Is this version of DeLaHoya even close to prime?

This content is protected

!

 

Exactly this.

 

Oscar was faded, Mayweather was blown up in weight. Neither were at there peak.

The Oscar at 154 that Mayweather fought in those same circumstances still gives WWs moving up in weight to fight him at 154 all they can handle.

 

I'm not a fan of Oscar at all and consider him to have lost a lot of his biggest fights and see him more a as a nearlyman than anything. However, he's a really awful match for Floyd (lots of activity, mixing it up, sneaky puncher) and I think a prime fight with Pacquiao would've been a war he probably would've came out with the win in.

 

He may not have been prime, but he was a heck of a lot better than the welterweight,2 years older, coke addicted Oscar,Pacquiao fought.

He was still the WBC 154 title holder at the time.

 

you saying that oscar was the same vs. mayweather and vs pacquiao just proves you don't know anything, how can he be the same when he was 2 years older and at a weight he hadn't been in years

 

De La Hoya would have beaten Floyd if Sr. was still in his corner.

 

I still give a lot of credit to Mayweather for the fight obviously not a prime a DLH but still a game DLH on his way down, that version would have whooped on Pacquiao especially if PACULA would have fought him at 154 like May did, but PACULA just drained a worse version of DLH and gets no credit for it because at that point DLH was done, not down hill but completely done.

 

No one said Oscar was in his prime against Maywather, everyone knew he was past his prime.

 

No **** it wasn't anywhere close to a prime Oscar. And yet, that's STILL one of Mayweather's top three wins.

A prime Oscar clearly beats Floyd. Mayweather struggled mightily with a very faded, unmotivated Oscar.

The version that fought Pacquiao was a whole hell of a lot worse than even the one Mayweather fought though, so Mayweather gets more credit than Pacquiao for the win over DLH (still, it's a case of triumphing over the name rather than the fighter for both, though it's more pronounced in Pacquiao's case.)

 

By a pound?

People saying that a prime oscar would have won because he would have not faded like he did, Oscar always faded against opponents of mayweathers level not always physically but mentally, he used stand in mid range and used to stop jabbing, just watch the mosley first fight as an example, the guy stopped jabbing and did what he did in floyd fight, which was to follow the opponent and throw very little jabs. He would have stood in mid range with a defence that leaks straight punches and he would have lost to both pac and floyd - both by close decision - Oscar's ring IQ was **** - he was also vulnerable to swelling under left eye (I think left).

Mayweather did not struggle - 116-112 easy and couple of the rounds he lost was because he didn't throw enough punches, he clearly could have because there was no sign of tiring towards the end of the fight. SD was bull****

 

Oscar's a *****...no offense to any real *****'s.

 

I've always thought that Hoya's defence was underrated in the Floyd fight. Despite the fact that he was faded and past his prime, he was surprisingly good at blocking and parrying Floyd's shots. Not only that, but he was able to continually cut off the ring. If he didn't have a stamina issue he may well have won the fight -- he didn't land a lot of good punches, and a lot of his flurries were missing, but he was winning rounds on sheer activity.

 

Floyd fought a faded DLH.
Pac fought a ghost DLH.
Pac would beat the the faded version due to styles, prime oscar vs prime pac, toss up IMO, however styles favour pacman.