Who ranks higher on your ATG List. Oscar De La Hoya or Floyd Mayweather Jr

Undefeated records are nice, but its not everything in boxing. How many TOP 15 fighters all time are undefeated?

So why do you put so much emphasis on the ZERO if history has shown us that a zero doesn't deternime ranking?

How can you rank a fighter higher than another simply because he either opted to fight less quality opponents, or didn't have the opportunity to fight better opposition.

Again, all of the top ATG fighters have been rated based on what they did in their prime, not for the losses they took at the twilight of their careers.

The zero is not all that important, unless its what you use to market yourself, and that's not necessarily for legacy, but for generating revenue.

I disagree with this point completely. I'll rate a fighter who fought 10 A level fighters and out of the 10 lost 2 fights HIGHER than a fighter who fought 10 B level fighters and did not lose any.

That just shows you that quality counts for more than quantity in boxing.

Why? Do you know how many losses Ray Robinson had, Roberto Duran, Henry Armstrong?

Why do you insist it hurts Oscar? Do you use the same scale to judge someone like Duran who had losses too?

You have to be consistant in your judging. If you're going to knock DLH then you have to knock everyone who ever had a loss.

And you admit that Prime Oscar would probably beat Floyd???

Yet you have Floyd higher in the rankings, even though:

• Oscar has fought and beat more champions and former champions.
• Oscar has won more title fights.
• Oscar has beat better opposition.
• Oscar has been champion in more weight classes.
• Oscar has been champion more times than Floyd.
• AND you even say Prime Oscar would likely beat Floyd.

So the ONLY accomplishment Floyd has over Oscar is that he was able to keep his ZERO? That's it?

Oscar is higher ATG than Floyd imo, I base it on overall resume.

 

Don't ****ing come on here and ****ing Label me a *****. ****ing grow up bruv, I Call things how I see them, There are guys I ve seen before who I think are better than Floyd and would who I would pick to beat to Floyd. I just think Floyd was better than Oscar. Your a very good poster, you shouldn't lower yourself too stupid name calling. In terms of Oscar's offense I disagree. Oscar was a One handed fighter. That was the One big criticism that people always had of him. Especially at 140-147 he was very one handed. He most used his left hand and left hand only. Mostly when he threw the right, it weren't effective and he looked awkward throwing the right. It was only once he joined Floyd Sr when he became two handed. There are some things Floyd is better at and has more of while there are some things Oscar is better at. I just think overall when your talking about the total package in terms of ability, athleticsm and mentally I think Floyd is better.

 

Interesting fact that Oscar was a one handed fighter...:think

I could have sworn I seen him KD or stun a few fighters with his right between 135-147.

Yes, his left was an amazing left. Not many fighters in the HISTORY of the sport have had a left like Oscar's, but just because the left is vastly superior to hs right, doesn't validate the myth that Oscar only used his left. Again, he's stunned, KD, and KO fighters with his right.

When he got with Sr., he used his right more consistantly.

 

Oscar was never a one hand fighter the man was an offensive machine under Alcazar ,he became more of defensive fighter with SR.

 

Oscar himself said in 1999 that he was a one handed fighter.

 

In 1999, in a press Conference before the Trindad fight, a reporter told Oscar he thought Oscar was One handed and Oscar agreed. So Oscar himself even thought he was too One handed. There are going to times when he lands good rights, your never going suck at everything you throw. But Oscar was very inconsistent, not as effective and awkward at throwing the right before he went to Floyd Sr.

 

Oscar's power comes from his left, but he uses the right to create openings. Just because he isn't a power puncher with the right doesn't mean he doesn't know how to use his right to his advantage, because he does use it.

Hell, he probably has as much power in his right hand as Malignaggi, Diaz, Bradley, and a few other fighters... So if Oscar doesn't have a right, does that mean that those fighters don't have a right or a left?

 

He may have relied on his left too much back then but he always threw punches in bunches .

 

Oscar was a tremendous combination puncher.

You're correct, his trademark punch was the left, easily, but he used both hands effectively.

 

We're getting off topic. The topic is who ranks higher All Time.

 

So how can Floyd rank higher when between Oscar and Floyd:

Oscar has won more title fights.
Oscar has beat more champions and former champions.
Oscar has been champion more times.
Oscar has fought and beat the better opposition.
Oscar has won titles in more weight classes.

 

The poll doesn't agree with you

 

You haven't been at ESB long have you? Polls don't mean much. Debates are what matter.

Lets continue the debate.

How can Floyd rank higher when Oscar has accomplished MORE.

 

It is off-topic but I can't help but smash the one-handed myth:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f86LmpwGUJY[/ame]

The right hand just comes out more and more as the rounds progress...even at 154 his handspeed and combination punching was very well varied...2:44 shows just one great example of an unpredictable head-body attack.

I agree.

 

I was joking about Polls. Look I personally rank Floyd Much higher and I already say Why earlier. If you think Oscar greater, thats your opinion, I can't be bothered for a long debate. If your going by accomplishments would you rate Pacquiao ahead of Oscar ?