BARRERA Vs MORALES - Discuss the fight and the decision HERE !!

Discussion in 'Boxing News and Discussion' started by Remus, Jun 22, 2002.

  1. amth

    amth Guest

    to change the subject for a min here
    what did people think of Cotto?

    I was not too impressed yes he has power but i really cant see him as champ at 135 or 140

    Jukko was clearly washed up, though he did try his best to do a Zudah impression with the leg kick from the second shot to the jaw he took [​IMG]
     
  2. esk59

    esk59 Member

    Ok, I let the fight soak in. I read what everyone's been saying and i'm back for another stab at this.

    There is no way in hell, anyone could justify MAB winning a UD. I don't care about the kellerman card, I don't care about the HBO analysts, I really don't.

    Bottom line is Morales won the fight. He just won the fight.

    Also MAB went down because the right hand hit him to the body. You can't call it a slip.

    In spanish if someone would tell you "se resbalo" you would say, "si, se resbalo en una cascara de pinaso"

    Anyway, it was a legit knockdown. Also at one point in the fight, MAB threw Morales to the floor and hit him on the way down, sort of what Lewis did to Tyson. Nady did a horrendous job in there.

    The first fight was closer than this one. I can justify someone giving the first fight to Morales.

    This one would be much more difficult to justify giving it to MAB.

    I can't do that. MAB lost the fight. Plain and simple.

    I picked Morales by UD and that's exactly what happened.

    But somehow with the corruption, now I have to take into account what would be the best thing for the promoters pockets and predict accordingly.

    It's a SHAME boxing's judges are so SHAMELESS
     
  3. esk59

    esk59 Member

  4. zboxz

    zboxz Member

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by esk59:



    Also MAB went down because the right hand hit him to the body. You can't call it a slip.


    <hr></blockquote>

    Barrera went down from a right had to the body. His knees buckled and his glove touched the mat. His feet did NOT slip out.

    I don?t know if that 1-point would have made the difference in the fight. IT all depends on who they gave that round to. If they gave the round 10-8 instead of 10-9 to Morales it would have made the scores (on 2 score cards) 115-114 Barrera. If they gave Barrera that round THEN the fight would have had a different winner.
     
  5. zboxz

    zboxz Member

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by esk59:
    If you guys want to puke, here's the offical scorecard.

    http://64.125.131.140/scorecard_barrera-morales.jpg

    <hr></blockquote>

    I didn?t see you link to the scorecards Esk.

    Thanks for posting it.

    After looking at the scorecards, YES, the knockdown that was called NO KNOCKDOWN is the difference in the fight. They all gave the round to Barrera.

    Changing it to a 10-8 Morales round it would have made the scores 114-113 Morales, 114-113 Morales and 114-113 Barrera.

    Morales would have won by split decision.
     
  6. MrBob

    MrBob Guest

    I agree that It was a knockdown, and furthermore I think Nady should have deducted a point from Barrera for all the dirty shit he pulled.
     
  7. Yori Boy

    Yori Boy Member

    Morales stepped on Barrera foot and then Barrera went off balance and then Morales put a right to the body that put an off balance Barrera on the mat. Good call by Nady. While the Morales punch did not take place at the exact same time Morales stepped on Barrera's foot, it took place a second earlier which put Barrera off balance and then Morales hit Barrera. Bottom line is if Morales hadn't stepped on Barrera's foot, Barrera would not have been off balance and would not have fell from a lazy body shot. Well done Nady! BTW, Morales turned his back to Barrera and often turned his head away at the last second causing Barrera's punches to be towards the rear of Morales' head.
     
  8. Yori Boy

    Yori Boy Member

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by esk59:
    If you guys want to puke, here's the offical scorecard.

    http://64.125.131.140/scorecard_barrera-morales.jpg

    Chuck Giampa gave Barrera the first 3 rounds.

    That's all I have to say. That should end all discussios right there. Peace.
    <hr></blockquote>

    Actually, after the first three rounds I said to my party that I wouldn't be surprised if the judges gave them all to Barrera, or gave them all to Morales. Personally, I favoured Barrera's sharp clever punches he snuck in and thought Morales threw a lot of punches in the general direction but not much accuracy. I had Barrera up after three rounds. Obviously I'm in the minority here as most of my peers here had Morales winning. Oh well...perhaps this fight will go down in my list of fights people classify as some sort of robbery and I have no idea why..... like De La Hoya/Whitaker.
     
  9. Yori Boy

    Yori Boy Member

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by zboxz:


    I didn?t see you link to the scorecards Esk.

    Thanks for posting it.

    After looking at the scorecards, YES, the knockdown that was called NO KNOCKDOWN is the difference in the fight. They all gave the round to Barrera.

    Changing it to a 10-8 Morales round it would have made the scores 114-113 Morales, 114-113 Morales and 114-113 Barrera.

    Morales would have won by split decision.
    <hr></blockquote>


    I disagree...even if the referee rules it a knockdown, if the judges felt Barrera won the rest of the round (which they did), they're not obliged to score the round 10-8 for Morales. Given the extraordinarily poor quality of the "knockdown" it's certainly not unreasonable for the judges to score the round 10-9 for Morales, or even 10-10 although that would be an extraordinary occurence.
     
  10. Yori Boy

    Yori Boy Member

    As an aside, the AP and Max Boxing had Barrera winning. I pretty much agree with the Max Boxing round by round breakdown below but I thought Barrera won the first.

    http://maxboxing.com/Fischer/fischer062202.asp

    The Seconds Out site is going with the robbery approach although the fans posting there seem to be more split as to who won. I think here only Fitz and I thought Barrera won???? Ah well, at least I'm in good company.
     
  11. zboxz

    zboxz Member

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Yori Boy:



    I disagree...even if the referee rules it a knockdown, if the judges felt Barrera won the rest of the round (which they did), they're not obliged to score the round 10-8 for Morales. Given the extraordinarily poor quality of the "knockdown" it's certainly not unreasonable for the judges to score the round 10-9 for Morales, or even 10-10 although that would be an extraordinary occurence.
    <hr></blockquote>

    I disagree with you disagreement.

    If the round is even or if one is slightly ahead and a knockdown occurs it will be scored 10-8.

    If a fighter is very, very dominant in a round but gets knocked down during it the score may be 9-9 at best.

    This round was fairly even and it would have been a 10-8 Morales round if the Ref would have called it.

    The Referee uses his judgment and if he saw Morales step on Barrera?s foot I can?t argue. I didn?t think Nady did a shitty job at all. He didn?t take the fight from either fighter and broke everyone clean. He gave warnings but didn?t take points. I didn?t see many occasions that he should have. A Ref never wants to be the deciding factor in a fight.
     
  12. Yori Boy

    Yori Boy Member

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by zboxz:


    I disagree with you disagreement.

    If the round is even or if one is slightly ahead and a knockdown occurs it will be scored 10-8.

    If a fighter is very, very dominant in a round but gets knocked down during it the score may be 9-9 at best.

    This round was fairly even and it would have been a 10-8 Morales round if the Ref would have called it.

    The Referee uses his judgment and if he saw Morales step on Barrera?s foot I can?t argue. I didn?t think Nady did a shitty job at all. He didn?t take the fight from either fighter and broke everyone clean. He gave warnings but didn?t take points. I didn?t see many occasions that he should have. A Ref never wants to be the deciding factor in a fight.
    <hr></blockquote>


    I'm not saying the judges wouldn't have scored it 10-8, I'm saying they wouldn't be obliged to. That wasn't a knockdown, but if Nady felt it was, it would be one absolutely shitty bad knockdown. Maybe the judges would score it 10-8 Morales, maybe they wouldn't. Can't say for sure that Nady's ruling is why Barrera won is all I'm saying. By the way, there's no such thing as a 9-9 round.
     
  13. zboxz

    zboxz Member

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Yori Boy:



    By the way, there's no such thing as a 9-9 round.
    <hr></blockquote>

    Sorry to differ but there is ABSOLUTLY a 9-9 round.

    To get it a foul or knockdown must occur.

    A fighter wins a round 10-9

    A point is taken from that fighter making it a 9-9 round.

    I have been told that a round can go no worse then 10-7. That is the most unfair.

    If, with a no 3 knockdown rule, a fighter gets knocked down 4 times he has lost 4 points making it 10-6. They feel that a fighter cannot come back from such a scoring gap. I say why should he be able to. Not getting credit for a point is a travesty.
     
  14. Yori Boy

    Yori Boy Member

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by zboxz:


    Sorry to differ but there is ABSOLUTLY a 9-9 round.

    To get it a foul or knockdown must occur.

    A fighter wins a round 10-9

    A point is taken from that fighter making it a 9-9 round.

    I have been told that a round can go no worse then 10-7. That is the most unfair.

    If, with a no 3 knockdown rule, a fighter gets knocked down 4 times he has lost 4 points making it 10-6. They feel that a fighter cannot come back from such a scoring gap. I say why should he be able to. Not getting credit for a point is a travesty.
    <hr></blockquote>


    No, that's wrong. It's the ten point must system, and one fighter MUST get TEN points. For deductions for fouls, they are SUBTRACTED FROM THE FINAL TALLY of a scorecard. No single round can be scored 9-9. That is fact. Whether for convenience someone may want to display a round as being 9-9 is one thing, but there is no such thing as a 9-9 round.
     
  15. FITZ

    FITZ Member

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Yori Boy:
    As an aside, the AP and Max Boxing had Barrera winning. I pretty much agree with the Max Boxing round by round breakdown below but I thought Barrera won the first.

    http://maxboxing.com/Fischer/fischer062202.asp

    The Seconds Out site is going with the robbery approach although the fans posting there seem to be more split as to who won. I think here only Fitz and I thought Barrera won???? Ah well, at least I'm in good company.
    <hr></blockquote>

    [​IMG]

    I agree with your assessment of the fight man......while I did have it closer than you, your overall method of scoring sounds similar to mine. I can see someone having Morales winning......but I thought Barrera edged it. Exremely close fight, but the decision is nothing to complain about IMO.

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Remus:
    I just finished watching this fight. I'm surprised at the people who think it was a clear Morales victory. VERY surprised.

    While I think Morales did enuf to win, the fight certianly could have gone either way. I have issues with the scorecards being as wide as they were. That was a joke. But the decision...while controversial was not highway robbery.

    After reading all about this before I watched it, I'm wondering how people score fights. I'm not saying that I'm right, but I give more credit for EFFECTIVE aggression wen I score as opposed to just plain aggression. Sure, Morales worked harder early on, but he was inaccurate and almost sloppy. The cleaner shots were MAB's.

    I got into the same arguement about Mundine/ Soliman. Cleaner shots, even if they are FEWER should always SCORE better. It's the old adage my trainer used to tell me:

    "One shot with good EXECUTION is worth a dozen shots of good INTENTION."
    <hr></blockquote>

    Good post. [​IMG]
     
  16. JayDawg

    JayDawg Guest

    To all of you cats who called it a knockdown. Ya'll are just telling me that ya'll didn't see the replay. The replay clearly shows that Barrera left foot slipped while he got punched. It CLEARLY shows it. I mean damn I'm suprised that alot of you are calling it a legit knockdown. Watch the replay. It was his left foot. I'm looking at it now. It was a good call by Nady. This fight was no where near a robbery and I'm a fan of neither. So your getting an unbias opinion here. I had it a draw but it could have went either way with one of them winning 7 rounds to 5. HOLLA!
     
  17. Valentino

    Valentino Member

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by BIGDAWG:
    Personally I had Morales winning the fight. Immediately after the fight you could see it in MAB's manerisms that he thought he lost. But like Mayweather, and Tito you get decisions like this. Christmas comes more than once a year for certain individuals.

    Just a quick question for you p4p'ers that like to change your ratings. Does this now move MAB down on the list kinda like the way ya'll moved Mayweather down? Or does this move Morales up. I mean judging from Morales' last couple fights and MAB's one could assume that this would have been an easy blowout for MAB. So once again I ask. Does MAB get bumped down like ya'll did Floyd. I'll Holla 5000
    <hr></blockquote>


    There is a HUGE difference in the Tito-ODLH fight and the MORALES-Barrera fight.

    ODLH simply QUIT fighting. He RAN. So he lost.

    Morales CONTINUE to fight (even winning CLEARLY the 10th round).

    Castillo-Mayweather Jr. was won by Castillo, IMO.

    However, UNLIKE Castillo...Morales started winning the earlier rounds.

    The thing is BARRERA and MAYWEATHER Jr. were THE NAME FIGHTERS.

    TAPIA was the NAME fighter too (that how he was awarded the decision over Medina).

    In the ODLH case...he could have won. But he didn't give the JUDGES no choice but to give Trinidad the last 3 rounds. If ODLH would have done SOMETHING (even throw a punch or two in the last 3 rounds), he would have WON that fight. But he didn't leave the judges any choice.

    I do know one thing for sure...

    135 lbs = Castillo is the BEST
    126 lbs = Morales is the BEST
    122 lbs = Barrera WAS the best

    Morales would have given Hamed a BOXING lesson too.
     
  18. Valentino

    Valentino Member

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by JayDawg:
    For the people that called it a knockdown. Ya'll need to rewatch and you will clearly see that Barrera slipped while he was punched. That was a good call by Nady. He was right under it. This fight was not no robbery in my eyes. I had it a draw or it could have went either way. Too many people pay attention to Ledermans card and it makes them think these fights were contraversy. There were so many rounds that could have went either way. I don't even pay attention to him no more he scores alot of fights fucked up now. He use to be good but not no more. I think he's getting to old. HOLLA!<hr></blockquote>

    Dude...of ALL the 450+ posters enrolled in this FINE FORUM, you are the one with the lesser reputation (when it comes to boxing).

    So, your opinion means practically crap.
     
  19. Valentino

    Valentino Member

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by amth:


    is a knockdown when you go down at the end of a punch?

    It was a knock down, once MAB got up he was taken back, so he was hurt and knocked down from that punch.

    As for people saying MAB was hitting harder, that's BS the first 6 rounds all he did was slap, it looked like he had no power behind his punches, while Morales was snapping his head back with HARD jabs and getting in some good rights. I think they jobbed Morales beasue of the first fight. Boxing is going down the shitter and FAST!

    All these "super" fights are being ruined becasue of promoters greed.

    I had morales by 2 rounds, yes there was alot of close rounds, but Morales was the one that looked like he wanted to fight. I think MAB just got a big head and thought he could outbox Morales, which he can not.
    I think Morales should fight Paulie next and then the winner of Hamed Vs Tapia. He would KO Hamed for sure. I know have Morales higher on my p4p list than MAB, he clearly has better skills!
    <hr></blockquote>


    Amen to this post.

    I remember people laughing at me when I said that Morales was CONSIDERABLY more SKILLFUL than Barrera. And the ONLY way Morales loses to Barrera is in a BRAWL.

    Well...forgot to add that the ONLY other way is if he is ROBBED.

    Morales WON in more than one way last night...

    1- He CLEARLY won in the eyes of the MEDIA (especially HBO...so people are going to hear CONSTANTLY that Morales won the fight).

    2- The fight took place at 126 (the first one at 122), therefore, Morales is going to be considered the BEST at 126 lbs. He will be the fighter to look for.

    3- The title was NOT in the line, therefore MORALES continue to be the WBC WORLD FEATHERWEIGHT CHAMPION. Sure, he had a bogus "defeat", but he still holds the PEOPLE's TITLE (at 126) and the REAL TITLE.

    4- He showed class (he always does).

    5- He showed that he had INCREDIBLE boxing skills and that he fights (even when he is hurt)

    FIVE MARKS of a WINNER.

    Hamed, Tapia, Ayala, Gainer, Paquiao, etc...will be looking for MORALES.

    Another thing...

    6- Barrera SHOULD be drop lower in the top 10 P4P lists. The same way that Mayweather Jr. was droped from the top 3, so should Barrera. So, Morales WINS in that way too.
     
  20. Ringside

    Ringside Retiree

    <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Valentino:


    Dude...of ALL the 450+ posters enrolled in this FINE FORUM, you are the one with the lesser reputation (when it comes to boxing).

    So, your opinion means practically crap.
    <hr></blockquote>

    Val..no one makes me laugh the way you do on your posts..I don't post it a lot but sometimes I roll over laughing from your responses...you have a dry sense of humor like my father had..keep it up!!!LOL Ringo
     

Share This Page