Thread: Was Oscar De La Hoya merely a well marketed fighter??

This argument was made by John Rawling in The Guardian. Myself, whilst I do not think he can rank in the elite pantheon of greats (Ali, Robinson, Leonard etc), I think he has done enough to be considered 'great', and disagree with a lot of the points put forward by Rawling (a man who did describe Carl Froch as 'surely the best super-middleweight in the world' on the back of beating Jean Pascal)

Here is the article in full

Oscar De La Hoya was the golden boy, but never truly great

Oscar De La Hoya was a very good fighter, but throughout his career he has never lived up to the hype


Watching Oscar De La Hoya being battered to defeat against Manny Pacquiao on Saturday night, it might have seemed superficially sad that this once outstanding fighter had hung on too long. But sympathy can only be extended so far because De La Hoya had ultimately received what was always likely to come his way.
Was De La Hoya a great fighter? Certainly not in the five years or so since he lost to Sugar Shane Mosley for a second time. There followed a highly debatable points win over the German Felix Sturm, a result that enabled De La Hoya to be able to boast he was a six-weight world champion as he picked up the WBO middleweight title.
Then there was the defeat against Bernard Hopkins, with De La Hoya halted in the ninth round, beaten by body shots. He did beat the overrated and crude Ricardo Mayorga, before being outboxed by Floyd Mayweather in May 2007, at which point he should surely have called it a day.
But that was not De La Hoya's way. Propelled by a sizeable ego and as the glamour name behind Golden Boy Promotions, Oscar remained boxing's biggest cash cow. He looked bad beating Steve Forbes earlier this year, but took no heed. The back slappers argued he was not properly motivated and the bigger test would see him rekindle the snap and vigour of his youth. And his Golden Boy partner, the former Swiss banker Richard Schaefer helped him formulate the Pacquiao event.
The theory undoubtedly was that De La Hoya was naturally by far the bigger man and that a good big 'un will always beat the little man. It seemed plausible that he might prevail. The punters bought it, as did the pay-per-view television audience. The only problem was that Pacquiao clearly failed to read the script.
And so, as the Ricky Hatton fight that had been pencilled in for next summer seemingly disappears, the question might rightly be posed as to whether De La Hoya was ever a truly great fighter, or just a brilliantly matched talent who was also fortunate to have the sort of film star good looks that ensured he would appeal to an audience far wider than those addicted to the blood and sweat of the boxing ring.
The Olympic gold medal he won in Barcelona in 1992 established him as the Golden Boy of the Games in the days when the US was still unearthing talented fighters. And the promotional nous of Bob Arum brought him brilliantly through the professional ranks. He won his titles, starting with the WBO super-featherweight crown which he took from the light-punching Dane Johnny Bredahl in 1994.
His wins over John John Molina, Rafael Ruelas and Jesse James Leija marked him as a very fine lightweight. There were the wins over Julio Cesar Chavez in 1996 and 1998, but they came when Chavez was past his best. Similarly, he beat Pernell Whitaker when he was on the slide. He lost for the first time to Shane Mosley in 2000, having already lost a massively hyped match-up with Felix Trinidad the previous year.
For me this is the career resumé of a fighter who was brilliantly marketed. He was a great interviewee, photogenic and, to his credit, he never ducked anybody. His best performances? Maybe in beating Ruellas or perhaps Ike Quartey in 1999. He had fast hands, good reactions and a decent dig. But he is not one to be ranked with Roberto Duran or Sugar Ray Leonard. A great televisual success, most certainly, De La Hoya was always entertaining and he was great box office. But was he a truly great fighter? For me, the answer has to be no simply because the most intriguing matches of his long career were by and large the ones he lost.

Oooh a rough but good article not sure how i feel but i know there are a lot of people who feel the same way, teddy atlas said all this months ago and predicted not so much a manny win but a oscar loss. I thought he was a damn fool but once again i was wrong.

That's bullshit

He was the first person to clearly IMO beat Pernell Whitaker(in a close fight albeit)
He beat JCC twice
He owned Camacho
He fought a close fight with Quartey(I thought he lost, but still a close fight)
I feel he made Trinidad look like a retard for 9 rounds, and that Trinidad only won the last three because Oscar stopped punching(because he knew he had won).
He lost a great competitive fight with Mosley in the first one, then once again he outboxed Mosley in the second fight, and IMO got the wrong end of a decision again.
Against STurm I don't think he deserved the decision, but once again it was a good middleweight, and Oscar was moving up A lot, and his style isn't the best for fighting bigger guys.
He was also fighting a competitive fight with Bernard Hopkins, and holding his ground until he was stopped. Even though Bernard was taking control of the fight, this is IMO one of the two best current fighters at LHW we are talking about, and a guy who was extremely big for the MW division. Since then Hopkins has beaten Wright, Tarver, fought a close fight with Calzaghe, fought two close fights with Jermain Taylor, and owned Pavlik.

He stopped Carr, Vargas, Mayorga(in a way I haven't seen anyone else do, I mean he dominated every minute of that fight, Mosley definitely didn't, and Trinidad was KD by Mayorga and couldn't stop him with head shots), Chavezx2(First man to stop Chavez), Gatti, G. Hernandez, Ruelas, Paez, Leija, even Rivera wasn't a bad fighter he was the first to stop.

He gave Mayweather the second most competitive fight of his career, even if he lost most of the rounds, he deserved credit for not getting dominated by a man as good as Floyd.

He then beat Forbes nearly every round: who also had a good showing with the most highly tauted up and comer in Andre Berto.

Basically he has had one bad fight, and this is what he gets(maybe two including the Sturm fiasco). That is why this fight was a no win situation. What fighter who has foughten into their thirties against consistently the best competition IN THE SPORT has remained undefeated or always looked good? Ali didn't, Robinson didn't, Leonard didn't...

Who else can say their last three loses were against the top p4p fighter in the sport? And he has also foughten in his career what 7 guys who have held the title of best fighter in the world at some point in their career, 5 of them got that title right before or because of their fights with him.

I am amazed at how much some people hate on Oscar. His resume is second to none in the last 10 or so years. People take it for granted that Oscar, with his looks and marketability, could have ALWAYS taken the easy way as far as fights go...he never did. Did he under perform in some of his big fights...absolutely. But he had the balls to consistently take on some of the best fighters of his time...when he could have easily been JUST as rich and famous by always fighting average foes. But his influence goes much beyond that. He generated more money and attention for this sport as almost any fighter in history. Even towards the end of his career....he fought top, PRIME names AND generated huge revenue for the sport. And as much as some fighters and fans spit venom at him...i would bet anything that almost no one wouldn't kill to trade places with him. None of this is to say the man is perfect...he has obvious flaws in and out of the ring. But whether some people like it or not, he is one of the rare fighters in history that will have long lasting influence and attention.

Originally Posted by Taeth

That's bullshit

He was the first person to clearly IMO beat Pernell Whitaker(in a close fight albeit)
He beat JCC twice
He owned Camacho
He fought a close fight with Quartey(I thought he lost, but still a close fight)
I feel he made Trinidad look like a retard for 9 rounds, and that Trinidad only won the last three because Oscar stopped punching(because he knew he had won).
He lost a great competitive fight with Mosley in the first one, then once again he outboxed Mosley in the second fight, and IMO got the wrong end of a decision again.
Against STurm I don't think he deserved the decision, but once again it was a good middleweight, and Oscar was moving up A lot, and his style isn't the best for fighting bigger guys.
He was also fighting a competitive fight with Bernard Hopkins, and holding his ground until he was stopped. Even though Bernard was taking control of the fight, this is IMO one of the two best current fighters at LHW we are talking about, and a guy who was extremely big for the MW division. Since then Hopkins has beaten Wright, Tarver, fought a close fight with Calzaghe, fought two close fights with Jermain Taylor, and owned Pavlik.

He stopped Carr, Vargas, Mayorga(in a way I haven't seen anyone else do, I mean he dominated every minute of that fight, Mosley definitely didn't, and Trinidad was KD by Mayorga and couldn't stop him with head shots), Chavezx2(First man to stop Chavez), Gatti, G. Hernandez, Ruelas, Paez, Leija, even Rivera wasn't a bad fighter he was the first to stop.

He gave Mayweather the second most competitive fight of his career, even if he lost most of the rounds, he deserved credit for not getting dominated by a man as good as Floyd.

He then beat Forbes nearly every round: who also had a good showing with the most highly tauted up and comer in Andre Berto.

Basically he has had one bad fight, and this is what he gets(maybe two including the Sturm fiasco). That is why this fight was a no win situation. What fighter who has foughten into their thirties against consistently the best competition IN THE SPORT has remained undefeated or always looked good? Ali didn't, Robinson didn't, Leonard didn't...

Who else can say their last three loses were against the top p4p fighter in the sport? And he has also foughten in his career what 7 guys who have held the title of best fighter in the world at some point in their career, 5 of them got that title right before or because of their fights with him.

Agree with pretty much everything you say apart from the Forbes bit. I thought he looked poor against Forbes, & thought Berto looked more impressive. I felt the shot at Berto's title was Forbes reward for basically being Oscar's glorified sparring partner that night. The fact is Forbes is at the most a light-welterweight, and not a big puncher, yet he bruised up Oscar. I don't blame Oscar for not dropping him, coz Forbes has a chin of steel, but his performance was poor considering. Like I sed I think the guy who wrote the article is talking shit, & agree with the rest of your post pretty much

LOL amazing... The author of that article is a retard and should never write about boxing again. Who else has captured as many divisons as Oscar has, he was in a competative fight with the true p4p king Mayweather and Oscar was already past prime. Oscar is one of the greatest of all time. That being said i still dont know what happend in the fight with Pac. I don't think he was drained by weight but something was off.

Yea pretty sad article. Not only is it just awful but completely pointless as it basically contradicts itself.. It seems to pose the question whether he has simply been well marketed or matched up his entire career(), and then preceeds this by saying he clearly hasnt been the fighter of old since the rematch with Mosley. To me he isn't even suggesting that Oscar would have struggled with Pac in his prime, and it's pretty well a given. Sure he went for a smaller guy and in doing so gave himself a megafight that he felt he had a chance to win. He couldn't get off, and is basically completely out of the picture due to his age. So what? How does it in any way shed new light on his career prior to that? He got old, is this man suggesting that it was telling of how Manny would have done against Oscar 10 years ago or something? Stupid.

This is by far my biggest pet peeve when it comes to boxing "experts". A guy can accomplish whatever he wants, but it seems like you're only as your last fight. It is SO short sighted to bury guys because of a bad showing, especially when they have a track record of greatness.

The guy was a great fighter in his day. He had a great jab, a sledgehammer left hook, handspeed, fantastic combinations, and whats more is he was ALWAYS up for a challenge. He was handed everything very early, but was anything but a prima donna. The guy was a true fighter who would go to war with anyone. Lets face it, he gave prime Tito a boxing lesson and got robbed. He lost to Mosley but won the second fight and got jobbed.

Who in recent memory has fought more future hall of famers than Oscar? Pacman, Floyd Mayweather, Bernard Hopkins, Shane Mosley 2x, Felix Trinidad, Pernell and JCC (even though they were past their primes).

The guy was a fantastic fighter and anyone who knows anything about boxing can see that by watching him fight. A true legend in the sport and its a shame these brainless sports writers exist to kick a legend when he's down.

Yeah, Oscar was a good fighter. But let's be honest, he wishes that he could be mentioned in the same breath as Floyd Mayweather, Manny Pacquiao, Roy Jones Jr, Manny Pacquiao, Bernard Hopkins and others. He's always used his immense popularity to hang with the "pound for pounders" but he's never been a part of the fraternity. He's a really good boxer that was on the cusp of being a truly great fighter, but for some reason he just never got over the hill. It's ironic to me because probably the biggest ticket seller of all-time never really could close the show.

I think Oscar has been incredibly unlucky in the ring, yes he had some close decisions go his way (Whitaker and Quartey) arguments would have been made the other way had he lost those fights. He was robbed against Trinidad and he beat Mosley the second time yet the judges amazingly score that one more convincingly for Mosley than the first fight which Mosley clearly won.
I think it is here where you need to go back and take a look at Oscar psychologically, he really wanted that win against Mosley, his main competitor since they were kids. Oscar simply hasn't been Oscar since that loss and it has showed, he has been confused as to what weight class he should be fighting, 147lb or 154lb and he looked awful at 160lb then back to 147lb, surely this puts a strain on the body. He should stop now before further embarrassment occurs, he is 35 and it really showed against the Pacman.
Despite his critics he has been the most watched fighter since Ali and Tyson and he deserves a lot of credit for keeping Boxing in the Sports pages a little bit longer.

With so many fighters more concerned with protecting there records than fighting the best out there, Oscar really stands out. Maybe it was because he was so popular that he could afford to lose and still be a huge draw, but he was never afraid to take chances with his career. Almost every fighter loses, especially one who fights in a deep division/divisions, and Oscar's loses don't take anything away from what he accomplished in my book. At Oscar's best, he was superb fighter and on of the most complete, in not the most complete fighter, of our generation. He technique was perfect and great work ethic. He was athletic and quick, though not the most physically gifted, he made the most out of every bit of talent he had. If he had the physical gifts of a Mosley or a Roy Jones, he may never have lost.

its funny everytime pac demolishes someone that someone gets rip. But before the fight pac was suppose to lose, idiots!

Originally Posted by RozzySean

With so many fighters more concerned with protecting there records than fighting the best out there, Oscar really stands out. Maybe it was because he was so popular that he could afford to lose and still be a huge draw, but he was never afraid to take chances with his career. Almost every fighter loses, especially one who fights in a deep division/divisions, and Oscar's loses don't take anything away from what he accomplished in my book. At Oscar's best, he was superb fighter and on of the most complete, in not the most complete fighter, of our generation. He technique was perfect and great work ethic. He was athletic and quick, though not the most physically gifted, he made the most out of every bit of talent he had. If he had the physical gifts of a Mosley or a Roy Jones, he may never have lost.

Dude, what are you talking about? I will give credit to Oscar for taking a lot of chances in his career but the guy is NOWHERE NEAR the most complete fighter of our generation. Hahahaha. Where the hell did that come from? The guy didn't even develop his right hand until later in his career. He was a one handed fighter FOR YEARS!!! His work ethic has always been questioned as well. Let's not forget that he was completely out of shape for the Felix Sturm fight, and it wasn't due to the fact it was at 160. This is a guy who's always been rumored to not like training and not train hard many times. After the Quartey fight people were saying that he slacked ALL training camp. This guy in his early years would be out partying all night during training camps.

This has nothing to do with pac rains it is about Oscars career what are talking about and tell me this is that the Oscar you remeber watching in the 90s just to ask did you see the way he looked last night i am not taking anything away from pac but Oscar looked old last night and it was how you say a pasing of the torch but this is about Oscar though and what he has done in his career so i dont see the point you getting at because it has nothing to do with the thread at all.

its funny everytime pac demolishes someone that someone gets rip. But before the fight pac was suppose to lose, idiots!

ODLH got a taste of his own medicine. Remember when he faced an old worned out J.C. Chavez? Sure, ODLH was good when he faced Chavez but we can't forget the fact that it was an old worned out passed-his-prime Chavez. Beating Chavez looked great in his resume of course. That's what happens when fighters stay in the ring longer than they should. It has happened to Mohammad Ali, Sugar Ray Leonard, J.C. Chavez, Oscar de la Hoya, Pernell Whitaker, Roberto Duran, Mike Tyson, etc. just to name a few. Lennox Lewis and Floyd Mayweather Jr. were smart to leave the ring during their primes. Pac beat an old worned out ODLH passed his prime but still, he beat OSCAR DE LA HOYA and that is all that matters. There are a lot of big names along the road that I am pretty sure Pac will be able to beat and those guys ARE IN THEIR PRIME AND YOUNG. Can't wait for those fights. He should do just fine.