Oscar 2 - Great opponents 5

He beat Trinidad and Mosley, so his record's unfairly tarnished.

 

Ya, and he lost to Whitaker and Sturm so lets call it even.

 

I have said it on here before, boxers should get very little credit for losing ? even to an ATG, De La Hoya is not a top 50 ATG possibly not top 100 as the thread starter stats show, if you only win 28% of your fights against HOF boxers by definition you are not an ATG.
People need to realise that fighting and losing to a good boxer does not give you a good resume, fighting and beating a good boxer gives you a good resume, i could get in the ring with Pacman, Mayweather and Calzaghe lose inside 30 seconds every time and claim to have a great resume ?

 

I just read an article from yesterday's New York Daily News saying that because Shane is on record, apparently, saying he took EPO (and the steroid THG, I think) in at least one of the ODLH fights (2003) that ODLH may be able to try to get that decision overturned. Here's the piece:

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/m...oscar_de_la_hoya_could_sue_to_ko_sugar_s.html

Oscar should have gotten the decision against Trinidad as well.

I do understand what you're saying, though. I had this discussion last night with a friend, the "Oscar vs great opponents" talk. There does seem to be a bit of disappointment as this goes.

However, when you think the guy has won belts at 6 weight classes, has a gold medal and is unbelievably rich and pretty much ran the sport at least until last night, it gives you a different perspective. Oscar's done pretty much everything he can do, and even if he wasn't that one step higher on the chain as a fighter his career and legacy seem to be very secure.

 

No he didn't, the way people us that fight as a rebuttle for the Trinidad robbery is pathetic.

He lost to Sturm though.

 

Quartey was a clear robbery for me. Oscar did his best to survive, waited the last rd to launch an attack knowing Ike had done all the work in the precedent rds and was weary.

Then of course he refuses a rematch.
Whittaker beat him.
Mosley beat him clearly the first time, closer the second time.

I agree though he outboxed Trinidad. But the manner in which he unabashely ran the last few rds as to not engage was disgusting and should have cost him points.

His best victory, Vargas, came after Trinidad ruined his chin.

Sturm, Mayorga were brought in to lose.

 

This is a low blow after the man lost like that.He is shot,he ain't gonna fight anymore but he was a great fighter.

 

Whitaker did not beat Hoya - it was close, but Hoya edged it.

Lampley felt Hoya schooled Whitaker, you could tell with the commentary, but I felt it was close.

 

You realise hitting air and looking like a clown does not win you a fight.

Whitaker did the effective work in that fight, despite being on his last legs. God knows how bad it would be prime for prime.

 

To be a great fighter you need to beat great fighters; which ones did he beat ?

 

Nonesonse. Whittaker was a great fighter greater than Oscar but he did not win that fight, Oscar did the work. You don't get extra points for being really slick.

 

This is what made last night so shocking to me. It wasn't just that the supposed 'comic relief' side of the 'circus fight' was winning (Pac), but he totally dominated in a way that reduced ODLH to virtual non-participant.

It's one thing to have beaten a competitive DLH as did PBF, but what Pac did last night was one of the most amazing things I've ever seen in the sport.

Speed doesn't just kill. It humiliates, eliminates competitiveness and ends careers.

 

It's not about being slick, its about doing the better more effective work. Oscar might have been walking forward, but it wasn't exactly a case of output vs quality, Whitaker was fairly active in there. Hoya looked stupid missing all the time like that.

Either way, there are enough doubts over a few decisins in Hoya's favour for us to be worried about the ones he didn't get. His record looks about like it should do.