How did you score Whitaker-De La Hoya?

[boxerca]

This was a tough fight to score.

You had to deduct one point from Whitaker, because of the WBC rules back then. If you caused an accidental headbutt, one point was deducted from you. Stupid rules but that's how it went.

I scored it 113-113 a draw. Without the point deduction from Whitaker, I'd have him winning by a score of 114-113.

How did you score it?

[sweet_scientist]

Pernell Whitaker vs. Oscar de la Hoya: Whitaker 114-113
De la Hoya: 2,3 ( 10-8 ) 4,8 and 12.
Whitaker: 1,5,6,9 ( 10-8 ) ,10 and 11.
Round 7 even.

In the grand scheme of things though, I don't think anyone really 'won' this fight. You have to be kind of petty to pick a winner.

[Bill Butcher]

This was a tough fight to score.

You had to deduct one point from Whitaker, because of the WBC rules back then. If you caused an accidental headbutt, one point was deducted from you. Stupid rules but that's how it went.

I scored it 113-113 a draw. Without the point deduction from Whitaker, I'd have him winning by a score of 114-113.

How did you score it?

50/50 fight, too many hard to call rds TBH.

DLH didnt land enough clean & Whitaker never attacked enough, no superiority was shown overall.

A draw is the fairest result.

[Robbi]

7 rounds to 5 for De La Hoya. Very close fight.


No robbery.

[Seamus]

with pen and paper.

[KOTF]

By watching it on television.

113-113 the last time I watched it

[GregDempsey]

I dont remember the score..but i remember that I did feel that sweet pea took it. That was a example of speed and defense being desceptive. I remember Oscar threw a huge flurry...fast hands...with Pernall moving all over....rolling and slipping..but it looked like he was being hit with at least half the punches thrown. Then they go between rounds..and they show it again, with Jim saying something like "watch this great work Oscar got off here" and they show it and slow motion, and you see NOT A SINGLE OSCAR punch lands....and the HBO team doesnt say a damn word...I was just a kid at that point..but I thought "interesting..."

[Bummy Davis]

During the fight I thought Oscar was not doing good because I thought he would have been winning by a larger margin but I thought Oscar edged it...Hard to look good against fighters like Sweet Pea, Calzage,Hopkins,Saol Mamby,JJWalcott,

[divac]

I dont remember the score..but i remember that I did feel that sweet pea took it. That was a example of speed and defense being desceptive. I remember Oscar threw a huge flurry...fast hands...with Pernall moving all over....rolling and slipping..but it looked like he was being hit with at least half the punches thrown. Then they go between rounds..and they show it again, with Jim saying something like "watch this great work Oscar got off here" and they show it and slow motion, and you see NOT A SINGLE OSCAR punch lands....and the HBO team doesnt say a damn word...I was just a kid at that point..but I thought "interesting..."

Through most of those flurries by DLH, Whitaker did'nt even attemp to counter the misses........he did'nt punch, he stuck out his right hand to touch DLH.......

Maybe if we score this fight the amatuer way, ineffective touches, a case can be made for Pernell Whitaker.

Neither fighter was very effective, and in such cases I score such fights for the aggressor.
I had DLH winning along the lines that the official judges had it.....Wide!

[Popkins]

Pernell Whitaker vs. Oscar de la Hoya: Whitaker 114-113
De la Hoya: 2,3 ( 10-8 ) 4,8 and 12.
Whitaker: 1,5,6,9 ( 10-8 ) ,10 and 11.
Round 7 even.

In the grand scheme of things though, I don't think anyone really 'won' this fight. You have to be kind of petty to pick a winner.


This sentence kind of sums up the feeling of apathy I get whenever I see a fight like Whitaker-De La Hoya. SS, do you feel the same about Hopkins-Calzaghe and Hopkins-Winky? That's the way I feel about those two fights. I just don't think either man did enough to deserve to win either fight. The fights were so dull that neither man emerged with much credit, and there really isn't any way of having a strong conviction over who won. Thoughts?

[sweet_scientist]

This sentence kind of sums up the feeling of apathy I get whenever I see a fight like Whitaker-De La Hoya. SS, do you feel the same about Hopkins-Calzaghe and Hopkins-Winky? That's the way I feel about those two fights. I just don't think either man did enough to deserve to win either fight. The fights were so dull that neither man emerged with much credit, and there really isn't any way of having a strong conviction over who won. Thoughts?


Totally agree mate. You can throw in fights like Hopkins-Taylor I & II in there as well. How the hell could anyone deserve to 'win' those 'fights'?

[round15]

with pen and paper.

Baaaahhh! Humbug!!!

Seamus, are you "Scrooged Approved," just playing with the words, or you simply can't stand it when someone posts a question that's questionable to you in terms of diction and syntax?

What was your score in the Whitaker vs Delahoya fight?

[Seamus]

Baaaahhh! Humbug!!!

Seamus, are you "Scrooged Approved," just playing with the words, or you simply can't stand it when someone posts a question that's questionable to you in terms of diction and syntax?

What was your score in the Whitaker vs Delahoya fight?

8-4. Admirable effort by Whitaker but I thought he was outgunned and out-efforted. I did not see it as close as others did. However, I was not a big fan of Whitaker's style in certain fights.

[Rubber Warrior]

Pea's disposition and in the ring clowning cost him against the popular, marketable good guy - Golden Boy. The momentum of the moment seemed to slip between Pernell's fingers based on all of this. Had the tables been turned Oscar still would have won.

[anarci]

Not as close as the Sweet Peat nuthuggers cry about.


Ive seen this fight numerous times and the closest i can come up with is 115-113 Delahoya. Usually i have it 116-112 Delahoya.

[itrymariti]

Whitaker by two points, but I'm not really fussed either way. Not a robbery.

[Thread Stealer]

I had it 113-113