July 20, 2002


So we all saw what happened this weekend right? Well Jim, you said Mosley was gonna take this one? What happened? How do you feel the decision went? Will there be a rematch?

I really thought Shane Mosley would apply more pressure throughout the fight like the way the first round started. Mosley seemed to be too conscience of Vernon Forrest's right hand to be at his best, which is attacking the body and being aggressive in general. Forrest did make adjustments to Mosley's change of style from their first fight. They both landed some big punches, but I feel Mosley landed the harder blows throughout the fight. I'm not outraged at the decision, because I could see it going either way, but I do have a problem with 117-111. I scored the fight 115-113 for Mosley in a very tactical defensive fight. I could see 114-114 or 115-113 for Forrest, but I guess the judges gave credit for misses to Forrest instead of good defense by Mosley. I will say that Mosley did not throw enough punches to solidify the decision. I don't think there'll be a third fight anytime soon, because Forrest want to unify the titles and Mosley is moving up to 154 to maybe set up a rematch with DeLaHoya or a number of attractive fights with Fernando Vargas, Winky Wright or possibly Bernard Hopkins. - JIM

I agree with Jim as far as the 117-111 ruling by one of the judges. I have no idea what fight he was watching. I had it 115-113 or a draw...pick a winner. I'm a Shane fan, but just calling it like I saw it, I'd have to go with Forrest if I HAD to choose a winner. Only because Forrest is the champ. Basic rule of thumb when it pertains to boxing is that the champ has to be 'beaten' to dethrone him. Neither 'beat' the other so I'd have to pick Forrest. Shane did enough to win.....if he was the champ coming in. - ADRIAN

I believe a lot of judges, not all, score rounds impartial, boxing politics aside. A challenger should be able to win a close round the same as the champion, based on the judges viewpoint. It's an old cliché that the challenger must really take the title. Scoring should be consistent with all fights, whether it's a fight between guys with losing records or a championship bout. This is why I feel there should be a universal/national commission to set standards for judging, ring rules, medical standards, etc. -Jim

I agree Jim. A challenger should have just as good a chance as the champion in every round of every fight. However, when rounds are very close and could go to either fighter, I tend to lean toward the champ if he's fighting defensively good enough to keep the challenger from getting a head. I rarely judge a round a tie unless it is absolutely no doubt in my mind that both fighters landed equally damaging blows. If it's a close, but boring round (like most of the ones in this fight) where neither fighter is delivering any real blows, opting instead, to clinch and connect on a few soft contact shots (no damage) at an almost even rate as the other fighter, that's when I give it to the champ. So I tend to agree that a challenger in any sport has to 'beat' the champion. Not necessarily having to dominate. But it should be clear that the challenger had the upper hand. That's fair. A challenger's goal should not be to be 'as good' as the champion. It is to be better. That's why in a draw, the champion should (and does) keeps the belt. You can't have 2 champions. That said, I still believe Forrest did just enough to keep Mosley from taking his belt. And that Mosley did not do quite enough to take it. This was a tough fight to judge. Because had Mosley come in as the champion, I'd have to say that Forrest didn't do enough to have taken it from Shane. Go figure.....-Adrian's $.02

If you think otherwise or have an opinion, feel free to contact me at