FIGHT Record vs FIGHT Record

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by IsaL, Jan 13, 2010.


  1. IsaL

    IsaL VIP Member Full Member

    50,557
    18,243
    Oct 7, 2006
    Whitaker had fought and won a fight at Jr. MW against a solid JMW in Vasquez.

    Not only that but he was well established at that weight, where Oscar was just coming up from LW one year and a half before.

    So how can you say Oscar was really the bigger man??? I'd like to know what the weights were fightnight.

    Also, Oscar looked FANTASTIC against Tito at 147, and imo better than what he looked like against Pea. SO I truly believe he did improve his boxing.
     
  2. thewoo

    thewoo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,769
    4
    Mar 3, 2005
    Don't really know what the weights were on fight night but Oscar is bigger than Pea.

    This content is protected
     
  3. IsaL

    IsaL VIP Member Full Member

    50,557
    18,243
    Oct 7, 2006
    I know he's taller, for sure. But height is not the sole measuring for how big someone is.

    I know that Whitaker had weighed 153+ on the weighin for one of his fights. This was Oscar's first fight at 147, and a year and a half before Oscar was fighting at 135.

    Actually, if you compare their torso, Oscar looks smaller.
     
  4. Sweet Pea

    Sweet Pea Obsessed with Boxing banned

    27,199
    93
    Dec 26, 2007
    I don't see the relevance? That just goes to show how skilled Whitaker was. Are you trying to insinutate that he was a natural JMW, or even fit the weight at all? He was bloated and pudgy against Vasquez, and looked far removed from the fighter he was.

    He was still more of a natural Welterweight than at any other weight class he fought in. That was his ideal weight, though he may have been better from a head to head perspective at 140 given his physical attributes and the lack of depth in comparison to Welterweight.

    How can I say he was the bigger man? Because I've seen the fight and compared the two, that's how. I think you might be the only person in the entire history of Earth that's ever tried to insinuate that Pea was bigger or that they were even the same size. Oscar held a clear natural size advantage.

    Two totally different styles. Oscar was on the backfoot facing a fighter whose footwork was his main weakness in the Trinidad fight. Against Whitaker, he was fighting in ring centre for the majority of the fight against a defensive slickster and a pure boxing master. Of course he's going to look a better boxer against the former.
     
  5. thewoo

    thewoo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,769
    4
    Mar 3, 2005

    You have to take into consideration why it is that Pea was weighing so much. When guys get older, it's harder to make weights. Measure both guys at what weight they were in their prime. Prime for Prime Oscar is a welterweight and Pea is a lightweight.

    Oscar is a naturally bigger man.
     
  6. IsaL

    IsaL VIP Member Full Member

    50,557
    18,243
    Oct 7, 2006
    That's a valid point. But at the time of the fight, you believe Oscar was significantly bigger if he was indeed bigger??? :think
     
  7. thewoo

    thewoo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,769
    4
    Mar 3, 2005

    I think that he had a size and strength advantage yes. I don't think that a size and strength advantage is really a factor against pernell because pernell is not a big physical fighter and never was even at lower weights.
     
  8. Sean101

    Sean101 Active Member Full Member

    1,392
    1
    Oct 11, 2008
    Oscars head looks photoshopped on
     
  9. PhillyShell

    PhillyShell Active Member Full Member

    704
    0
    Dec 11, 2007
    So you aren't going to come out and say "DLH is better than PBF and MP", why exactly? It couldn't be because if you said it like that, you wouldn't be able to get past the third word in that sentence before scornful laughter drowned you out. Surely not.
     
  10. riannu25

    riannu25 Active Member Full Member

    641
    0
    Jun 29, 2008
    I didn't know that was threatening. More like an analogy how moronic you are. And get this into ur head......we don't need to justify anything, you delusional Mayweather fans are the ones who should justify why we should believe your rumors, and for the past month not one shred of evidence was presented to corraborate your statement. You even grasp at straw with Moorer and he came back and bitchlapped your gossipy checks right off the bat. Bottom line you are nothing but a crybaby, forcing us to debate on nothing but speculation so as to give credibility to your baseless ranting. GTFO!
     
  11. riannu25

    riannu25 Active Member Full Member

    641
    0
    Jun 29, 2008
    Castillo and Corrales? Are you serious?
     
  12. pauliemayweathe

    pauliemayweathe Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,995
    0
    Dec 27, 2007
    here is substance....floyd moved up gave ODLH every advantage and beat him...then pac moved up and ****ing destroyed him....they are both better than delahoya....oscar has 2 really good wins, quartey and vargas and are they THAT good or am I missing some? mosely...no hopkins...hell no tito...no but I thought he did ummmm anyone? he has fought the best though and always been competitive....oh sweet pea....yeah 3 good wins
     
  13. pauliemayweathe

    pauliemayweathe Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,995
    0
    Dec 27, 2007
    are you serious...corrales was a beast and he ****ing destroyed him and JLC was the BEST lw and he beat him twice...then he beat delahoya and hatton....and floyd has not squeaked out decisions...he has clearly won all but 1 which he then won easy
     
  14. riannu25

    riannu25 Active Member Full Member

    641
    0
    Jun 29, 2008
    And that just shot down your arguement. No sane person here will acknowledge Barrera was past prime. Off peak maybe, still in prime. And JCC was shot. Shotter than Morales. You always argue that Morales was shot at the tender age of 29 since he has lots of war. Using your logic well what abt Chavez who had 99 fights?

    There are also things like how you beat your opponent, dominance during your prime and how you pushed the envelope. Oscar's reign didn't last very long, he didn't show the aura of invincibility, the technical masterclass of Mayweather or the brutal efficiency of Pacquiao. He has a lot of close fights, he has not separated himself against the competition.

    Oscar's resume is top notch, but credit is given for winning, ring dominance, and carrer-defining fights. When you think of DLH you think about how close he won the Trinidad fight. Almost but not quite. That is how he will be perceived. Almost there, but failed by an inch.
     
  15. riannu25

    riannu25 Active Member Full Member

    641
    0
    Jun 29, 2008
    We are talking about GREAT fighters. A FMJ fan will never understand it it seems.