Ike Quartey - One Of The Best Of His Generation?

The only way I agree with your statement is the common notion that a challenger usually doesn't take a champion's title by getting knocked down in the last round. In this fight though, it shouldn't have mattered because Delahoya didn't win enough rounds, even if the 12th was scored a 10-7 round for him.

I still think Quartey beat Delahoya clearly and I scored the fight 115 - 112 for Quartey. A draw would have been the more reasonable decision in this fight but mathematically, there's no way Quartey lost more than 4 rounds total. I distinctively remember Larry Merchant in the broadcast saying that Quartey "buckled" Delahoya at the end of the fourth round when they traded shots. In fact, he buckled Delahoya more than once and had him hurt more than he was himself. After both fighters knocked each other down in the 6th round, Quartey dominated the fight with his jab and right hand. The evidence is plainly visable when Delahoya backed up and did nothing after he got knocked down by Quartey.

I don't know how anyone can forget the 9th round shot that Quartey landed against Delahoya that nearly turned his head around completely. That was one of the hardest and cleanest punches that I've seen Delahoya take in the history of his career. Another quote I clearly remember is from Jim Lampley. "Going into the last three rounds, Oscar Delahoya is in trouble." Yeah Delahoya might've came back in the 10th and won the round barely, but Ike controlled both the 10th and 11th with his jab and right hand. Delahoya threw very little in return. As for the 12th, give credit to Mitch Halpern because he was right on the action even though Quartey was close to being stopped, but still threw back.

Ike Quartey is won of the very best of his generation and he's been on the short end of the stick when it comes to decisions. The Forrest decision was much, much worse than the Delahoya decision. The only difference between Delahoya's fights with Quartey, Whitaker, Sturm and Mayweather is the fact that the judges weren't swayed by the crowd noise against Mayweather and they finally paid attention to the punches landed. As far as I'm concerned, Delahoya got big time gifts from the judges in all the above fights except for Mayweather, which he clearly lost.

 

Ike was in my opinion one of the best Welters of his generation. I thought he won the DLH fight,although it was close, and i wish he had got to fight Tito.

Also he had one of the greatest jabs boxing has ever seen, a real ram rod.

 

DAMN good post bro.:good

 

Solid post Quartey clearly outboxed Oscar, 1 of the judges felt so ashamed of their card they gave OScar-Tito to Tito

 

excellant fighter...watch him on youtube hitting the mitts. jab is unreal.

 

I had Whitaker beating De La hoya 114-112 and as I said generally had Ike up a few points over DLH. Both were competitive and close fights. However, Ike was still in his prime whatever his inactivity problems were, where as Pea was clearly past his own. Apart from that, Whitaker's two wins over McGirt rank higher than anything On Quartey's resume as well as the Chavez performance.

All-time I rank the 90's welters
#1. Trinidad
#2. Whitaker
#3. De La Hoya
#4. Quartey

De La Hoya lossed on my cards to both Pea and Ike, but beat Trinidad. I also have to give him some credit for being the only one to fight the other 3.

 

Yes, up until the 9th round. De La Hoya was the fighter taking chances during the last three rounds. And his power punches were getting home during the championship rounds. Quartey dropped down a couple of gears and De La Hoya gained momentum.

Quartey clearly dominated from after the 6th round to the 9th. That was the only part of the fight where either of them won rounds clearly beyond any dispute whatsoever.

Here is my take on De La Hoya Quartey.

During the first 5 rounds, I can see 3-2 in favour of either fighter. De La Hoya IMO won at least two of the first 5 rounds, possibly 3. The 6th round is debatable. Both knocked each other down, but Quartey probably edged the rest of the round. 7,8,9, were all Quratey. And Quartey only won one of the last three, as one of them was tight. All of the last three could have went to De La Hoya, who clearly won the 12th, 10-8.

There was only a three rounds in a row patch in the fight where either fighter truely dominated convincingly, 7, 8, 9, all for Quratey.

 

With Tito losing to DLH, what does his welter resume really have going for it to have him placed at no.1?

 

Who's welterweight resume is superior?

Trinidad has Whitaker (more or less shot, but while inactive it was only a year or so since arguably beating DLH and Trinidad was dominant), Carr, Blocker, Campas, Camacho (also far from his prime), 1st kayo of Troy Waters (past his absolute best), 16 defenses, officialy unbeaten (Had DLH winning 7-5 on rounds).

DLH has the win in my mind over Trinidad, but losses to a clearly faded Whitaker and also Quartey. Apart from that he has an even further past his best Camacho, a basically shot Chavez, Rivera, Carr, and Kamau, plus the close but very clear loss to Mosley.

Whitaker has McGirt twice, A not peak but more prime Chavez, Hurtado, Rivera, and the decision in my mind over DLH, plus the one-sided loss to Trinidad.

Quartey has the decision in my mind over DLH, a close win over Carr, Vince Phillips, the draw with Lopez, and not much else.

Trinidad had the best career at 147lbs of the 4.

 

The only rounds Quartey dominated and they happened to be a three round winning streak, rounds 7, 8, 9. He certainly never dominated any of the early rounds. The first five rounds were all reasonably close. As I said, 3-2 either way. De La Hoya without question was the boss after the 9th round. He took at least two of the last three rounds, possibly all three. No way did Quartey dominate this fight to the extent "No way Quartey lost more than 4 rounds total" Utter nonsense. You make it sound as if he dominated rounds easily, when he clearly never.

Quartey dominated three rounds beyond dispute, 7, 8, 9.

 

Wins over Blocker, Carr, Campas and shot versions of Camacho and Whitaker just aren't anywhere near as good as wins over peak DLH, near peak Chavez and near peak McGirt. I don't even need to rifle off the other nondescript wins Whitaker had at the weight. It's clearly more impressive than what Tito has to his resume. DLH, Chavez and McGirt were all top 5 p4p in the sport when Whitaker beat them. Nuff said.

The only way Tito can be construed as having a better resume is if you go by his official record, or if you actually think he beat DLH, neither of which, it appears, you are considering.