2 out of Oscar's last 3 fights were against the p4p#1. In recent years, he also fought another p4p#1 (Hopkins), fought a middleweight world champ when he was too small for that weight class (Sturm) and took on Mayorga when the Matador was a dangerous fight for him (Oscar was viewed as being past-prime, Mayorga was bigger, stronger and had power). Other than a tune-up with Steve Forbes, I don't understand what fights were cherrypicking. Sturm was only a tune-up for Hopkins, but a former superfeatherweight champ fighting any natural middleweight can hardly be called cherrypicking. As usual, you're talking ****.
I can guarantee that Oscar never signed a fight he didn't think he would win. I understand what you are saying, but Oscar has one of the best resumes in recent Boxing history.
alright, so your definition of cherry picking is a fighter who picks his opponents regardless of class. so a fighter "choosing" to fight the best fighters is just as much of a cherry picker as someone like sven ottke who retired undefeated, but fought nobodys his entire career?
Oscar should never have signed up to fight Manny Pacquiao purely out of principle. Of course, we're all wiser after the fight, but even fighters in the sport were making fun of Oscar for taking that fight. Other than that, Oscar has always fought the best in the division.
Exactly lol... Yeah, Dlh had a few guys he cherry picked like Gatti, , Forbes, Campas, and Chavez. Forrest Winky, and Kostya would tell you otherwise.
Ottke fought in a division that was starting to get rocognition since the Holmes era. Dlh cherry picking isn't a negative to me. He deserved the right. Usually when a champ cherry picks, he wants the guy fans want to fight him to prove himself, or a big money fight. AM as good as he was was side stepped by Dlh because Dlh didn't think AM had proven himself yet as the best challenge and biggest money fight for dlh, and he was right.
When a fighter loses a fight, it's common practice to have a comeback bout against the likes of Gatti or Campas. That's the sport. Oscar fought Tito (prime), Mosley (prime), Hopkins (prime), and Mayweather (prime). On thats basis, I can give him a free pass for fighting Gatti and Chavez. Even if I hate his celebration after beating on a shot Chavez.
That's a totally ******ed definition of the term though. Unless someone lives in an igloo in the Antartic and let's their promoter arrange the fights, gets flown to the ring with a blindfold on, and then sees his opponent for the first time when they are getting the ref's instructions, everyone picks their opponents, excluding mandatory defences. Cherrypicker is not a term that is used to describe someone who has the money to select the biggest fights with the best fighters available, that isn't what it means at all. It's like me saying: "Oscar is a fraud". You saying: "No he isn't." And me saying: "Yeah he is, by my definition. I think a fraud is someone who has loads of money and lies/exaggerates to promote fights." That is meaningless though, because that is not what the terms means in boxing terms.
yeah, i guess i see what your saying. forrest, winky, and kostya, forrest and kostya earlier in his career, and winky later would probably have given him tougher fights than, gatti, campas, and chavez.
As I've always stated 5 years ago. When Mosley still had that blinding speed. I'd choose him over Mayweather. But now, I dont see how Floyd would not be able to time him and slip his punches. He really is down to 2 punches. The flicker jab and overhand right. Without an authoritative jab like Oscar and the ability to fight at a high level for an entire fight, I see fLoyd outlasting him and giving him hell in this fight. In the Cotto fight, he couldnt dodge the jab for anything.