ATG Who Ranks Higher: Lennox Lewis Or Oscar De La Hoya

It should be Oscar , as he would never have been knocked out by the quality of a Rahman or been outjabbed by a Bruno level.

But Oscar lost all of his biggest fights , losing twice to Mosley is for me the hardest.

 

I really think Oscar's resume is getting discounted here.

Lennox has 4 fewer losses, and calculating exactly what Oscar won and lost can get a bit tricky, but the level of competition isn't that close.

It's not that Lennox's level of comp was that bad; it's that Oscar's was that good. I don't blame Lennox for Bowe not happening or Holyfield and Tyson being past their best; but it's not fair to give him the credit for fighting them at their peak like Oscar routinely did.

 

Second Mosley fight was a joke. Oscar got robbed twice there- on the cards, and when it came out that Mosley was on PED's and the decision wasn't changed.

 

Felix Sturm rakes higher than the hype job Oscar by any serious followers of the sport.

:deal

 

Now that's just plain hating.

 

When did Lewis beat Schulz, Wladimir, Foreman and Bowe etc???

 

This boxrec'er doesn't realise Sturm dominated Oscar.

 

Mosley clearly hands down won the first one, he outjabbed Oscar for Fcuks sake, second Oscar won clearly, he used his jab in the second fight, he also did beat trinidad, but lets not forget he got schooled vs Strum, he won like 3 rounds in that fight, and he hardly gave floyd a good fight, Oscar won like 2 rounds down to his own doings and he won couple of more on my cards when mayweather just sat on the robes laughing ass off.

Lewis's win over Holyfield and Vitali is better than anything on Oscars resume

 

I seem to recall DLH getting a gift decision of his own against Sweet P.

 

Since when is Lummox considered an ATG :blood

 

Bruno had an excellent jab, Oscar got outjabbed by Mosley in the first fight, and Mosley has a mediocer jab, Mosleys jab is only a range finder whilst oscars is a piston jab, and he still got outjabbed and outboxed in the first fight, won like 1/2 rounds in the second half of that fight. Sure Mosley>>Bruno, but not when it comes to the jab.

 

I think that may be your downfall. You have to score each round individually rather than a fight overall.
If someone said to me who do you feel won, then yes I would probably say Mayweather, but in scoring round at a time had it even and dont forget it was a SD atsch

 

It's a close one...I'll go with Oscar.

 

Lewis, rather easily for me. He completely dominated his divison, avenged all of his losses, and even when he was faded, he was able to beat a prime Vitali. I rank him as the third best heavyweight behind Ali and Louis.

Oscar was a good fighter, but he's overrated grossly by some. Chavez was faded and wasn't any more notable of a win than the Tyson that Lewis beat. He didn't deserve the nod against Whitaker and lost to Mosley the first fight. He deserved to win the second fight, but it wasn't nearly as big of a robbery as people make it out to be. The Trinidad decision was horrible, but Oscar got a lot of gifts that he didn't deserve as well.

 

Oscar is one of those boxers who, depending on how you score his fights, either has a great record or a subpar record. He, more than any other boxer I've seen, causes people to break from official records to maintain their own sub-records and base all of their arguments about him on these sub-records.

"Of course Oscar wasn't that good. He lost to Whitaker (don't care what the judges say), Sturm, Quartey (don't care what the judges say), Trinidad, Mosley TWICE, Mayweather, Hopkins, Pacquiao"

"Of course Oscar is one of the GOATS. He beat Whitaker, Sturm, Quartey, Mosley TWICE (don't care what the judges say), Mayweather (don't care what the judges say), and Trinidad (don't care what the judges say)"

And, of course, if two people can't even agree on a fighter's record, then they're certainly not going to agree on how to weigh it when evaluating that fighter's career.