Gold medal winner, 6 div champ, probably the best resume in the last 20 yrs and none of that was accomplished based on his boxing ability:think Did you only catch the tail-end of DLH's career?:huh
I like how people criticize Pac for beating older oponents. I remember Oscars early career. I also remember the string of fights that brought him to stardom, a 34 year old Julio César Chávez, a 33 year old Whittiker, and a 35 year old Camacho.
the problem here is i did'nt even made a comment about who is greater legacy wise. you on the other hand had stated your case already. i just want to know what are the opinions of non-mexicans and pinoys.
De La Hoya is more of a legend in terms of star status. He replaced Mike Tyson as the mainstream superstar of Boxing. Pacuiao is huge but will probably never reach De La Hoya's hollywood appeal in North America. That said, in terms of victories, Pacquiao hasn't been around quite long enough to superced Oscar's accomplishments although that may soon change.
I didn't call you on your opinion, I called you on your hypocrisy: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^:deal And just for the hell of it, what is your answer to the thread question
Barrera, Morales, and Marquez aren't tough? I love it when people try to discredit great fighters. It makes them look stupid. Hey if Pac was pampered and protected like Oscar was he wouldn't have losses on his early career either. So your point is moot. Early careers don't mean **** in boxing anyway. Fact of the matter is Pacquiao beat his toughest opponents. Oscar didn't end of story.
Oscar hands down..:good But he lost to Tito aight so dont get it twisted mamon! :nono PS...Someone needs to pump up UliUli's most famous thread about the Oscar vs Pac fight please, I feel like having a laugh......
Chill out '****, I never said MAB, Morales and Marquez weren't tough. Try reading the post again, but this time try it with your head out of your ass:deal "early careers don't mean **** in boxing anyway" some of you are too much