Guerrero vs Berto a tainted win?

[happyman]

people feel sorry for a drug cheat getting beat like a dog...

i wonder why, oh well their hero is done at elite level. gatekeeper for life

[ElMeroChingon]

I usually don't respond in threads in which a dim-whited TS makes a ****** statement, then attacks everyone who doesn't agree, but I loved this fight so here's my take. If the ref was a more known and respected guy like Smoger, would it have gone any differently? No. People see someone they can tear down and use that as an excuse. Both fought dirty but it enhanced, rather than took away from the fight. It would have been a clinch-fest had they not been forced to fight their way through it. If Berto didn't like being hit while held, then he should have put his energy into body movement and not clutching onto Guerrero's other arm.

I'll take one of these fights over a huggiing contest anyday.

[M Bison]

I usually don't respond in threads in which a dim-whited TS makes a ****** statement, then attacks everyone who doesn't agree, but I loved this fight so here's my take. If the ref was a more known and respected guy like Smoger, would it have gone any differently? No. People see someone they can tear down and use that as an excuse. Both fought dirty but it enhanced, rather than took away from the fight. It would have been a clinch-fest had they not been forced to fight their way through it. If Berto didn't like being hit while held, then he should have put his energy into body movement and not clutching onto Guerrero's other arm.

Yep that's pretty much it...
Fair play if Guerrero was punching him then clinching so Berto couldn't engage in any action then I'd understand this idiot complaining.
I bet he's a big Broner fan aswell.

[radioraheem]

I usually don't respond in threads in which a dim-whited TS makes a ****** statement, then attacks everyone who doesn't agree, but I loved this fight so here's my take. If the ref was a more known and respected guy like Smoger, would it have gone any differently? No. People see someone they can tear down and use that as an excuse. Both fought dirty but it enhanced, rather than took away from the fight. It would have been a clinch-fest had they not been forced to fight their way through it. If Berto didn't like being hit while held, then he should have put his energy into body movement and not clutching onto Guerrero's other arm.

I don't think so. I think it makes a big difference. I really don't believe the more elite referees would have allowed for that knockdown without a penalty. Or at the very least a hard warning. That changed the momentum of the fight quite a bit. He should have put more energy into body movement? That foul happened pretty fast. Even solid defensive fighters aren't immune and can get caught. Next you'll say Floyd should have moved his head back further as Ortiz went for the headbutt.

[ElBossHogg™]

bottom line. Two times so you can get it.

Berto got bested at everything he tried. Some fouls that both engaged in but cause one benefited from it and the other didn't when they both engaged in such behavior should not rise issues.
1.(Thus debate may be too deep for you if you cant see the initial 6 minutes of the fight dictating the rest especially when a KO or 2 is the outcome)
first KD was legit because both were holding and one chose to work his free hand while the other chose not to.
2.(Your using the well known free hand argument to justify an illegal shot as if hardcore fan dont know the difference)

second KD legit because One chose to try and tie up while the other turned him and worked his free hand.
(see above: though it was not as obvious)

Through out the fight was solid ebb and flow with the occasion rough house tactics, that both partaken in.
3. (Yes they both did but who was warned? and if your warned will you not change your technique...WHICH IS THE WHOLE POINT!..lol)
Win was a solid victory and was earned, nothing the ref did helped guerrero, nothing berto did helped himself.

4.(Your hardcore and real but dont understand how a warning or deductions may change the approach of a fighter?)
signed - the Papa of the realest motherfucker on this forum.

1. what was wrong with the KD's, you are speaking out of opinion. Fact is both held in the first KD in which robert chose to work his free hand and berto didn't, its up to the ref to disquintish if it was deemed illegal or not, he deemed it not and let them fight and counted the KD as legit. (no wrong doing done here) second KD is even more legit, robert lands a right hurts berto eye (berto did not get thumbed, gloves have the thumb stiched down now to prevent such acts. he just got caught with a clean shot right on the eye) and the kd berto held hugged around robert waist and chose to duck his head instead of fight and robert hit him (what he supposed to do) again no foul here.

2. Hardcore fans do know the difference and also know when its at the discretion of the Ref. Both held and berto got the worse end of that situation. Berto could have done multiple things their but because he chose to hold and hope the ref help him that's not robert fault, is his own fault.



3. Do you actually watch the fight yourself and listen to what goes on or just repeat what the hbo commentators say, cause multiple times you can hear clearly the ref warn them both and solely robert at times but the hbo commentators say they only warned berto.


4. I do but you should never let anyone take you out your game, Robert was warned just as much as berto and he didnt let it take him out his game.


Berto was bested at everything, Face it.

[Bullrider]

Bottom line to me is the ref does have a huge influence on the outcome of a fight. Berto in this case wanted an outside game, while Guerrero wanted the opposite. Had the ref intervened with every hold and clinch, the outcome would have been different. It's like aiding the offender for his illegal tactics.

That's what I saw happened in the Trout/Cotto fight. Cotto didn't have a chance to play an inside game because of the ref's unnecessary interference at the slightest clinch and hold.

[happyman]

1. what was wrong with the KD's, you are speaking out of opinion. Fact is both held in the first KD in which robert chose to work his free and berto didnt, its up to the ref to disquintish if it was deemed illegal or not, he deemed it not and let them fight and counted the KD as legit. (no wrong doing done here) second KD is even more legit, robert lands a right hurts berto eye (berto did not get thumbed, gloves have the thumb stiched down now to prevent such acts.) and the kd berto held hugged around robert waist and chose to duck his head and robert hit him (what he supposed to do) again no foul here.

2. Hardcore fans do know the difference and also know when its at the discretion of the Ref. Both held and berto got the worse end of that situation. Berto could have done multiple things their because he chose not to but hold and hope the ref help him is his own fault.



3. Do you actaully watch the fight yourself and listen to what goes on or just repeat what the hbo commentators say, cause multple times you can hear clearly the ref warn them both and solely robert but the hbo commentators say they only warned berto.


4. I do but you should never let anyone take you out your game, Robert was warned just as much as berto and he didnt let it take him out his game.


Berto was bested at everything, Face it.

no need to argue with the bitter trolls bro, just post gifs of berto getting beat down like a sissy while being bullied by a former featherweight

berto isn't much without his precious steroids.

[DondiNeverLeft]

I usually don't respond in threads in which a dim-whited TS makes a ****** statement, then attacks everyone who doesn't agree, but I loved this fight so here's my take. If the ref was a more known and respected guy like Smoger, would it have gone any differently? No. People see someone they can tear down and use that as an excuse. Both fought dirty but it enhanced, rather than took away from the fight. It would have been a clinch-fest had they not been forced to fight their way through it. If Berto didn't like being hit while held, then he should have put his energy into body movement and not clutching onto Guerrero's other arm.

Check it out Mr. Sanford (by the way big fan).If your going to call someone a "Dim-white" at least spell it right (its Dimwit).

Anyway what you fail to see in my challenges against most is they failed to read the initial start to the thread (or dont understand). I have given respect to those who believe the outcome would be the same, or different, thats fine with me.

But to say that an illegal shot is not is ridiculous or to say Ref did a good job is insane, or it wasnt a close fight (a blowout win?)Never said both didnt fight dirty either, even said that Berto fought the wrong fight (which alot keep reiterating in different terms). Also real fans know (whether it applies to this fight or not) In a close fight the ref can affect an outcome if he prevents or encourages something. Lets be real.

[radioraheem]

1. what was wrong with the KD's, you are speaking out of opinion. Fact is both held in the first KD in which robert chose to work his free and berto didnt, its up to the ref to disquintish if it was deemed illegal or not, he deemed it not and let them fight and counted the KD as legit. (no wrong doing done here) second KD is even more legit, robert lands a right hurts berto eye (berto did not get thumbed, gloves have the thumb stiched down now to prevent such acts.) and the kd berto held hugged around robert waist and chose to duck his head and robert hit him (what he supposed to do) again no foul here.

2. Hardcore fans do know the difference and also know when its at the discretion of the Ref. Both held and berto got the worse end of that situation. Berto could have done multiple things their because he chose not to but hold and hope the ref help him is his own fault.



3. Do you actaully watch the fight yourself and listen to what goes on or just repeat what the hbo commentators say, cause multple times you can hear clearly the ref warn them both and solely robert but the hbo commentators say they only warned berto.


4. I do but you should never let anyone take you out your game, Robert was warned just as much as berto and he didnt let it take him out his game.


Berto was bested at everything, Face it.

I think it's pure B.S. that you're arguing Berto was really holding Guerrero on that first knockdown! Using that as an excuse. When it's clear as night and day that Guerrero did illegal hitting.

Berto later on started to return the favor, punching behind the head. Now you see, this is calling a spade a damn spade. But even though you try to say that both fighters were doing dirty things, you defend every foul targeted against Guerrero. You excuse it every chance you get. I have yet to see you mention a single CLEAR foul that Guerrero did.

[ElBossHogg™]