Better Legacy: De La Hoya or Mayweather?

Mayweather beat guys who were top p4p fighters/in their prime at the time he fought them. Corrales, Castillo, Marquez, Hatton were all top p4p and in their prime. Even Oscar, though not in his prime, was a top p4p fighter. Besides him, the only 'past prime' fighters amidst those you listed for Floyd were Hernandez and Gatti.

Which of the guys on Oscars list were top p4p fighters/in their prime at the time he fought them? Quartey was in his prime but he a top p4p fighter. Vargas was never the same after Trinidad and many others on that list were old men by the time they fought Oscar. Oscar acknowledged himself that he needed that defining victory in his career, which drove him to take on the likes of Shane, Floyd and Pac.

Oscar has a good resume, but the best opposition on his resume are his losses. You can't just count wins, the fact that Oscar has lost to each of the best fighters on his resume and Floyd has never lost considering a formidable resume of his own is a factor.

 

You can argue that most of DLHs best wins were over guys who were past it, but lets look at the 3 you listed as MAYs biggest wins. Corrales was probably his best victory, awesome performance. Corrales had just been convicted though and was heading to Prison shortly after the fight (slight distraction). Hattons best weight was at 140, May brought him up to 147. And Marquez, not only was he fighting way above his best weight, Floyd didn't even make the weight.

 

Lets be serious here, distractions or no distractions and weight aside, the results would have been EXACTLY the same.

I've heard this excuse for Corrales and frankly its pretty lame. That's like saying Mayweather's problems with the IRS provided Marquez with a slight advantage. Distractions happen/life happens to fighters. Whose to say if you don't dig deep enough on each of Oscar's opponents you wouldn't find that some of them had similar distractions?

The weight excuse with Hatton doesn't fly too well either. Guys move up in weight all the time. To excuse them when they lose is BS. Hatton's best success was at 140 because he fought all his career fights at that class, save 1 prior fight at welterweight. So how can we so quickly surmise he couldn't have been an effective welterweight?

Regarding Marquez, Floyd would have beaten him at any weight. Skills win fights, not size.

Difference is between the two is this... if Oscar fought, Chavez, Whitaker and Camacho in their primes, there would have been a huge difference. Especially in the case of Whitaker, where even the withering skills of Pernell at the time were enough to give Oscar all he could handle and even win the fight in the eyes of many.

Edit: By the way, if you're gonna put Leija and Molina on Oscars list, don't forget to put Jesus Chavez(35-1) and Philip Ndou(31-1) on Floyd's.

 

I agree in part with what you're saying. This question about legacy is subjective, so opinions play an important role. Looking at the list of wins, and willingness to take risks are things I weigh heavily in this process. This leads me to place DLH slightly ahead. However, like I said, Floyd is not finished yet so things can change.

When you start throwing out "if" factors, where does it end? You can say "His wins were against past prime fighters" Now the door is open to point out flaws with the other guys wins. "Well his wins were too" or "he was sick for that fight" or whatever the case be.

To make this subjective process as objective as possible, you have to look at what's recorded on paper. For now we can agree to disagree, and maybe things will change when Foyd beats Shane and Pac.

 

Money May!

Schoolin' dopes, jumpin' ropes, settin' scopes and dashin' hopes!

Oscar de la hoya is fixin' fights, wearin' tights, cruisin gay sites and givin' pillows bites.

 

yo thread starter, it is a simple question but then again it isn't. I think De La Hoya has a better legacy in boxing, because he took on everybody, made non-heavyweight fights into events, he helped make mayweather and pacman into the stars they are today (so I voted for odlh)...but, as far as all time great status I got mayweather around 50 and de la hoya in the 80's or 90's, because he did lose most of his big fights and all of his big fights against other atg's in their primes.

 

Yes I agree ...Once again Clearly Oscar takes this one

 

No, he didn't. ODLH won that fight fair and square with a far superior work ethic. It was close, you can disagree with the decision if you want, but to act like it was some kind of robbery is just bull**** and you know it.

Also, when you say ODLH lost to Trinidad and Mosley, make sure you say "lost" instead of lost, because the Tito fight WAS an outright robbery, and ODLH has a much better case to make in the Mosley fight than Pernell does v. Oscar.

 

The gift decision has no relevance to his legacy. He was in the worst shape of his career fighting at a weight he shouldn't have been at. Sturm beat him, yes, but who cares, the fight shouldn';t have ever happened. And oscar coming in so far out of shape was brutal - he deserved to lose

 

No.

Some logic missing there, Luke.

I said: "Winning's got to count for something."

That doesn't mean it counts for everything.

Legacy is a combination of resume (who you've fought) and wins. How close the losses were could also be considered.

I'm a fan of Oscar and definitely NOT a fan of Floyd, but by my reckoning, Floyd has the slightly better legacy as of now.

In fact, he risks his legacy somewhat by continuing to box. Eventually, he will lose and that will be remembered more than his current record.


Roy had an excellent legacy after he beat Tarver. That was the ideal time to stop.

Thirty five years old. Unbeaten (One DQ notwithstanding). Domination of all or nearly all of his opponents. First MWt in a 100 years to win a HW title.

His continued campaigning detracted from his legacy and raised (unfair) questions.


A loss to Pac would dint Mayweather's legacy. Further losses would damge it more severely.



I'm a big fan of Calzaghe and believe him to be an ATG, especially h2h.

However, his resume is not strong enough to push his legacy ahead of either Oscar or Floyd.

 

No.

A loss to Sturm at Mwt, for a man who held titles at 130, 135, 140, 147 and 154, does not negate a clear win over Tito at 147.

Agreed.

He did.

Chavez, Whittaker, Tito (despite scorecards), Vargas, Mosley (again, despite the scorecards), Quartey.

 

Dela Hoya

 

Your talking about a guy that is money in the big fight and a guy who doesnt step up to the plate for the big fight. An a rate fighter and a b rate fighter.

 

Mayweather, Hopkins, Trinidad, Whitaker, and Mosley all have better legacies than DLH