Cesar Chavez - Was He Really Shot...

He lost to Tszyu in 2000 for Christ's sake, he was as shot as could be.

He was pretty much shot against DLH as well, nowhere near the force he was in the late 80's and early 90's anyway.

 

Where was he ranked P4P when De La Hoya beat him the first time?

 

Chavez was nowhere near shot when he fought oscar in 96, this was a great win for Oscar.

 

He was a few years past his absolute best at the time of the De La Hoya fight, by the time he faced Tszyu he was pretty much shot to pieces. Ocsars win definitely holds more water as he faced at least a good version which at least had a bit left.

 

We all know you're an Oscar fan, but get real. He was past his prime by the Randall fights(and it pretty much started with the Whitaker bout, when he was already fading and moved up in weight for that one fight).

Chavez was at his very best in the late 80's, but started to fade prior to the mid-90's when he lost to guys like Randall and Oscar, etc. He may not have been totally shot as he was against Tszyu, but he was far past his prime.

 

After his fight Vs Tszyu, Chávez was pretty ashamed of himself.

 

He wasnt at his best when he fought Oscar, he can be compared to the fighters of old who it can be said were past their best at similar ages, due to the amount of fights he had, it aint like now. Thought everyone knew this.

But against Tszyu, he was shot.

 

He was definitely past his prime by the first Oscar fight and outright shot against Tszyu. However, even in the first Oscar fight, he came into the ring with a pre-existing cut so blood was bound to **** everywhere if he got hit on the right spot, which he did. Oscar did look fantastic that night, but the fight was half over before it even started and so the credit DLH gets for it in my book is diminished.

IMO, DLH would have beat that Chavez even without the cut, but no way would it have been the one sided massacre it turned out to be. I'm guessing DLH would have won 8-4 or 7-5 if the cut wasn't there.

 

more like 10-2. IMO oscar would have always beaten chavez prime or no prime. Oscar was the best bure poxer of that era, amazing boxing skills from a technical standpoint. His jab was phenominal and he threw combinations in bunches like no other.


Oscar fought EVERYBODY, he avoided no one. He should aways get credit for that, he had no fear.

 

hell yes he was shot even when he fought Whitaker he was already past his best.

 

You gotta be kidding me.

 

Why would he be kidding? Oscar's combinations had turned Julio's face to ribbons in that 4th round. He was getting murdered!

I think the two Randall fights took the life force out of Chavez and he was hanging on for what he could get by that time.

But even so, I don't believe Julio could ever beat the Oscar of 1996. Too fast and too damaging a puncher for him. Flatfooted Julio would have no choice but to move in on Oscar and try muscling him but this approach would also be his downfall as Oscar's rapid combinations would find their mark. Julio, who did not have the biggest heart, would eventually be resigned to defeat heading into the later rounds and probably lose by a sizable margin. This is how Julio would look by round 12 :!:

 

I was talking more about him calling Oscar the best pure boxer of the era.

And at 140, prime for prime, it's a close call. At 135 I'd favor Chavez.

 

Oscar was a decent boxer but just a bit above average. I think what made him a threat was the damaging blows he could unleash in close-hooks, uppercuts in tandem. Chavez would have been dead meat trying to close in.