Who was the greatest and WHY: Oscar v Tito

Who cares?? About 7 pages of posters and counting, u stupid ****.

 

My point entirely. I think Trinidad was amazing, thrilling to watch, I just think Oscar shades it on achievement.

 

63 posts, an Oscar fan who speaks positively about someone who incessantly clutters up threads with abuse and insults about DLH and anyone who says anything positive about him... I think Presscot may have just got a 2nd account to try and make him look more legitimate, now everyone just laughs at his posts and no longer takes his hatred seriously...

Nice try Presscot, good idea though

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_TheGreat
People want to say Floyd ducked people, well Oscar is the bigger ducker. His whole career is defined by losing the big fights and by who he never fought.
================
At 130:
WBC Champion Azumah Nelson? WBC Champion Gabriel Ruelas? Oh, and please, De La Hoya people. Don't be confused. Oscar fought RAFAEL Ruelas, not Gabriel. You know, the Ruelas brother that WASN'T champ.
Somehow, Oscar managed to stay away from these guys. He didn't want a shot at their titles and I guess they weren't worthy of a match to unify the titles? Of course not. Instead, Oscar went after the weakest man at 130. Johnny Bredahl.


At 135:
WBA Champion Orzubek Nazarov? That bum was 23-0 with 16 KOs. Yeah, I can see why Oscar didn't want to meet him. Then there's WBO Champion Giovanni Parisi. You know, another nobody with a record of 27-1 with 19 KOs.



At 140:
IBF Champion Kostya Tszyu. Ever hear of him? He was 20-1-1 with 14 KOs. Was he also not worthy of a fight with De La Hoya? If you say so, you're an idiot. Then there's WBA Champion Juan Martin Coggi. His terrible record was 63-3-2 with 40 KO's. Are you actually going to argue that HE didn't qualify for a shot at De La Hoya's title...or that De La Hoya should not have fought for Coggi's belt? You can say Coggi wasn't that great, but if that's true, all the more reason for the ultra-careful Oscar to fight him. Also at this weight division at that time was future champ, Frankie Randall. Oscar steered away from him as well.
Oh, and Giovanni Parisi, the former champ at 135 was also WBO champ at 140, but Oscar ducked him TWICE.


At 147:
IBF Champion Vernon Forrest. He had the belt for the last TWO YEARS that Oscar fought as a welterweight. Somehow, Oscar missed him. Forrest, at that time, was 34-0-1 with 25 KOs. Yeah, De La Hoya fans. Vernon was a joke, right? Oscar shouldn't have wasted his time fighting him. Fine.
Then how come Oscar also didn't fight WBA Champion Ike Quartey? Yes, I know, I know. Oscar fought Quartey, correct? He sure did. TWO YEARS after Quartey was champ. Besides, many boxing writers believe Quartey actually won that fight. What a brave warrior Oscar is! Last, but not least, was WBO Champion Jose Luis Lopez. What a girl. He only had a record of 36-3-2 with 30 KOs. When you look at who Oscar didn't fight, it's a pretty impressive list!


At 154:
From 2001 - 2003, Oscar moved up to this division. Who did he forget to fight? Oh, there was that punk, IBF Champion Winky Wright. Yeah, I guess Oscar never heard of him and figured his fans wouldn't want to see it? At that time, Winky's record was 46-3 with 24 KOs.
How about WBA Champion Alejandro Garcia? At the time, he was sporting a record of 24-1 with 23 KOs. How about WBO Champion Harry Simon? You know, that dude who was 23-0 with 17 KOs? Or his successor, WBO Champion Daniel Santos? 23-2-1 with 20 KOs.




via http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...==============

Oscar is a joke.

this has gotta be the greatest post ever on Oscar!
_________________________________________________________________

Has it?? Strange, as its a lot of biased old ballbags.

Here's why again you simpletons:


Question 1

Did Oscar get all of his title from the weakest belt holder in his division or not, excluding the vacant ones he picked up?

Answer: NO.

Proof:

I have already proved this, I don't know why you brought it up again.

Rafael Ruelas was IBF lightweight champion when he fought Oscar, it was a unification fight.

Here is the top 10 lightweights as selected by THE RING in 1994 (if you want the page link to verify this I'll put it on):

Here is The Ring Top 10 Lightweights in 1994
Miguel Angel Gonzalez
Rafael Ruelas
Orzubek Nazarov
Oscar De La Hoya
Miguel Julio
Leavander Johnson
Shane Mosley
Stevie Johnston
Billy Schwer
Ivan Robinson
So De La Hoya fought the top two guys in the top 10, he missed out the number 3 who hardly anyone had ever heard of and fought in Japan and Africa. He stopped Rafael Ruelas (#2) to take Ruelas's IBF title, then stopped Hernandez too.

Point already proved.

But there's more, to further embarrass you Dave, and your absurd clinging to this non-sensical article.

In 1997, Pernell Whitaker was #1 at welterweight, and still p4p#1 if I'm not mistaken, and De La Hoya took his WBC title. HOW THE **** can you not know this Dave, if you are commenting on this thread?!

It boggles the mind!

In 2002, he added the WBA title to his WBC title by beating Fernando Vargas in a unification fight. At this point, Oscar was #1 at the weight and Vargas #2. There was no-one ranked higher for him to fight. Tito was fighting Hacine Cherifi at middleweight then having a 2-year lay-off. Again, how can you not know these simple facts about these guys careers if you are on here discussing it?

In 2006, he beat Ricardo Mayorga for the WBC light-middleweight title. At this time, the WBA champion was Alejandro Garcia, and the IBF champion was Roman Karzamin, and the WBO"-gus" champion was Sergei Dzindziruk.

You have been SMOKED OUT OF SIGHT yet again


2.No. He beat Quartey, Whitaker (pound-for-pound#1, how can you step up any higher than that??) Vargas and Mayorga, he lost to Mosley, Mayweather, and Hopkins. The Hopkins loss was in large part due to Hop's natural size, weight and strength advantages. In Mayweather, he fought a guy better than anyone Tito ever fought. He should have shared the 2 fights 1-1 with Mosley. The Trinidad decision was a stinker, even Trinidad's own mother knew that. Trinidad never even fought Mosley though, same with Quartey- so I don't think this can be used in an argument against De La Hoya, he fought more greats so he lost more fights. He was never dominated like Trinidad was.

Don't you see that that accusation could be made against Trinidad too? It could easily be said the best 3 fighters he faced were Hopkins, Wright and Jones. Silly boy.


3.Yes. Not in every division, but he fought at world title level in 6 weight divisions, to unify every division would have taken decades. He unified at lightweight and light-middleweight. He was growing too fast to hang around at super-featherweight to unify, and he only fought twice at middleweight. That leaves only light-welterweight and welterweight that he didn't unify at that he could have unified at, and at both of those weights he won the most prestigious belt IMO (WBC).

All in all, the guy won TEN world titles at SIX weights. That simply cannot be criticized.

Trinidad won 5 titles at 3 weight divisions (half the amount De La Hoya did). He unified in 2 (same as De La Hoya), but was never an undisputed champion (same as De La Hoya).



Dave, dear misguided Dave, are you starting to see now that that article is a lot of biased old ****hair??

If you think Trinidad is better then thats cool, it's perfectly valid, both great fighters as I said, but the stuff you've been coming out with to support that has been painful to read.

This must be the most rational post on Oscar and Tito ever!

 

Felix Trinidad (good as he was) = Sugar Ray Robinson :-(

Off-the-cuff remarks made in commentary to emphasize how well someone is performing in a standard fight does obviously NOT mean the fighter in question is actually being put on par with a guy like Robinson, that's just silly. If you listened to all the commentaries again for De La Hoya's fights (probably when he was p4p#1 ahead of Rjj and Trinidad), I'm sure these comparisons for commentary's sake were being made too, I wouldn't read anything into them mate, and that's no slight on either man.

 

I agree with you that Tito was thrilling- but he didn't show exceptional heart v Hopkins or Wright I don't think. He didn't give up or anything, but it wasn't really a tremendously courageous effort from him. More of a feeble attempt at resistance easily crushed. Then again, neither did De La Hoya exhibit incredible bravery in his battle against Hopkins or Mayweather. So I wouldn't use that as a strength of either man to be honest.

I do take issue though with your implication that De La Hoya didn't show heart or wasn't exciting or explosive to watch or wasn't up for fighting anyone around. I think he showed ALL of these qualities in the fight with Quartey, and the fight with Vargas, and the fights with Mosley, and the fight with Mayorga...