DLH - Trinidad... "Whos is better all time" ?

I don't see how anyone can make a serious case for Trinidad being ranked above Oscar all time.

 

Julio Ceasar Chavez
Ike Quartey
Pernell Whitaker (while he was still in the top pd 4 pd and Champion) Tito beat him after Whitaker came out of crack rehab, and the fight was a joke)
Arturo Gatti
Javier Castillo
Rafael Ruelas
Jesse James Leija
Felix Sturm
Miguel Angel Gonzalez
Genaro Hernandez
John John Molina
Jorge Paez


That is just to rattle off some guys that Oscar beat, that Tito didn't.


Now let's see your list of Champions that Tito beat, that Oscar didn't beat. I will sit here and laugh at the list that you bring back.

 

How exactly did Trinidad have better accomplishments?

 

Oscar fought the best of the best 5 times, the truly elite of his generation.
Mosley twice, Trinidad, Hopkins and Mayweather. And he lost them all!!
You have to go with Trinidad.

 

Tru

 

In all honesty they are about even in my opinion......

If I had to choose one over the other I would go with Trinidad just based on pure excitement and action. Something about Tito just made you get your popcorn and watch him go at it. I never felt that way about Hoya he always rubbed me the wrong way he seemed to always be more of a business man than he was a fighter though the dude was supremely talented. I never dugg his ora as it seemed fabricated. It seemed like DLH always knew win, lose or draw that he would be a top money getter. I also felt he shy'd away from true combat against Tito and decided to utilize the easy way out and got screwed at the end but rightfully so, some call it a boxing clinic others see it as glorified sparring session that revealed his true intentions as a business boxer in a world of warriors. Don't get me wrong DLH has shown warrior traits but it always seemed to happen at such conveinent points in his career. Technically I thought he lost against Swea Pea, Ike, Strum he's fight with Bhop was less than stellar and has always smelled a bit unpleasent in my opinion. I guess you can simply say I liked Tito because he was simple guy with a warrior heart and an infectious ora that pulled you in without asking while DLH seemed to want approval from everyone instead of just being.

Props to both fighters for keeping the sport alive and kicking.:smoke

 

No, they are only considered Oscar's "biggest fights" because he lost them. Had Oscar lost to Whitaker or Chavez, then people would consider those his "biggest fights". If Oscar would have lost to Quartey, Vargas, Hernandez, Gonzalez, Ruales, ect., they would consider those his "biggest fights". Had Oscar beat Mosley, then people would hardly talk about it. Mosley wouldn't be considered the same way that he is today, still basically living off of his first win over Oscar. Also, pretending like Tito actually beat Oscar is laughable.

Oscar simply has so many great wins, that people began to define him by his losses.

 

I also find in laughable when fans actually think Oscar beat Tito. Its an intresting way to evaulate a fight, Tito never backed away from Oscar yet Oscar seemed to land and retreat to perfection. It was not the intimate battle we all expected and it seemed Tito was in it more for the bravado and DLH was in it to get points and dance his way to a score card victory it was the first time I ever saw him use that strategey and the last time I saw him use that strategy. Again you can make arguements for both men but one guy captured a fan base of hardcore fighters while the other seemed to work hard enought to get the nodd from all people even little school girls by putting out music albums that without his fame would have never even sold one record.

 

0
So, because Oscar boxed Tito's ears off, bloodied his face, he doesn't deeserve the win? Because he gave the last two rounds away?

Tell me what rounds you scored for Trinidad, that would be fun.

 

Here is the 9th round of Oscar vs Tito. Explain to me how an unbiased person can give that round to Tito. Oscar did more in the first minute of the round, than Tito did the entire round, then Oscar closed the round out too. Was it Tito following Oscar around, missing wild shots that won it for you?

[YT]w4uCyVvbH3g[/YT]

 

Here is the 5th round at the begining of this video, I would also love to know how that can be scored for Tito.
[YT]z4HWREj2If0[/YT]

 

7th round at the begining of this. I also don't see that being Tito's round. You have to GIVE Tito those rounds for him to win them. Because he didn't do it in the ring.
[YT]46t1L_U3mTs[/YT]

 

these pathetic haters cant even put on credible arguments atsch

 

You look at these videos and explain how u can give them to Oscar!
The premise of your question/command/debate/tactic supposes that u are the only one who watched this fight properly already and that u know better how to judge a fight than people who disagree with you. So no one who values their time will debate this issue with you. Please be aware it only confirms your stance, not the outcome of the fight. That was rightly decided by the judges.

 

How can you score those rounds for Oscar?

Well, here are the 4 catagories of scoring used by the judges.

Clean Effective Punching- Oscar obviously took this by a mile. Oscar landed the only clean effective punches in those rounds. He also landed quite a few, as well as great combinations. OSCAR

Effective Aggressiveness- Nobody wins that. Oscar wasn't fighting overly aggressive, and Tito's aggression was ineffective. DRAW

Defense- Oscar was making Tito look like an amateur missing by a mile on those winging power shots. Tito wasn't even close to being as defensively effecient as Oscar was. OSCAR

Ring Generalship- Oscar made Tito follow him around, and put him into every position that he wanted him to. Made Tito lead, and would counter, or he would move, stop, move and then hit Tito as Tito was trying to reset his position. The fight was fought on Oscar's terms, and he won the ring gerneralship catagory by a mile. OSCAR

Good enough?