Barney Ross and Oscar De La Hoya - Stylistic Similarities ?

teeto · Nov 18, 2010

TheGreatA said: ↑

De La Hoya had fight-changing power while Ross was always forced to outsmart and outpoint his opponents for 10 or 15 rounds. He went into the fights knowing they would most likely last the distance and that he needed to outbox his opponent in each round to capture a decision. A man who was extremely difficult to outbox, and was never knocked out, is a hard man to beat and Ross did not get beaten but 4 times in his career, and perhaps only once in his true prime (a loss he avenged).

De La Hoya was well-taught, but lacked the creativity of Ross, sometimes pulling out the victory with his power and befuddled at times by clever boxers. Both did use mainly their left hands to dominate opponents.
Click to expand...

GreatA, your posting is so efficient, I can't help but ramble when I'm making serious posts. You lay your point down so well. Great post, I agree fully.

bodhi · Nov 18, 2010

teeto said: ↑

Well Oscar isn't a top echelon operator imo. He is a technician, and to put him in that context he's not sitting at the big table imo. He's not sitting at the kiddy table though, definitelty a great fighter, and he achieved a lot as well. Ross is slightly greater for me, because he has a greater resume, but that's only the way i saw it. I didn't think Oscar beat Quartey, or Whitaker, but I did think he beat Trinidad, which is a great win. I didn't credit him with the Sturm win either, which isn't a bad loss by any means, because that was not his best weight, but what I mean is I'm not giving him that win. Others might, and i won't object, but I personally don't credit guys with wins I didn't think they got. Ross on the other hand, has losses to lesser competition than Oscar does, but not many, and they are hevily outweighed with wins over the some of the best practitioners of the era and some of them are actual atg's. It is close actually.

For some reason though I've always viewed Ross as someone who could definitely compete with the greatest fighters of all time, whereas Oscar I have always went on records as saying would lose to them. But maybe I need to review that, I did give him the win over Trinidad after all. People will bring up Tito's technical deficiencies and say he wasn't atg, but the good outweighs the bad imo and I definitely think he is an atg.
Click to expand...

Sorry but losing in the first two years as a pro to seasoned pros isn´t really a shame. Anywhere near his prime he was beaten once - at best third, depends how you scored the Ross-Canzoneri bouts - against atg(s). And at the end of his career against a guy who is in consideration of the greatest ever. The losses that really count, DLH lost to inferior fighters.

teeto · Nov 18, 2010

bodhi said: ↑

Sorry but losing in the first two years as a pro to seasoned pros isn´t really a shame. Anywhere near his prime he was beaten once - at best third, depends how you scored the Ross-Canzoneri bouts - against atg(s). And at the end of his career against a guy who is in consideration of the greatest ever. The losses that really count, DLH lost to inferior fighters.
Click to expand...

I don'y understand this response Bodhl, i said Ross' good points heavily outweigh the bad (which are hardly worth mentioning as you say).

Unnecessary reply this really.

Mr Butt · Nov 18, 2010

teeto said: ↑

Well Oscar isn't a top echelon operator imo. He is a technician, and to put him in that context he's not sitting at the big table imo. He's not sitting at the kiddy table though, definitelty a great fighter, and he achieved a lot as well. Ross is slightly greater for me, because he has a greater resume, but that's only the way i saw it. I didn't think Oscar beat Quartey, or Whitaker, but I did think he beat Trinidad, which is a great win. I didn't credit him with the Sturm win either, which isn't a bad loss by any means, because that was not his best weight, but what I mean is I'm not giving him that win. Others might, and i won't object, but I personally don't credit guys with wins I didn't think they got. Ross on the other hand, has losses to lesser competition than Oscar does, but not many, and they are hevily outweighed with wins over the some of the best practitioners of the era and some of them are actual atg's. It is close actually.

For some reason though I've always viewed Ross as someone who could definitely compete with the greatest fighters of all time, whereas Oscar I have always went on records as saying would lose to them. But maybe I need to review that, I did give him the win over Trinidad after all. People will bring up Tito's technical deficiencies and say he wasn't atg, but the good outweighs the bad imo and I definitely think he is an atg.
Click to expand...

i totally agree with you on the trinidad fight and also the others you mentioned and on your views on ross

bodhi · Nov 18, 2010

teeto said: ↑

I don'y understand this response Bodhl, i said Ross' good points heavily outweigh the bad (which are hardly worth mentioning as you say).

Unnecessary reply this really.
Click to expand...

I was solyly talking about Ross´losses. Sorry but his first two losses aren´t of any significance at all.

Log in or Sign up

Barney Ross and Oscar De La Hoya - Stylistic Similarities ?

teeto Obsessed with Boxing banned

bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

teeto Obsessed with Boxing banned

Mr Butt Boxing Junkie Full Member

bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

Log in or Sign up

Forums

Barney Ross and Oscar De La Hoya - Stylistic Similarities ?

teeto Obsessed with Boxing banned

bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

teeto Obsessed with Boxing banned

Mr Butt Boxing Junkie Full Member

bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member