Prime Oscar De la hoya vs 2007 Floyd Mayweather 147

Tell that to Floyd's swollen cheek after Oscar. Say that to Pernell's half swollen eye after facing Oscar. Tell that to all the body shots oscar landed on Floyd.
Pernell would UD Floyd any day of the week prime for prime

 

Agree that Floyd fights nothing like Pernell. Pernell is more elusive, dodges more punches. Floyd's defense keeps him in position to fire where Pernell's dodging takes him out of position. Pernell gets hit when he switches from Defense to Offense. Floyd takes less damage in a fight overall.

Either way if you disagree that Floyd's defense is top 5 All Time you're in the minority.

Your definition of plenty and mine are different. A few dozen solid shots in 43 fights is not plenty in my book.

 

Oscar landed 263 punches against Trinidad -- 192 against Pernell -- 122 against Floyd.

 

Well Said

 

Not so coincidentally, the Trinidad fight was probably one of the 3 best performances of De La Hoya's career, the Whitaker fight happened during his prime years (even though it was his first career fight at 147)... and he was badly faded against a nearly prime Floyd. You can't use that fight as an indicator of what Prime De La Hoya was capable of. And by the way, Whitaker was a superior fighter to Floyd.

 

I voted Oscar. He was fierce

 

joe budden avatar, nice!


would be a close fight because of DLH's jab I think.

 

That version of Whitaker was not superior to Floyd. Whitaker was old and past his prime when he fought Oscar.

 

Fair about Trinidad being one of his best fights. I tried to pull compubox around that period and there's not a lot of data. Either way to say that he he could hit Pernell at will is just a misstatement. Oscar was missing 8 and 9 punch combos.

Agree that Oscar fought Floyd way past his prime, but I disagree that Oscar being at his prime automatically means that Floyd is easy to hit. In any fight with Floyd the first question for the opponent is whether they can find him. Also remember Floyd was not in his prime either.

I disagree that Pernell beats Floyd. I think Floyd UDs Pernell rather easily. Their defenses are comparable and Floyd's offense and power are easily superior. Floyd is also one of the most accurate punchers and certainly more accurate than Pernell. But that is disscussion for a different thread.

 

Every fighter gets hit flush at least a few times in every fight. What I'm saying is that the statement "no one hits Floyd flush" is inaccurate, and while you're right in pointing out the stylistic differences with Whitaker, I don't think prime for prime you could say Floyd was defensively better. Which has nothing to do with Floyd's defense all-time, which is obviously up there with the best.

Whitaker running around the ring and using angles to his advantage to give Oscar trouble wouldn't have much to do with Floyd's use of the philly shell against the same jab and combination punches of DLH.

 

I think we mostly agree. Where I differ is that I see Floyd taking fewer clean, effective punches than any other fighter. In his last four fights, the truly clean effective punches can be counted on one hand, Cotto had most of them and they were mostly jabs. The total number of punches he gets hit with on average (off the top of my head) in the 130 range Other fighters get hit 200+ times in a night. His +/- is well documented.

I don't know exactly where I stand on whether Whitaker or Mayweather are better defensively because I think Whitaker at his prime could make anyone miss as long as he wasn't throwing a punch. Both Whitaker and what I've seen of Willie Pep were really only vulnurable to the counter. They got hit when they threw punches and didn't get hit much when they weren't.

As I said in my original post, Floyd's countering ability plays a significant role in his defense because he changes his opponents offense with the threat of the counter. Does Floyd have a better defense than Pernell? Maybe not but he's a better counter puncher and I think would take less damage than Pernell in most cases against the same opponent. You can't convince me that Roger could ever knock Floyd down, or hit Floyd with as many clean effective punches that Pernell got hit with. Pernell clearly beat Roger, but he got hit a lot. Either way we agree that they both have ATG defenses.

I tend to think Floyd's counter punching ability, defense, ring intelligence and accuracy make him a live opponent in any fight. That being said, it is not unreasonable to think that a prime Oscar, SRL, Hearns, Duran, Ray Robinson or other ATG would beat Floyd. He's so tough to judge in Fantasy bouts because on one hand he so completely dominates his opponents and on the other hand he hasn't faced the tests that those fighters have. It's conceivable that his style is so effective that he could dominate an ATG. It's also conceivable that he gets KTFO. I think getting KO'D is less likely because I think it's fair to say at he is superior to many opponents that those guys fought.

 

Oscar wins via better combinations, better jab, better footwork, better Gold Medalship

 

That Whitaker was #1 P4P and the #1 welter when he fought Oscar. Stylistically Whitaker is a much tougher fight for Oscar with his outhpaw jab and crazy speed.

Oscar needs angles for his Jab and Whitaker's stance does not offer that.

 

What does that make the Oscar that fought Floyd.

 

Nope he always win.