de la hoya vs mayweather scoring?

It is a question of which style the judges perfer. If you are scoring a fight and one guy eats a dozen jabs, then knocks the other fighter down with one punch, who wins the round, the guy who landed 12 pity pats or the guy who landed one quality shot. Most of the time quantity beats quality in a judges mind. I don't particularly agree, but thats the way it usually plays out. Oscar was on the cusp of beating Mayweather at his own game, then DeLa Hoya quit jabbing, go figure, I never would have dreamed Oscar could out box Floyd, but for eight rounds he arguably did just that, I had it 4-4 after eight. I don't know if Oscar got winded, or if it was a mental laspe, or an undisclosed injury or what. I heard Roach tell him repeatedly to jab, but for some reason Oscar just stopped jabbing the last four rounds. It cost him the fight, I gave Floyd 3 of the last four, and had Mayweather winning going away, but all of the rounds were close and could have went either way.

Your comparison between the two fights is valid, but I had Hopkin's winning on my card and though Taylor got a gift, so in those I though Bernard got robbed. That's part of the appeal of boxing, opinons will always differ. I am still bitching about Ray Leonard beating Hagler, and that was what, decades ago? It's like that sometimes, and you can't please everyone.

If there were any suprises in the DeLa Hoya/Mayweather fight it was how well Oscar did, it was razor thin, and a differerent judge would have Oscar still champ and Flyod at 37-1. As it played out, Mayweather won the decision most figured he would, but sure as hell didn't live up to all his pre fight threats.

I don't understand the logic that the more aggressive fighter should have won... at least not in this particular fight. I'll explain why I think that in a second. I'm personally a fan of both fighters, and more importantly a boxing fan. Floyd out-landed Oscar by a substantial margin considering he threw considerably fewer punches. That stat speaks for itself. I'm also in the camp that believes Hopkins should have won both of his fights against Taylor. Sometimes though, stats just don't tell the story. Mayweather was clearly the winner in my eyes. He was far more efficient, and rarely wasted punches. I mean, Oscar was applying pressure, or rather attempting to apply pressure, yet it was ineffective pressure. Oscar could not effectively apply that pressure to get Floyd to fight Oscar's fight. Looking at it from that perspective, Floyd was in total control of that fight. I scored this fight 8-4 Mayweather (you could make an argument for 7-5), but I think the differences between the Taylor-Hopkins fights and this one are easy to see. For one thing, Hopkins didn't have that glamorous technical and flashy style that Mayweather has, and style does leave an impression with the judges. I also think it was far easier to give the earlier rounds in the Hopkins-Taylor fights to Taylor rather than the early rounds in the De La Hoya-Mayweather fight De La Hoya because even though Hopkins landed more while throwing less in those fights, he did so little in those early rounds, where as Floyd was still active in the early rounds of the De La Hoya bout. Basically Hopkins gave away rounds to Taylor in those fights, and you just didn't see Floyd giving away rounds in the De La Hoya fight. In the Hopkins fights, I think Hopkins basically lost on bad strategy... where he focused on the later rounds too much, racking up landed punches in the final rounds and winning on the stat sheet... almost like a poorly run presidential campaign, in which the candidate focuses too much on winning the big states and wins the popular vote, but loses the electoral college vote. Mayweather however was consistent in the fight, displaying his efficiency from round 1-12. So while the stats of the two fights were similar, I think the difference in strategies employed by Mayweather and Hopkins was the difference in the outcomes of the judging of those fights, and maybe the reason why it is hard to see Mayweather losing on any judges scorecard.

Yeah, the judge that scored it for DLH was wrong. Like you said, Oscar would fire a lot of shots when Floyd was on the ropes, but they didn't land. He got more credit for them I think because the crowd freaked out, which probably influenced that one judge. Floyd clearly won that fight by at least 116-112 or 115-113. Nothing less. Also, I don't think Pacquiao can get much to capitalize on from that tape. The main thing that made the fight so competitive was the jab of De La Hoya, a guy who is naturally left handed and has one of the best jabs in recent years. Pacquiao would not be able to utilize the jab, even if he worked on it. His jab isnt' that good, and he would get killed in a jabfest against Mayweather. I think Mayweather would beat Pac, but I also think it would be a competitive fight too.

First off, De La Hoya gotta snowed out of a victory. Granted Mayweather did connect on a higher percentage of his punches, I think De La Hoya had a better quality fight than Mayweather. It really all comes down to who the judges want to see win when it's as close as a fight as it was.

The better comparison for me is Leonard - Hagler. I was hacked off after that fight. I really thought that Hagler had won. Fortunately, my Dad recorded the fight and I watched it over and over again until I started to view it not as a Hagler fan, but a FIGHT fan. Leonard had won.......as much as I hated to admit it. Leonard beat my boy Benitez so I was looking for Hagler to put a hurt on Leonard.

In the Taylor - Hopkins fights, Taylor was definitely more active and connected more than DLH did with PBF. Taylor was effective as an aggressor, DLH was not.

As much as I wanted DLH to perform better, I did not agree with the judge that gave DLH the fight. He simply did not do enough to win.

mayweather really just boxed in his style. he's never been too much of a combination thrower or anything, though he should be with that handspeed. but de la hoya was barely landing anything. as far as anyone thinking de la hoya won that fight is friggin ridiculous. we all wanted him to win but you were a fool if you thought it was gonna happen. i just didn't see it. of course the fight didn't live up to the hype, which was disappointing, but they both fought as good of a fight as they could. de la hoya rose to the challenge of fighting a much more skilled fighter and did so with everything he had, but it just wasn't enough. i've been in the ring, and it's a whole different world in there and i commend anyone who can do that for a living. it was definitely a memorable moment in boxing history. i just hope de la hoya doesn't do what too many boxers do and overstay their welcome in the ring like ali and tyson did.

I really truely belive Oscar one that fight but i odnt know why he was not declared the winner. i remember in the last of the three judges said there decision they said the new champion and i was so happy then i saw mayweather jumping up and i felt crused. this was the wrong decision by far thats all i know.

thanks

~josh

Cant really beat the previous answer. Great post, and I agree with 100% of it.

I THINK DE LA HOYA WON EVEN MAYWEATHERS OWN DAD EVEN SAID IT NOW WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU?