BoxRec

danamba7 wrote:PUNCHES GARCIA PETERSON
Landed.......173...........170
Thrown.......589...........494
Pct.............29.............34

I would love to see the breakdown of punch stats per round.

Ian1973 wrote:

Cloutov wrote:The system isn t to blame in this one. Peterson is. He should have started boxing before and he would have won. Is game plan was good he just waited to long before he stop running

That said it's a bit like Eubank junior vs BJ Saunders.

IF Peterson / Eubank had engaged earlier, it becomes a totally different fight. It doesn't mean either would've won.

Good point. But i don't see how Garcia would have won. He showed nothing special and Peterson looked so comfortable walking on him. But has you said maybe a fresh Danny could have connect a solid punch and change the way the final rounds went

117-111 garcia. i gave danny 7 of the first 8 rounds. Like someone else suggested, I actually think lamont was the better fighter, but just had an absolutely horrible game plan. Even when peterson started coming on, I thought garcia still edged a couple of those rounds, partly due to peterson's clowning.

Maybe the running took a bit out of garcia and that is why lamont was able to come on late, but it obviously turned out to backfire.

I really don't see how the OP could only have 3 rounds to Lamont, with respect if a judge turned that card in many would be on here moaning about corruption/incompetence, and they'd have a fair point.
Interesting fight and responses :P

Had it 115-113 Peterson.

Lamont won, but it was close and no one should have any real problem with the out come.

But certainly, Peterson was much more effective against Danny than Herrera was, and plenty of folks thought Swift lost that one.

Still kind of shaking my head on this one. Obviously Peterson used a lot of movement in the first 5 or 6 rounds, but Garcia hardly touched him. Peterson had to have landed more punches in those first several rounds, even if they were not hard punches or just jabs. How do you win rounds if you can't hit your opponent? Do you get points because you are walking forward wanting to exchange more? At times Peterson made Garcia look foolish, and very slow and frustrated. I guess the judges were frustrated too, as the score cards showed.

Whatever. I guess if Peterson isn't going to complain, I won't. A rematch would be good, and I would be betting on Peterson.

Badhusker wrote:Still kind of shaking my head on this one. Obviously Peterson used a lot of movement in the first 5 or 6 rounds, but Garcia hardly touched him. Peterson had to have landed more punches in those first several rounds, even if they were not hard punches or just jabs. How do you win rounds if you can't hit your opponent? Do you get points because you are walking forward wanting to exchange more? At times Peterson made Garcia look foolish, and very slow and frustrated. I guess the judges were frustrated too, as the score cards showed.

Whatever. I guess if Peterson isn't going to complain, I won't. A rematch would be good, and I would be betting on Peterson.

Just doesn't seem right does it when Lamont was making it look easy, evading most of the power shots and landing a fair few himself where as Garcia looked a bit lost with no plan b just plodding forward yet he wins the fight.

Badhusker wrote:Still kind of shaking my head on this one. Obviously Peterson used a lot of movement in the first 5 or 6 rounds, but Garcia hardly touched him. Peterson had to have landed more punches in those first several rounds, even if they were not hard punches or just jabs. How do you win rounds if you can't hit your opponent? Do you get points because you are walking forward wanting to exchange more? At times Peterson made Garcia look foolish, and very slow and frustrated. I guess the judges were frustrated too, as the score cards showed.

Whatever. I guess if Peterson isn't going to complain, I won't. A rematch would be good, and I would be betting on Peterson.

I gave Garcia the first two rounds because even with the movement he was occasionally catching up to Peterson.

In the 3rd and 4th, he was less successful doing so and those went to Peterson. I had it even after 4.

So is fight more an indictment on the 10 point must system or just too close to call can't complain that's the way the cookie crumbles kind of deal..

It seems wrong that one fighter clearly showed his superiority then pays a hefty price based on a few flighty rounds.

By the time the fight ended I actually had Garcia by 3 rounds though in reality it looked to be closer than that, truthfully speaking though Peterson allowed too many rounds to go into the bag in the early beginnings say from round 1-5, sure he came on and upped his output but by then he was already behind on all the cards.

Another sad case of "too little, too late" IMHO.

Garcia 115-112

What is running now?

Dirrell VS Stevens was running. Now it seems that everyone has to stand and trade or they are running.
Boxing is descending even further into absolute stupidity.

koolkc107 wrote:

Badhusker wrote:Still kind of shaking my head on this one. Obviously Peterson used a lot of movement in the first 5 or 6 rounds, but Garcia hardly touched him. Peterson had to have landed more punches in those first several rounds, even if they were not hard punches or just jabs. How do you win rounds if you can't hit your opponent? Do you get points because you are walking forward wanting to exchange more? At times Peterson made Garcia look foolish, and very slow and frustrated. I guess the judges were frustrated too, as the score cards showed.

Whatever. I guess if Peterson isn't going to complain, I won't. A rematch would be good, and I would be betting on Peterson.

I gave Garcia the first two rounds because even with the movement he was occasionally catching up to Peterson.

In the 3rd and 4th, he was less successful doing so and those went to Peterson. I had it even after 4.

I think the outcome really blind you if you had it even after 4. I think every one here agree on the fact Peterson was the better guy and he should have won the fight but for several reason he didn t. One of these reason is he did not won any of the first 6 round by running is life off

tbh I am glad that it was controversial, as the fight was a sham cos of the CW

Cloutov wrote:

koolkc107 wrote:

Badhusker wrote:Still kind of shaking my head on this one. Obviously Peterson used a lot of movement in the first 5 or 6 rounds, but Garcia hardly touched him. Peterson had to have landed more punches in those first several rounds, even if they were not hard punches or just jabs. How do you win rounds if you can't hit your opponent? Do you get points because you are walking forward wanting to exchange more? At times Peterson made Garcia look foolish, and very slow and frustrated. I guess the judges were frustrated too, as the score cards showed.

Whatever. I guess if Peterson isn't going to complain, I won't. A rematch would be good, and I would be betting on Peterson.

I gave Garcia the first two rounds because even with the movement he was occasionally catching up to Peterson.

In the 3rd and 4th, he was less successful doing so and those went to Peterson. I had it even after 4.

I think the outcome really blind you if you had it even after 4. I think every one here agree on the fact Peterson was the better guy and he should have won the fight but for several reason he didn t. One of these reason is he did not won any of the first 6 round by running is life off

I don't agree that Peterson was the better guy. Better on the eye yes but that was something of an optical illusion what he did was not effective hence he lost the fight and rightly so IMO.

His plan was clearly to frustrate the fk out of Garcia and it worked but had Peterson engaged instead of running round the ring for the first ten - fifteen minutes the fight would've been completely different.

Peterson's tactics dictated the pattern of the fight but that's all it did. You could argue that Garcia won DESPITE the fact that the fight didn't go his way.

yet that argument would be inaccurate to most of the people who saw the fight. Danny never looked more clueless and ineffectual than he did in this fight. TBH he was awful, boggles the mind how anyone can see different when it's plain as day. If that's winning despite himself, there is something very wrong with either that opinion or scoring in general.

SFW wrote:yet that argument would be inaccurate to most of the people who saw the fight. Danny never looked more clueless and ineffectual than he did in this fight. TBH he was awful, boggles the mind how anyone can see different when it's plain as day. If that's winning despite himself, there is something very wrong with either that opinion or scoring in general.

Yet he still won the fight and deserved to do so. Even the fight stats support a Garcia win ......... though very marginal.

It's the age old thing of the eye deceiving the mind. It is SCORING shots that count not who LOOKS the part. If that was the case Hollywood actors .................. you're in the wrong game!

SFW wrote:yet that argument would be inaccurate to most of the people who saw the fight. Danny never looked more clueless and ineffectual than he did in this fight. TBH he was awful, boggles the mind how anyone can see different when it's plain as day. If that's winning despite himself, there is something very wrong with either that opinion or scoring in general.

Again, I am surprised at how many folks thought he lost to Herrera, yet are saying nothing about the much worse beating Peterson put on him.

Ian1973 wrote:

SFW wrote:yet that argument would be inaccurate to most of the people who saw the fight. Danny never looked more clueless and ineffectual than he did in this fight. TBH he was awful, boggles the mind how anyone can see different when it's plain as day. If that's winning despite himself, there is something very wrong with either that opinion or scoring in general.

Yet he still won the fight and deserved to do so. Even the fight stats support a Garcia win ......... though very marginal.

It's the age old thing of the eye deceiving the mind. It is SCORING shots that count not who LOOKS the part. If that was the case Hollywood actors .................. you're in the wrong game!

Scoring shots? the ones that did little to no damage? stop kidding yourself, your on the way to a Judges seat... No, he did not deserve to win, and more people agree with that than not. Sorry, but that's reality.

lol now everyone is deceived by what they saw what a crock lol. The running and losing too many possibly losing too many early rounds notion holds far much more weight than that bullshit.

Ian1973 wrote:

SFW wrote:yet that argument would be inaccurate to most of the people who saw the fight. Danny never looked more clueless and ineffectual than he did in this fight. TBH he was awful, boggles the mind how anyone can see different when it's plain as day. If that's winning despite himself, there is something very wrong with either that opinion or scoring in general.

Yet he still won the fight and deserved to do so. Even the fight stats support a Garcia win ......... though very marginal.

It's the age old thing of the eye deceiving the mind. It is SCORING shots that count not who LOOKS the part. If that was the case Hollywood actors .................. you're in the wrong game!

Hmmmm, it's clearly produced differing opinions but it doesn't sit well with me that Garcia won. What's this massive negativity around "running" anyway? Alright first few rounds it was a bit OTT but Danny wasn't landing at all and if it was a plan to frustrate Garcia, then it worked. Then when Lamont turned it on a bit he had his way with Danny, landing some hurtful shots whilst still evading most of Garcia's power shots. One looked in control and one looked lost. The punch stats are very even but don't take into account how clean the shots were. As someone else mentioned, if Peterson had upped it just a couple rounds earlier, he could've even stopped Garcia so in that sense he can only blame himself.

The thing here is all about how you run. Some fighter win fight without engaging by using good footwork,angles and accurate counter. Here ine the first 6 LP was just trying to avoid everything that could look like a fight. So who are yoi going to favor, the guy who look elusive by running or the one who try to engage a fight and is putting the pressure.
It a ll come back to can a fighter can win a fight without throwing by making is opponent miss.
I think the answer is no because throwing a punch open your defense and pit you at risk. No risk equals losing

Cloutov wrote:The thing here is all about how you run. Some fighter win fight without engaging by using good footwork,angles and accurate counter. Here ine the first 6 LP was just trying to avoid everything that could look like a fight. So who are yoi going to favor, the guy who look elusive by running or the one who try to engage a fight and is putting the pressure.
It a ll come back to can a fighter can win a fight without throwing by making is opponent miss.
I think the answer is no because throwing a punch open your defense and pit you at risk. No risk equals losing

I agree with the gist of your post but it also matters how skilfully the attacking fighter attempts to get close. It's no good plodding forward in straight lines and complaining the opponent won't engage head on, Garcia didn't show a great deal of craft or guile in his attacks and was quickly frustrated, which was surely at least part of Peterson's plan - if a boxer is falling into the others plan then it ought to be acknowledged by the judges.

I think the key question folks have to ask about those rounds Peterson was supposedly running in is how did each fighter stack up when it came to the 4 primary scoring criteria: Clean punching, Effective aggressiveness, Ring generalship, and Defense.

If you plug in these, there is no way you could have Garcia way ahead in the first half of the fight.

There was little effective aggressiveness by either fighter.
You could argue clean punching for either guy.
But Defense and Ring generalship clearly go to one fighter.

Lamont boxed a lovely second half of the fight and at times Garcia looked like a punchbag, flatfooted, short of ideas and a cheap replica of the fighter that busted up Amir Khan.
There shouldn't be all this confusion over what style you prefer , how bizarre. Lamont broke him down and busted Garcia up in there - it was a great Peterson win - he's more capable than I previously thought.