", or something like that.

Either way, Arum's to blame for both ends of that, though shame on anyone who bothered to put any stock into it.

 

The ninth round was clearly Oscar's. Sure, he was running, but Trinidad landed nearly NOTHING.

 

Round 1: Even
Rounds 2-3: Oscar
Round 4: Tito
Rounds 5-7: Oscar
Round 8: Tito
Round 9: Oscar
Rounds 10-12: Tito

6-5-1 DLH

The 8th round was actually closer and a better round for Trinidad than round 9.

 

Based on what's been said previously, perhaps it's the 9th round I had for Trinidad. I ended up scoring it a draw. Like Jake said, the whole "Oscar won the first eight rounds" is a myth just like Trinidad winning the last four.

I haven't seen the fight in many many years and honestly, I don't care to watch it again. It was bad enough the first time.

 

could've been a draw. there's no way tito won 7 rounds tho.

 

That being the case, then only bad decisions would apply to this thread.

 

another horrendous statement

 

wow

 

perhaps there should be some kind of decency control for some of the diarrhea being spewed here.

The better fighter only loses on things like blatant robberies, such as Augustus Burton, Forbes Hopkins, that kind of thing.

Or if we considered DQ's counting then Bowe Golota 2 would flash to mind, but the uy who rightfully gets DQ'd doesn't deserve to be called better.

 

No they dont, lucky punches happens as does bad strategy, another prime example of this is Leo Gamez vs Pishniak Kratingdangym (the guy Moreal beat for his title)

 

Richard Grant against James Butler. Grant simply wasn't that good a fighter, but for some reason, he knew how to beat James Butler.

 

Okay. So you are saying you would bet on the winner in a rematch since he's the better fighter?

The better fighter doesn't always win, just like the better team doesn't always win. Shit happens.

 

No. Rematch is a new night and a new fight and anything can happen in that.

 

The OP clearly means that you shouldn't play semantics and consider it a tautology.

When you would bet on the loser in an immediate rematch, at the very least, that's what you should use for examples.

 

Clottey -Bumdomir
Castillo - Fraud
Vitali - Byrd
Abdullaev - Clottey
Forrest - Mayorga 2
Green - Beyer
Half of Sven Ottke's mandatory defences.
Margarito - Santos

 

i remember when Esk said the better fighter lost right after Tito - Mayorga :: :clap:
________
FFM KISSING

 

He was....way ahead on the cards.

 

there is no such thing as a lucky punch

 

Hearns vs Barkley I comes to mind.

You could even say Leonard/Hearns I. Tommy I thought was more effective throughout the fight and was ahead on my card before wearing down from Ray's constant pressure.

 

Tszyu - Judah - I thought Judah won the first round and was winning the 2nd when he got caught.

 

Nah...Tszyu was winning the 2nd....