He only has ONE clear loss to the much bigger Bernard. (Sorta like if Floyd was to fight Pavlik) The first Mosley fight was a CLOSE split decision. The second Mosley fight was probably a gift. He cleary 'beat' Tito. And he fought a close SD with Floyd. Against that, the SweetPea fight could have gone either way. The Quartey fight was very close, and the Sturm fight was probably a gift.
IMO he beat: Trinidad Mosley II Whitaker Quartey Lost to: Hopkins (Duh) Mosley 1 (obvious) Sturm Floyd He fought a great fight against Mosley, though it probably wasn't the right fight. Mosley clearly won the fight. Boxing rather than fighting worked much better in the second fight, which I thought was a close win for Oscar.
The Sturm fight was probably a gift?? You think HBO didnt have a financial interest in DLH/ Hopkins that a Sturm win would stop? And you believe that the FIRST Mosley fight wasnt a clear win? I think you wear Goldie glasses which twists your vision and reality when it comes to Oscar but thats just me.
The Quartey fight was very close. I agree. I scored the fight against Whitaker as a draw. I have also scored it for De la Hoya and for Whitaker. It was close. I think he defeated Tito clearly. Not only that, he SCHOOLED Tito in the first 9 rounds. The first fight against Mosley was close and competitive. Mosley won. No objection. I haven't seen the second fight, but it was probably also close. Ok, this are real loses. The fight against Sturm was won by Sturm. The fight against the much bigger Bernard was obviously a pretty clear Bernard victory. The fight against Money Mayweather was close and competitive but I think Mayweather should've won by UD. So he defeated: Whitaker, Quartey, Tito And he lost against: Mosley x2, Hopkins, Sturm, Mayweather
1997-2000 from Whitaker to Mosley 1 If there was one year to pick then it's 1999 despite the Trinidad judging fiasco.
I'm sure you'd agree his prime continued into his welterweight days, but his absolute peak was before his welter days, at 140. He didn't have many fights there but I think that's the division in which he'd be hardest to beat. He had a decent amount of experience by then and was extremely sharp.
Thanks Kg. IMO, he has had a reasonably good run with the best resume of opponents of anyone currently active. At times, he's gotten questionable breaks, but he's paid for that with some poor decisions against him. He was at his best at the lighter weights (as Floyd and Shane were) and I think his prime was 1998-2000.
Agreed. I place him higher there not because he himself was more skilled, but because he wasn't facing the bigger, better competition at WW. Anyone would've had a very tough time with Oscar at LWW.
De La Hoya was only 23 years old when he fought at LWW, probably the begining of his best days. His prime started around 96 when he battered an ageing Chavez inside 4 rounds. If your saying his prime was prior to entering the WW division, then his prime must have been extremely short lived. Exactly a year to be precise. Because no way were his best fighting days at LW. He wasn't anywhere near fully seasoned and developed at lightweight, although his power there was maybe at its best. De La Hoya's was at his peak both physically combined with ability at WW, with his power understandably not quite what it was two divisions south. IMO LWW-WW. 96-2000.
96-200 is about right, but DLH held the greatest advantages under welterweight because although Oscar got bigger and stronger there, bona fide 147 pound fighters are also a LOT bigger and stronger there than are 140 fighters. To me its the same as it is for Tommy Hearns. Hearns did get stronger at 154, but considering the height-reach-power advantage he had over 147 pounders compared to 154 pounders, his prime was at 147.