If DLH was any better it'd be frightening. Imagine that resume, those L's W's. It would be scary to imagine that he could quite possibly be the best ever, or arguably so.
He just wasn't the best in his era, and had some bad luck He lost to Mosley cause Mosley was better (and on steroids) He lost to Floyd cause Floyd was better He lost to Hopkins, he was better I'll give u Trinidad, Mosley II, and Pac were just terrible circumstances, its different
Indeed. Also, take away his "losses" vs a doped up Mosley and the picture starts to change. Hell, if Mosley had not been on the juice, ODLH would very likely have beaten him. Give him the win he really deserved vs. Trinidad and his record is something else. He lost to a much bigger B-hop but did really well and the losses to Mayweather and Pacquiao at the tail end of his career doesn't hurt his legacy much.
De La Hoya was blessed with some of the best trainers we have seen in recent era's, it had nothing to do with them. De La Hoya above 147 was not nearly the young, fit, fresh and determined De La Hoya of 130, 135 & 140. Once he began to make serious money the professionalism between fights suffered which ultimately caught him up. He had some decisions go against him but was also fortunate to grab some close ones that may of went the other way. My favourite fighter of all time, never in a dull fight, tough as old boots and skills coming out of his arse. The Golden Boy :good
I think he was great and lost only because he fought everybody. No boxer is perfect and there will always be someone out there who can beat them.
Just cause u have a good trainer does not mean its the right trainer. I thought roger was not a good fit he was bettsr wit alcazar
He had his flaws but ultimately, he had a couple of bad decisions go against him and he lost to superior skilled ATG fighters.
after he was robbed in the trinidad fight, he wasn't the same anymore and fought recklessly in the first mosley fight.