A huge diffeence between Oscar and Leonard

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by teeto, Sep 2, 2008.


Page 4 of 5
  1. teeto

    teeto Obsessed with Boxing banned

    28,075
    54
    Oct 15, 2007
    Thanks Loewe, yeah, the thread is more about Oscar's h2h ability and how good he actually was in the ring rather than his greatness, maybe you're right and im just trying to express the obvious!!

    I can see you've fit right in here yourself, very knowledgeable on the history of the sport,
     
    teeto, Sep 3, 2008
    teeto, Sep 3, 2008
    #46
  2. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005

    beautiful shot of oscars combos at his best!


    people forget just how devastating oscar was at 135lb, he was so much naturally bigger his power was devastating at the weight class. Top undefeated lightweights of the era got brutally knocked out by him. he did some impressive work at 135lb.
     
    SuzieQ49, Sep 3, 2008
    SuzieQ49, Sep 3, 2008
    #47
  3. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    shane moseley's is vernon forrest's *****, whats your point?



    yet u think roided up cheater shane moseley is a great fighter? not only did moseley take roids, he accomplished nowhere near the amount oscar did his whole career.

    oscar was a clear great fighter.....i have 3 questions for you

    1. What fighter of this generation fought the competition oscar de la hoya did? is it fair to say oscar legitemitley made it a point of fighting the best of his era?

    2. What 1990s fighter had better "pure technical" boxing skills than oscars? i dont think there are any

    3. Name me a fighter of this generation that won title from 130 all the way up to 160!!!




    umm.......Felix Trinidad? a great fighter undefeated at his peak, oscar won at least 7 or 8 of the first 9 rounds on any sane persons card. it was a boxing lesson at its finest.

    how bout ur boy shane moseley? the roided up juice freak who got badly outboxed in the rematch, a clear decision for oscar de la hoya. oscar outlanded him by more than 100 punches and won 7 clear rounds at the very least. this fight should be changed to a NC.

    also fernando vargas, who was young and hungry at the time(had beaten quartey and winky) and also another fighter on STEROIDS....oscar demolished him.


    I also thought the 12th round vs quartey won him the fight in my eyes, i had oscar beating quartey by 1 point. take note quartey was a undefeated great fighter and champion, it was oscars 12th round that took the 0 away from quarteys record.



    you never had pea beating him either......dont forget that. take note sweet pea was the # 1 p4p at the time, and it was OSCAR who knocked him off the leaderboard.



    im confused...like who? if your talking about his lightweight career, take note oscar made the weight limit of 135lb.....weight cutting is part of the game. use it to ur advantage.

    he didnt flurry, he threw elegant accurate free flowing combinations. I have yet to see a better combination puncher this decade at 147lb than oscar was in his prime.


    you mean his fast combos and underated body attack at 135-147lb are overated?

    thats fine, i pick him over a few elites. take note unlike trinidad, moseley, quartey oscar was NEVER dominated in a fight.....all of his losses came to top fighters in very close decisions......he never got shutout the way tito did vs winky, or embarrased and twice blown out by vernon forrest the way moseley was. even at 35 years old far past his prime he gave a peak # 1 p4p floyd mayweather his closest toughest fight.


    when u look at the guys of his era and go by career accomplishments you have to rank them like this

    1. oscar

    the rest

    trinidad
    quartey
    moseley
     
    SuzieQ49, Sep 3, 2008
    SuzieQ49, Sep 3, 2008
    #48
  4. teeto

    teeto Obsessed with Boxing banned

    28,075
    54
    Oct 15, 2007
    I knew you'd turn up at some point! Who said Mosley was great?

    He showed great footwork against Trinidad, but he couldnt convince everyone could he? Nowive already given him credit for taking on the best opposition of his time, so i dont know what else you want from me there. Taking them on doesnt make you a great fighter, it means you got balls. When you say you take him over some elite welters, i'd like to see who, im talikng history's finest here, straight up. Come on, he got his face tattooed by Ike's jab, was schooled at times by Pea, the only thing you could give him rounds on, was landing harder punches, nothin else, should be expected to be able to too, Oscar being a puncher and one of the best of the era fighting a past prime lightweight great. Moseley beat him and that is what happened when someone could match him for spped and relentlessness, and size.

    I remember a while back we were talking about Napoles-DeLaHoya, and someone said (cant remember who) Oscar flurried, Napoles threw combos, sums up my argument on his offense on the inside really. If you really think Oscar can live with a true great inside/pressure man at 147 you're lying to yourself and you knw it.

    When the playing field is levelled at the very highest level, Oscar comes up shprt in MOST, almost every situation imo, im talking fantasy matchups here, as i have been from the beginning, im not altering my debate here. Like i said, i thought Pea beat him by a point if it wasnt for a deduction i thought was wrong, so i officially had it a draw, either way, Oscar (who this debate is about) couldnt get it for me, i thought he beat Tito who can have trouble with someone who has top movement laterally, which Oscar has, Tito never learned how to cut off the ring, it was a stylistic thing, lets see him do that against welterweight Duran, Robinson, Gavilan, who is his superior absolutely everywhere. Thats all im saying, i pick him over most secnd tier greats, based on a stlye matchup, none above that though, but maybe i could make a one off though, afterall, styles make fights
     
    teeto, Sep 3, 2008
    teeto, Sep 3, 2008
    #49
  5. Robbi

    Robbi Marvelous Full Member

    15,221
    173
    Jul 23, 2004
    Whitaker was past his prime and a former lightweight. But when De La Hoya fought Whitaker the size difference was non-existent. Pea stands at 5' 6" and De La Hoya at 5' 10" 1/2. Thats the only area where De La Hoya was bigger, height. And De La Hoya never moved up in weight to fight Whitaker due to weight making difficulties at 140lbs. He moved up because thats where the money was at the time. Whitaker actually had the advantage over De La Hoya at welterweight because he had previously fought naturally larger fighters. Rivera twice and Vasquez as well at jr middleweight.

    If you look at De La Hoya's upperbody against Whitaker then compare it to how it looked against Kamau in his next fight at welterweight you'll see a difference. He was broader across the shoulders against Kamau. Thicker set around the waist. Steward mentioned that De La Hoya was still a natural 140lb fighter when he took over as trainer. He was more then likely lifting weights under Steward.
     
    Robbi, Sep 3, 2008
    Robbi, Sep 3, 2008
    #50
  6. redrooster

    redrooster Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,635
    332
    Jan 29, 2005
    Dela Hoya would get into the ring with anyone at any time and anywhere whereas Ray needed several years to think about it. 3 years just to accept a rematch with Hagler :lol:
     
    redrooster, Sep 3, 2008
    redrooster, Sep 3, 2008
    #51
  7. teeto

    teeto Obsessed with Boxing banned

    28,075
    54
    Oct 15, 2007
    The piint i was making was that Oscar was a natural welterweight and a puncher, Sweet Pea was a natural lightweight and though his power is underrated, he wasnt a puncher. ,
     
    teeto, Sep 3, 2008
    teeto, Sep 3, 2008
    #52
  8. Caponecartels

    Caponecartels Maritime Lawyer Full Member

    1,903
    5
    Jul 25, 2008
    :thumbsup learning alot from reading this debate..... please continue..... :good
     
    Caponecartels, Sep 3, 2008
    Caponecartels, Sep 3, 2008
    #53
  9. teeto

    teeto Obsessed with Boxing banned

    28,075
    54
    Oct 15, 2007
    Robbi, i never meant that Oscar had a weight advantage in terms of it being an unfair advantage. Oscar's shoulder's are broad i think, he has a bigger frame than Pea, but its irrelevant as both men made the weight and there's no excuses to be made once that has been done. I just meant that in that particular bout i personally only could give Oscar points for landing harder blows than his opponent, and that Oscar was a naturally harder hitter, and that seemed logical he would land harder blows. I thought that at times Pea schooled him though. If i was biased i would have not given Oscar close rounds that i did give him.
     
    teeto, Sep 3, 2008
    teeto, Sep 3, 2008
    #54
  10. Robbi

    Robbi Marvelous Full Member

    15,221
    173
    Jul 23, 2004
    Not when they fought that wasn't the case. De La Hoya as he got older was more comfortable at the higher weights, jr middleweight especially. And De La Hoya wasn't a puncher at welterweight. He had respectable power at the weight.

    Whitaker had four years under his belt at welterweight prior to meeting De La Hoya. He was fighting physically bigger fighters than De La Hoya before they fought regardless of De La Hoya previously being bigger than his opponents at lightweight, etc. While I confess that De La Hoya is naturally bigger than Whitaker, that wasn't really the case when they fought, maybe De La Hoya had the edge slightly. Height can be decieving and make peoples mind up that the taller fighter is naturally bigger, only in height though in some cases.

    It was De La Hoya's first fight at the weight and according to his camp after the fight he could still have made 140lbs easily, thus not being a natural welterweight or grown into the weight.
     
    Robbi, Sep 3, 2008
    Robbi, Sep 3, 2008
    #55
  11. teeto

    teeto Obsessed with Boxing banned

    28,075
    54
    Oct 15, 2007
    You can look in hindsight and say that at welter and above, he could hit, its not like he moved up and his power came along after. He hit harder than Pea, i never said he was a devastating puncher at 147, you actually know the point in making here is that he hit harder than Whitaker, something we could have expected before the fight. I feel that you still are under the impression that im making out he had an unfair advantage over his opponent, its clear thats not my implication.
     
    teeto, Sep 3, 2008
    teeto, Sep 3, 2008
    #56
  12. Robbi

    Robbi Marvelous Full Member

    15,221
    173
    Jul 23, 2004
    You said "Oscar was a natural welterweight and a puncher" I do agree that De La Hoya had more power than Whitaker at the welterweight, but I would not term him a 'puncher' at the weight. Lightweight, yes. Your confusing me with your opening sentence above. Trinidad was a 'puncher' at welterweight and above, De La Hoya wasn't. His power was at it's most lethal in the divisions below welterweight.

    You gave me the impression that De La Hoya had a massive advantage over Whitake because you said he beat a former lightweight. However, I countered that by explaining that De La Hoya wasn't much bigger at all when they fought as he was still a natural 140lb'er. And Whitaker had fought at the weight for four years and he had been in with physically more imposing fighters.
     
    Robbi, Sep 3, 2008
    Robbi, Sep 3, 2008
    #57
  13. teeto

    teeto Obsessed with Boxing banned

    28,075
    54
    Oct 15, 2007
    I still think that Oscar was more suited to welter even then, his shoulders are big and broad, his frame etc. I would class Trinidad as a devastating puncher, but maybe i used the term puncher lightly, the weight was not the point i was making. I was simply saying that on the point of me only giving Oscar credit for landing harder punches in that bout, that maybe should be a given considering Pea was a natural 135 pounder who want a big puncher even there. Oscar hit hard even at welter, i believe it is not out of order to use hindsight in this one. I never thought Oscar outskilled Pea in any aspect other than that, I was just expressing my opinion that when all is considered, a fighter of the caliber of Pea, in my opinion is superior to De La Hoya. Dont want that being taken out of proportion, just for what it is,
     
    teeto, Sep 3, 2008
    teeto, Sep 3, 2008
    #58
  14. Robbi

    Robbi Marvelous Full Member

    15,221
    173
    Jul 23, 2004
    Teeto. I know your whole post wasn't about the weight. The post I first quoted you on before messaging back and forth, I picked a part out of it out and made a point that while Whitaker was a natural lightweight on De La Hoya's resume as you mentioned, at the time they fought the weight/size difference wasn't much and I expanded on that.

    Thats cool Whitaker has grown on you recently. I read your posts about it on another thread.
     
    Robbi, Sep 3, 2008
    Robbi, Sep 3, 2008
    #59
  15. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    Oscar is one of those guys whose legacy will grow overtime, and I think whitakers will lose steam.
     
    SuzieQ49, Sep 3, 2008
    SuzieQ49, Sep 3, 2008
    #60
Page 4 of 5