I'm a big fan of Tito , he was a devastating boxer that won at his most opponent and is no doubt that he had a good career , but I'm going with Oscar despite of this Year i think that he should to retire.......

I went with Oscar because I believe his achievements eclipse that of Tito's. I have more respect for Tito though because he always takes the hardest fights. I just wish Tito vs. Mosley had happened.

If we base it purely on achievements than it is obciously Oscar.

But IMO Tito was the greater fighter and certanly the more dominant champion. Before the fight with Oscar, Tito had not even had close fight. He destroyed every top WW contender way before DLH ever got in the ring with them. The sole exeption being Whitaker.

Yes he was made to look bad by Winky but I don't think Oscar would've looked much better. Think Felix Sturm times ten.... For about 6 rounds Tito was competitive with RJJ for crying out lowd.

Oscar had the better career but it was only because he made the better choices and was by far the smarter man outside the ring.

I don't think you can criticise Oscar's choice of opponents, for my money only Evander Holyfield has fought as much top level opposition as Oscar in the last 20 years.

His resume in terms of top opponents fought is one of the greatest in the history of the sport.

The answer to this question depends on how you define success.

If success if defined in terms of money, then De La Hoya had a better carrer. Although, Tito did very good money, only a few boxers like Tyson or Holyfield can compete (boxing earnings).

But in the other hand, De La Hoya really tried to influence the Mexican fans and tried to become a national hero. Trying to achieve this goal he beat an old, worn out Chavez, which I believe hurt more. If you measure Tito's success in this area there is NO WAY De La Hoya will be close to Tito. Tito really became a national hero, he paralized and made a whole country to merge forgetting any type of differences. Every Tito's fight was a national event, full of emotions (recognizing his clear losses). Cotto is on his way, but definitely not at this level yet on the island.

De La Hoya has his trade mark of "Golden Boy", but I am sure he and any other boxer can be jelous of this type of Tito's success that very few people had achieved.

__________________
Wilfredo Gomez better than Mike Tyson at power
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I didn't mean to knock Oscar as he really has give us plenty of megafights throughout the years. I always felt he dodged Winky though. And Oscar is comebacking against Stevie Forbes, were Tito went up against a heavier more active fighter in Jones. I am surprised Oscar hasn't asked to rematch Tito. For me it is worth the gamble to move up to 168 for a 1 off fight with Tito to end his career.

I think most people will answer this question the same way they would answer the question "who won between Tito or De La Hoya?"

I for one is no different. And I go with De La Hoya.

I'd go for De La Hoya

Results below are my opinions not the judges

Wins

Vargas
Trinidad
Whitaker (maybe a draw though)
Mosley (II)
JCC (shot though)


Losses

Quartey
Mosley (I)
Sturm
B-Hop
PBF

I agree that most will answer this question by looking at their fight. But I don't agree that that is how it should be done. In fact, to be fair, I think their fight together should be excluded from this debate since it was really a low point on both of their careers. In their career defining moment at the very peak of their game they both choked and both of their stocks plumeted that day.

My vote went to ODH!!

Someone to achieve belts in different weight div.and stay champ says alot and it's VERY impressive.
I give my respect to TITO but i believe he only stood at one weight div. not quite sure but if any one can show me any statistics that would be great.

So there you have it.....CHEERS!!!

I picked De La Hoya.

De La Hoya for me all day long...I didn't even look at resumes, big fights etc. I just stripped it to the bare bones of boxing ability and Oscar takes Tito all day every day. He had a lot more skill, wasn't as one dimensional and had K.O power to boot. At this stage in his career he was still competitive against the number 1 pound for pound fighter in the world and is still the biggest draw in boxing. Nuff said.

It is gonna depend on what people define as a better career but you'd be hard pressed to find an area where Tito was better than Oscar. Whether it be money, competition, achievements and boxing ability.

Oscar's Best Wins.

Genaro Hernandez
Jorge Paez
Rafael Ruelas
John John Molina
Jesse James Leija
Julio Cesar Chavez x2
Pernell Whitaker
Miguel Angel Gonzalez
Ike Quartey
Oba Carr
Hector Camacho
Arturo Gatti
Fernando Vargas
Luis Ramon Campas
Felix Sturm = Not really though
Ricardo Mayorga

Titles at = Super Featherweight, Lightweight, Jr Welterweight, Welterweight, Jr Middleweight, Middleweight.

ODLH Argument = Oscar has much more achievements than Tito and overall i think he edges Tito in overall opposition plus he was never dominated in any of his losses unlike Tito.


Felix Trinidad's Best Wins.

Maurice Blocker
Oba Carr
Hector Camacho
Freddie Pendleton
ODLH
Pernell Whitaker
David Reid
Ricardo Mayorga
William Joppy
Fernando Vargas

Titles at = Welterweight 15 defenses if i remember right, Jr Middleweight,

Tito Argument = He beat fighters like Carr, Vargas, etc. When they were in there prime, and some people may argue that by the time they fought ODLH they were shot fighters. Tito also made impressive number of title defenses at Welterweight. He also has a win over ODLH.

Final Comments = I think ODLH wins this as you can see by those list's. Overall ODLH has beaten more quality opposition plus his achievements just leave Tito in the starting blocks if im honest. Someone mentioned Tito should be rated higher because he fought Wright, Hopkins, Jones. I don't understand that logic at all why should Tito be rated higher just because he fought good opposition but was pretty much dominated in all 3 of those fights, if we using that logic then ODLH should be rated higher because at least he was competitive in his losses to Mosley x2, Tito, Mayweather, Hopkins.

__________________
Favorite Fighters Of All Time.

Wilfredo Gomez, Ricardo Lopez, Larry Holmes, Erik Morales, Marco Antonio Barrera, Juan Manuel Marquez, Pernell Whitaker, Roy Jones, Floyd Mayweather Jr, Salvador Sanchez, Shane Mosley, Aaron Pryor, Thomas Hearns, Terry Norris, Julian Jackson, Kelly Pavlik, M.Cotto

I don't think it is even close...Tito was a great fighter but his resume pales in comparison to DLH...did Oscar lose many of his big fights? sure but he was never dominated but by B-Hop as was Triniadad...also DLH came back to fight again calling out the best he could after losses...Tito retired...(Lets save the excuses why... fact is fact)...DLH has won world titles in more divisions and spent more time in the rankings over all.....

Don't get me wrong I am not saying anything bad about Tito I was a big fan until the second retirement after Winky beat him...IMO he did not do what a great fighter does and pick himself up to fight again...He was still in his prime years...

It will be hard 20 yrs from now or even today to find a more successful fighter in the ring then DLH....

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Very hard to call but I had to go with Tito in the end cuz De La Hoya lost too many fights in his prime . Tito only lost once IMO . The other two were when he was washed up and semi retired .

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.