Yea I'd like to see much more of Mikey Garcia. Hopefully he had an active year.Tanzio wrote:Yes, a third is inevitable. It was a good, entertaining fight. Watching Mikey operate is always worthwhile.lazboy wrote:So Santa Cruz is not one dimensional.
Frampton went head hunting and put too much juice on his shots. Didn't do great at cutting off the ring. Maybe that young trainer put to much emphasise on power or Frampton himself really wanted to knockout. Still, they both showed class. I'd watch a third one.
Leo Santa Cruz v Carl Frampton 2 - RBR
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
-
boxing_rocks
- Welterweight
- Posts: 7851
- Joined: 20 May 2016, 13:11
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
He said "majority of CLOSE rounds".Evander wrote:Tanzio wrote:I had the opposite view. To me LSC was in control and it was Frampton who had to make the comeback to get into the fight. I feel that I gave Frampton the majority of the close rounds.Evander wrote:1st round was a beaut.
Frampton looked very strong during the first four or so rounds and it struck me that he knew what it took to go through Cruz, he then laid off but laid off enough for Cruz to mount a comeback and build some momentum and Cruz did just that and more.
Don't get me wrong there's an argument Cruz did ok during one or two of the early rounds but he didn't really step it up until the second half of the fight.
The Cruz jab although not necessarily a potent weapon throughout came in handy as the bout progressed.
Frampton's square on up in your face inside style became less effective as we went on, Cruz learned to parry punches, ride with the rallies and jab his way along the further it went.
Quality of the contest was high no doubt about it, it was a good fight and a just winner.
Carl had no answer for LSC's boxing. I had 115-113. If anything it was wider, not closer, imo.
If you have given Frampton the majority of the rounds and I feel it's fair to say there were no 10-8's in there how do you have Leo a winner ?
Is that a typo ?
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
10-9 rounds are not inherently close. There were four or five very close rounds. I gave Frampton the majority of those rounds. 3 of 4 or 5.Evander wrote:Tanzio wrote:I had the opposite view. To me LSC was in control and it was Frampton who had to make the comeback to get into the fight. I feel that I gave Frampton the majority of the close rounds.Evander wrote:1st round was a beaut.
Frampton looked very strong during the first four or so rounds and it struck me that he knew what it took to go through Cruz, he then laid off but laid off enough for Cruz to mount a comeback and build some momentum and Cruz did just that and more.
Don't get me wrong there's an argument Cruz did ok during one or two of the early rounds but he didn't really step it up until the second half of the fight.
The Cruz jab although not necessarily a potent weapon throughout came in handy as the bout progressed.
Frampton's square on up in your face inside style became less effective as we went on, Cruz learned to parry punches, ride with the rallies and jab his way along the further it went.
Quality of the contest was high no doubt about it, it was a good fight and a just winner.
Carl had no answer for LSC's boxing. I had 115-113. If anything it was wider, not closer, imo.
If you have given Frampton the majority of the rounds and I feel it's fair to say there were no 10-8's in there how do you have Leo a winner ?
Is that a typo ?
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
Saw that he changed it that's fine, nevertheless borderline rounds will make the score closer and create some controversy in fight where the decision is solid.boxing_rocks wrote:He said "majority of CLOSE rounds".Evander wrote:Tanzio wrote: I had the opposite view. To me LSC was in control and it was Frampton who had to make the comeback to get into the fight. I feel that I gave Frampton the majority of the close rounds.
Carl had no answer for LSC's boxing. I had 115-113. If anything it was wider, not closer, imo.
If you have given Frampton the majority of the rounds and I feel it's fair to say there were no 10-8's in there how do you have Leo a winner ?
Is that a typo ?
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
Evander, I never changed my post.Evander wrote:Saw that he changed it that's fine, nevertheless borderline rounds will make the score closer and create some controversy in fight where the decision is solid.boxing_rocks wrote:He said "majority of CLOSE rounds".Evander wrote:
If you have given Frampton the majority of the rounds and I feel it's fair to say there were no 10-8's in there how do you have Leo a winner ?
Is that a typo ?
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
Got no problem with your card mate.Tanzio wrote:10-9 rounds are not inherently close. There were four or five very close rounds. I gave Frampton the majority of those rounds. 3 of 4 or 5.Evander wrote:Tanzio wrote: I had the opposite view. To me LSC was in control and it was Frampton who had to make the comeback to get into the fight. I feel that I gave Frampton the majority of the close rounds.
Carl had no answer for LSC's boxing. I had 115-113. If anything it was wider, not closer, imo.
If you have given Frampton the majority of the rounds and I feel it's fair to say there were no 10-8's in there how do you have Leo a winner ?
Is that a typo ?
Way I see it see it was a clear win for the Mexican and that's that very entertaining fight.
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
I change mine when I make a typo I just try to do it as soon as possible when going live, god knows I've under misinterpreted myself over the years and got into trouble by not fixing some.Tanzio wrote:Evander, I never changed my post.Evander wrote:Saw that he changed it that's fine, nevertheless borderline rounds will make the score closer and create some controversy in fight where the decision is solid.boxing_rocks wrote:
He said "majority of CLOSE rounds".
Not accuse you of that.
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
Evander wrote:Got no problem with your card mate.Tanzio wrote:10-9 rounds are not inherently close. There were four or five very close rounds. I gave Frampton the majority of those rounds. 3 of 4 or 5.Evander wrote:
If you have given Frampton the majority of the rounds and I feel it's fair to say there were no 10-8's in there how do you have Leo a winner ?
Is that a typo ?
Way I see it see was a clear win for the Mexican and that's that very entertaining fight.
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
I also considered it a clear win for LSC.Evander wrote:Got no problem with your card mate.Tanzio wrote:10-9 rounds are not inherently close. There were four or five very close rounds. I gave Frampton the majority of those rounds. 3 of 4 or 5.Evander wrote:
If you have given Frampton the majority of the rounds and I feel it's fair to say there were no 10-8's in there how do you have Leo a winner ?
Is that a typo ?
Way I see it see it was a clear win for the Mexican and that's that very entertaining fight.
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
Example 
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
Bottom line is were on the same page at the end of the dayTanzio wrote:I also considered it a clear win for LSC.Evander wrote:Got no problem with your card mate.Tanzio wrote: 10-9 rounds are not inherently close. There were four or five very close rounds. I gave Frampton the majority of those rounds. 3 of 4 or 5.
Way I see it see it was a clear win for the Mexican and that's that very entertaining fight.
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
I edit when I catch mistakes after posting. This was not one of those cases.Evander wrote:I change mine when I make a typo I just try to do it as soon as possible when going live, god knows I've under misinterpreted myself over the years and got into trouble by not fixing some.Tanzio wrote:Evander, I never changed my post.Evander wrote:
Saw that he changed it that's fine, nevertheless borderline rounds will make the score closer and create some controversy in fight where the decision is solid.
Not accuse you of that.
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
You don't need to explain Tanz it's nothing mate honestly it's all good.Tanzio wrote:I edit when I catch mistakes after posting. This was not one of those cases.Evander wrote:I change mine when I make a typo I just try to do it as soon as possible when going live, god knows I've under misinterpreted myself over the years and got into trouble by not fixing some.Tanzio wrote: Evander, I never changed my post.
Not accuse you of that.
Now is there an argument Frampton may have got a draw out of it ?
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
I would not have called it a robbery but I think that there is more of an argument for it being wider.Evander wrote:You don't need to explain Tanz it's nothing mate honestly it's all good.Tanzio wrote:I edit when I catch mistakes after posting. This was not one of those cases.Evander wrote:
I change mine when I make a typo I just try to do it as soon as possible when going live, god knows I've under misinterpreted myself over the years and got into trouble by not fixing some.
Not accuse you of that.
Now is there an argument Frampton may have got a draw out of it ?
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
Cruz romped the later rounds on the numbers.Tanzio wrote:I would not have called it a robbery but I think that there is more of an argument for it being wider.Evander wrote:You don't need to explain Tanz it's nothing mate honestly it's all good.Tanzio wrote: I edit when I catch mistakes after posting. This was not one of those cases.
Now is there an argument Frampton may have got a draw out of it ?
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
Like I said earlier, I saw the opposite.Evander wrote:Cruz romped the later rounds on the numbers.Tanzio wrote:I would not have called it a robbery but I think that there is more of an argument for it being wider.Evander wrote:
You don't need to explain Tanz it's nothing mate honestly it's all good.
Now is there an argument Frampton may have got a draw out of it ?
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
Oh ... alright then.
-
manchester-mexican
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 247
- Joined: 15 Jul 2007, 11:18
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
Totally agree, think he trying to ko him, don't know why tbhTanzio wrote:114-114
115-113
115-113
LSC
Good decision, imo. LSC simply out boxed Frampton. Frampton was too bulky. Looked for nothing but heavy leather. Big mistake.
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
What a great fight and the respect shown by both fighters was excellent. The judges also need a pat on the back. Thought 115 113 to LSC was accurate but could see 114 114. Bring on number 3 i say !!
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
This fight sucked so lets stop pretending it was so great. The last round was good but most of the fight was marred by excessive clinching and missed power punches. The HBO fights last night were 20 times better. I'll watch a 3rd fight, sure. I'm not an idiot. But LSC clearly dominated that fight and it wasn't even close.
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
I disagree with your entire post, with the exception of LSC winning clear. Leo did control that fightcaldo2025 wrote:This fight sucked so lets stop pretending it was so great. The last round was good but most of the fight was marred by excessive clinching and missed power punches. The HBO fights last night were 20 times better. I'll watch a 3rd fight, sure. I'm not an idiot. But LSC clearly dominated that fight and it wasn't even close.
No the fight did not suck. LSC proving everyone wrong about his ability to adjust, jab, use space, defend, and land more telling blows was worth my time. Meanwhile, Frampton prepared for trench warfare, coming in 5 pounds heavier than LSC, pumped by his traveling crowd, looking for nothing but detonation.
The whole fight was excellent, in my opinion. LSC kept controlling space, landing good jabs, and actually countering Frampton's heavy handed strategy but it was always in the balance if Frampton could hurt Leo. There were good exchanges throughout.
I preferred the Showtime card by some distance. Witnessing Mikey surgically take apart a quality, undefeated opponent inside three rounds was terrific. It is always an honor to see a boxing performance by a professional of that level of virtuosity. We are very fortunate to have more than a handful of them in boxing currently.
On top of that you had the very high skill level fight of LSC v Frampton. Leo Santa Cruz graduated to a higher level of respect for most boxing fans last night.
The HBO card was entertaining Rock'em Sock'em Robots action but the skill level did not come close to Showtimes. The heart on display in the HBO fights was tremendous. Nobody quit in there, although the plug could easily been pulled on Vargas v Berchelt at least two rounds prior.
For my taste in boxing last nights fights rated:
1. LSC v Frampton. Basically Leo just reversed the roles on Carl.
2. Miura v Roman. Absolute back and forth war of attrition.
3. Mikey v Zlat. Ruthless beauty.
4. Berchelt beating down Vargas. Young lion removes the stubborn old lion. It went on too long due to the reputation of Vargas to return from the dead.
-
Monte Fisto
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 2978
- Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 15:36
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
I had Santa Cruz winning by 4 rounds, but it was still an intriguing and entertaining fight. I'd happily watch a third and i think Carl deserves it in Belfast.
Santa Cruz was fantastic last night, his defence was absolutely quality.
Santa Cruz was fantastic last night, his defence was absolutely quality.
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
You seem to be pretty hard to please. Im not pretending the fight was great, it was great. LSC didnt dominate it. It was a close bout and the judges got it right. If there were other "great"fights on the same day that's great for boxing.caldo2025 wrote:This fight sucked so lets stop pretending it was so great. The last round was good but most of the fight was marred by excessive clinching and missed power punches. The HBO fights last night were 20 times better. I'll watch a 3rd fight, sure. I'm not an idiot. But LSC clearly dominated that fight and it wasn't even close.
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
Once again, you see nothing wrong with Boxing just handing out World Title shots to people so it's not with arguing the point with you. Mikey Garcia sits out for almost 3 years and he gets handed a title shot after only 1 fight back against a bum. And let's stop with that ass kissing about Garcia's victory over an "undefeated" fighter. That kid was a midget and Garcia viewed that fight as nothing more than low hanging fruit.Tanzio wrote:I disagree with your entire post, with the exception of LSC winning clear. Leo did control that fightcaldo2025 wrote:This fight sucked so lets stop pretending it was so great. The last round was good but most of the fight was marred by excessive clinching and missed power punches. The HBO fights last night were 20 times better. I'll watch a 3rd fight, sure. I'm not an idiot. But LSC clearly dominated that fight and it wasn't even close.
No the fight did not suck. LSC proving everyone wrong about his ability to adjust, jab, use space, defend, and land more telling blows was worth my time. Meanwhile, Frampton prepared for trench warfare, coming in 5 pounds heavier than LSC, pumped by his traveling crowd, looking for nothing but detonation.
The whole fight was excellent, in my opinion. LSC kept controlling space, landing good jabs, and actually countering Frampton's heavy handed strategy but it was always in the balance if Frampton could hurt Leo. There were good exchanges throughout.
I preferred the Showtime card by some distance. Witnessing Mikey surgically take apart a quality, undefeated opponent inside three rounds was terrific. It is always an honor to see a boxing performance by a professional of that level of virtuosity. We are very fortunate to have more than a handful of them in boxing currently.
On top of that you had the very high skill level fight of LSC v Frampton. Leo Santa Cruz graduated to a higher level of respect for most boxing fans last night.
The HBO card was entertaining Rock'em Sock'em Robots action but the skill level did not come close to Showtimes. The heart on display in the HBO fights was tremendous. Nobody quit in there, although the plug could easily been pulled on Vargas v Berchelt at least two rounds prior.
For my taste in boxing last nights fights rated:
1. LSC v Frampton. Basically Leo just reversed the roles on Carl.
2. Miura v Roman. Absolute back and forth war of attrition.
3. Mikey v Zlat. Ruthless beauty.
4. Berchelt beating down Vargas. Young lion removes the stubborn old lion. It went on too long due to the reputation of Vargas to return from the dead.
Let's see who Garcia signs on to fight next. My guess is that he'll just keep going up in weight challenging the worst champs in the weight class. joke
Re: Santa Cruz v Frampton RBR
The resentment that drips off of you is your cross to bear. Professional boxing is business. Mikey has big business oozing from his pores.caldo2025 wrote:Once again, you see nothing wrong with Boxing just handing out World Title shots to people so it's not with arguing the point with you. Mikey Garcia sits out for almost 3 years and he gets handed a title shot after only 1 fight back against a bum. And let's stop with that ass kissing about Garcia's victory over an "undefeated" fighter. That kid was a midget and Garcia viewed that fight as nothing more than low hanging fruit.Tanzio wrote:I disagree with your entire post, with the exception of LSC winning clear. Leo did control that fightcaldo2025 wrote:This fight sucked so lets stop pretending it was so great. The last round was good but most of the fight was marred by excessive clinching and missed power punches. The HBO fights last night were 20 times better. I'll watch a 3rd fight, sure. I'm not an idiot. But LSC clearly dominated that fight and it wasn't even close.
No the fight did not suck. LSC proving everyone wrong about his ability to adjust, jab, use space, defend, and land more telling blows was worth my time. Meanwhile, Frampton prepared for trench warfare, coming in 5 pounds heavier than LSC, pumped by his traveling crowd, looking for nothing but detonation.
The whole fight was excellent, in my opinion. LSC kept controlling space, landing good jabs, and actually countering Frampton's heavy handed strategy but it was always in the balance if Frampton could hurt Leo. There were good exchanges throughout.
I preferred the Showtime card by some distance. Witnessing Mikey surgically take apart a quality, undefeated opponent inside three rounds was terrific. It is always an honor to see a boxing performance by a professional of that level of virtuosity. We are very fortunate to have more than a handful of them in boxing currently.
On top of that you had the very high skill level fight of LSC v Frampton. Leo Santa Cruz graduated to a higher level of respect for most boxing fans last night.
The HBO card was entertaining Rock'em Sock'em Robots action but the skill level did not come close to Showtimes. The heart on display in the HBO fights was tremendous. Nobody quit in there, although the plug could easily been pulled on Vargas v Berchelt at least two rounds prior.
For my taste in boxing last nights fights rated:
1. LSC v Frampton. Basically Leo just reversed the roles on Carl.
2. Miura v Roman. Absolute back and forth war of attrition.
3. Mikey v Zlat. Ruthless beauty.
4. Berchelt beating down Vargas. Young lion removes the stubborn old lion. It went on too long due to the reputation of Vargas to return from the dead.
Let's see who Garcia signs on to fight next. My guess is that he'll just keep going up in weight challenging the worst champs in the weight class. joke
Garcia should be applauded for getting back to business quickly, wasting no time beating on no hopers. Zlaticanin also deserves credit for stepping in with Mikey. It was a business decision.
Labeling an undefeated LW champion "a midget" repeatedly says more about you than the two fine athletes who met in the ring on Saturday night. Zlaticanin earned his place by defeating other credible professionals. Garcia demonstrated his gifts and skills for us. I look forward to his future fights and I wish Zlaticanin the best going forward.