Have u ever drastically changed your mind about a 'decision' years after later?

[dcull111]

so, the other day i was watching trinidad vs de la hoya for the first time in gods knows how long, and i watched the fight with the commentary off. to my shock, a fight that i had once scored by a couple of points to trinidad now looked totally different to me. this time i could only bring myself to give trinidad two rounds, the fourth and the twelth (just by way of explanation, i felt that even when de la hoya was running away he was still outscoring trinidad with his jabs that were still landing).

i dont mean to bring up that fight specifically, it's just that it was that fight that made me wonder if anyone else had done a similar thing with a fight (any fight). i was 15 when i was watched the fight originally, and im 24 now, so im sure i know more about boxing now than i did in the past, so maybe that's the explanation. i also thought that maybe it was the fact that i had the volume switched off this time and couldnt hear the loud booing that tito's fans were aiming at oscar.

as i said earlier, im not so much looking to kick off the whole tito/oscar decision debate again. i just wondered if anyone else had had a similar experience to me, where as time has gone by your views on a fight have changed and why u feel that they've changed....

[DiegoFuego]

I don't mean to sound harsh, but if you thought that fight was close and ESPECIALLY if you scored it for Trinidad, then you have a lot to learn about boxing.

I agree with your second score though, so it's just probably a case of being young back then and not understanding the sport.

Hell, there were casual fans who thought Holyfield beat Lewis the first time they fought just because Holyfield roughed him up in a round or two.

The fact is Oscar made Tito look like an amateur that night and gave up no more than 3 rounds.

To answer your question, I've never had any drastic swings in scores because I rarely scored them when I first got into the boxing. I've stuck to just about every score I've done since the late 90s.

[dcull111]

well u can learn a lot in 9 years, as shown by my new perspective lol! also, remember that 2 judges agreed with me and harold lederman also scored it a draw. my point is that i think the crowd and the biased commentary influenced me. i was wacthing it in a room full of my friends too who could only see oscar running away and were calling him a ******. i didnt even actually score the fight back then, i just thought that trinidad had won if u get what i mean. i would not have considered myself a boxing fan when i was 15. there is certainly a tendecy among casual fans to score the guy moving forward and i think that's what i was guilty of when i originally saw that fight...

[infamous larryx]

when i was younger i watched tyson-douglass and thought douglass got lucky..i rewatched it recently and douglass beat tyson pillar to post thru the entire fight

[edgarg]

it seems to me that you young people are mainly "watchers" and not "doers" of boxing, and that accounts for your lack of knowing what constitutes a proper scoring system.

For your information, the fight was actually about 4-2 for Oscar after 6 rounds. Trinidad's heavier punching and unceasing attack, were worth more points than Oscar's showy, excellent technique. In one of the middle rounds, I forget which, I think that Oscar nearly doubled up with a body punch (a major weakness of his) and from then on, was purely on defensive, with an occasional showy, seconds long flurry.

The last 4 rounds for certain were all Trinidad, Oscar was actually running backwards, with a very occasional weak flurry, most of which hit nothing, whilst one of Trinidad's heavy shots was worth, in a judges eyes, 6 of Oscar's pitty-patsIt wasn't Oscar's fault he gassed, after the body shot and never recovered confidence, or eeven perhaps, a second wind.

It was close, only because Trinidad missed so much, and it didn't look good, but the right guy got the victory.

Oscar had the very same problem and fought the very same way in the second Mosley fight. Mosley, behind after the first half, began to sink solid, VERY solid right hand body shots, and Oscar, even with his high "chest protector" was doubling over more and more, in real pain. You could hear the body shots all over the arena, sickening, really solid. I don't know how he was able to take them and stay standing. He was very tough, in his prime.

[American_Ninja]

Who hasn't? It's called Regret.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

A lotta people said Eubank vs Watson I was a robbery and when I was younger, I kinda took that for granted. Watched it a few times in recent years and actually scored it for Eubank.

[dcull111]

it seems to me that you young people are mainly "watchers" and not "doers" of boxing, and that accounts for your lack of knowing what constitutes a proper scoring system.

For your information, the fight was actually about 4-2 for Oscar after 6 rounds. Trinidad's heavier punching and unceasing attack, were worth more points than Oscar's showy, excellent technique. In one of the middle rounds, I forget which, I think that Oscar nearly doubled up with a body punch (a major weakness of his) and from then on, was purely on defensive, with an occasional showy, seconds long flurry.

The last 4 rounds for certain were all Trinidad, Oscar was actually running backwards, with a very occasional weak flurry, most of which hit nothing, whilst one of Trinidad's heavy shots was worth, in a judges eyes, 6 of Oscar's pitty-patsIt wasn't Oscar's fault he gassed, after the body shot and never recovered confidence, or eeven perhaps, a second wind.

It was close, only because Trinidad missed so much, and it didn't look good, but the right guy got the victory.

Oscar had the very same problem and fought the very same way in the second Mosley fight. Mosley, behind after the first half, began to sink solid, VERY solid right hand body shots, and Oscar, even with his high "chest protector" was doubling over more and more, in real pain. You could hear the body shots all over the arena, sickening, really solid. I don't know how he was able to take them and stay standing. He was very tough, in his prime.

quite frankly, you come across as a condescending know-it-all, and dare i say, that's exactly what you are. i take it you are an old man, because for you to call a fully grown man of 24 a kid, you must be nearer the end than the beginning.

as for your assertion that "young kids are 'watchers' not 'doers'... LMAO! so because i havent boxed my opinion is worth nothing. come on man, i can see you're old school, but just because you've fought a few fights, that doesn't mean that a younger man's opinion means nothing.

really man, i came to the same conclusion as you when i was FIFTEEN years old, and i now i have well and truly changed my mind. you can talk all the condecending tripe that you want, but for all your years of watching boxing, you clearly don't have a clue. experience does not equal genius, but experience does sometimes equal arrogance. case in point edgarg

and seriously dude, oscar didnt gas, he took his foot off the gas because his corner told him to. by the way, im far from an oscar fan, i cant stand him. u are so wrong for a man who is a "doer" not a "watcher". you "doers" can be so arrogant sometimes...

[geribeetus]

when i was younger i watched tyson-douglass and thought douglass got lucky..i rewatched it recently and douglass beat tyson pillar to post thru the entire fight

tyson had a few good rounds actually. i gave him the first. douglas swept the next 4 or 5. and i gave mike a couple more before the ko.

i'd also like to mention that the ref stopped counting at 9 before douglas was fully up. he was on his feet but he was still leaning over and raising up when the count stopped.