Five best welterweights ever, head to head?

Walker is a great fighter that's why...Looking a top five list (head to head) is really splitting hairs. All are great, and as a consequence they all have that chance to win a head to head. Walker may not have been the most consistant at the weight, but by judging the films (albeit at middle) he would be a force. I also agree he was better at middle, but I'll stand by this selection at welter. Bottom line Walker was great at both weights.
You could also shoe horn in Griffith, Rodriguez, '79-'80 version of Duran (again not the most consistant at the weight.)
Addendum: Thomas Hearns is also a tough out...for anybody.

 

Agreed, Hearns is a difficult night for anybody at 147, particularly the smaller guys. How much trouble did Leonard have getting under those arms? And some of these guys are smaller and less mobile than Leonard. Don't like his chances vs. Robinson though.

 

You Robertards obession with the man is more fanatical than my hatred, so dont pull me up on that again. How in the **** can you put Duran in a top 5 h2h WW list? And even more so leaving Hearns out at the same time??

H2H

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Thomas Hearns
3. Sugar Ray Leonard
4. Henry Armstrong
5. Oscar De La Hoya

Trinidad and Mosley are also in the equation

 

Robinson
Gavilan
Napoles
Cuevas
Burley

 

Bit surprised by the Cuevas choice, lax.

 

I reckon Walker would have a good chance at beating Hearns. Hearns is a fine pick though.

 

If we were using these as teams, Oscar cost your team , look at the difference inm levels between your other picks and him. And your back-up doesn't help much either. Just trying to help young grass-hopper.

 

De Lay Hoya has a great resume at WW, hes also a very big WW, and a really big puncher at WW and also a very fast WW, with a rock solid chin at even MW. With a style that relies on physicality. So H2H i think hes a beast at the weight.

 

He's just not as good Pachilles, maybe you saw a lot of his fights differently at the weight, but i thought he beat Trinidad, got beat by Quartey, didn;t beat a past it Whittaker, and he clearly lost to Mosley. I donlt think he;d have the skill to beat any true top level welter in history, and that's what this thread is. I don't think he'd beat Armstrong, who he outsizes for example. I reckon he wouldn't beat Napoles either, that would look like Oscar-Whittaker but with the shortcomings of Oscar being more pronounced and therefore resulting in him not getting a decision.

Just my opinion, i'm not authority or anything, you're entitled to pick who you want in your team, i was really just trying to help!

 

Five best welterweights ever, is a misnomer...
Besides Ray Robinson, you ommitted possibly the best welterweight in Jack Britton..
In over 350 fights , the great boxer Jack Britton was kod ONCE.and that in his second fight...He fought everyone and everywhere, and to exclude him isnot rational...Tell me fans, which fighter in your question ,aside from Ray Robinson ,had the boxing skills, the stamina and durability to fight 350 bouts without being kod,aside from his second bout...
The answer is none....Put him in the equation...

 

This

 

Why tho? Tony Ayala at 14yo (supposedly) smashed Pipino.

 

McGrain you rank him #2 with no footage..Is that also a leap of faith ?
We have no film of UNO#1,Harry Greb, but we know of his amazing record and great fighters he had beaten...
So too with Jack Britton...His record is amazing.Britton fought everyone in over 350 fights ,and was only stopped once in his SECOND bout..He was 37 years old when he lost his WW title to the absolute peak Mickey Walker in 1922, in fifteen rounds...He was rated over Ray Robinson by Nat Fleischer and other experts who saw them both fight...Ray Leonard as great as he was had SIX times less fights ,and was a shell of himself when he retired...Jack Britton was great, and he should be remembered today...

 

Oscar's 12th round against Quartey won the fight for him. I had it 114-113 Oscar. I also had Oscar beating Whitaker 113-111. Oscar outlanded Whitaker in power punches by a 2 to 1 ratio. I just don't think whitaker did enough to win that night. Even though whitaker was past it, he brought one of his better performances that night. Whitaker was # 2 p4p fighter in the world by Ring Magazine when Oscar beat him. Shane Mosley wouldn't have beaten that whitaker, nor would he beat ike quartey. look what happened to shane against Forrest. Shane's whole legacy is based on that one win over oscar, a great win, but it was very close fight. I had shane 115-113. We all know Oscar won the 2nd fight on any fair card, which should be declared a NC anyway because shane is a cheating steroid user. Without Oscar, Shane is just another good fighter. It's because of Oscar that shane is considered 'great'. Oscar never needed Shane to make him a great fighter.

Oscar fought the best competition in the past 20 years, and no one(outside of pacman when oscar was finished) had an easy time with him. Every decision he lost was a close one. No one ever outboxed him clearly. The same cannot be said of shane mosley, ike quartey, and felix trinidad.

Oscar might not have beaten any greats, but I can assure you he would have given them very competitive fights. each and every one of them.

Skill? Oscar has plenty of it. I would say Oscar is top 20 material, just not top 10.