I was just watching some ODLH fights again, and i was just wondering how he would of done against Manny Pacquiao in his prime. I personally think he would of won, ODLH had enough power, speed, movement, chin, and boxing skill to beat Manny Pacquiao.
Printable View
I was just watching some ODLH fights again, and i was just wondering how he would of done against Manny Pacquiao in his prime. I personally think he would of won, ODLH had enough power, speed, movement, chin, and boxing skill to beat Manny Pacquiao.
Pacquiao still hasn't faced anyone like a prime DLH, and everyone he's beaten at 140 up DLH would have handled just as easy IMO (Hatton, Cotto, Clottey, and Margarito), his chin was as solid as they come, he had good power and was always dangerous, his speed at 147 was just as good and he was technically superior to Pacquiao, he's naturally bigger than Pacquiao and if he wasn't weight drained he'd use his size advantage catching Manny every time Manny would miss, IMO DLH would win a UD something like 8 rounds to 4 or he'd stop him late, somewhere around the 8th or 9th
I don't think prime Oscar would beat prime Pacquiao.
Prime Pacquiao is better than the old, past-his-prime version of Whitaker that Oscar struggled with.
I'm not an Oscar hater, but he was losing big fights even at his peak.
No ODLH in his prime would not have beaten Pacquiao. By "technically superior" I think you mean "more conventional". The different angles Manny uses when he attacks and his ability to throw punches from everywhere combined with his freakish balance and speed are what make Pacquiao so special. He is an original, not an imitator so he is hard to gauge what his effectiveness would be or would have been against more conventional fighters. I would say Whitaker and Pep were similar in that regard (although Whitaker was obviously far superior defensively).
i mean that DLH in his prime had a great jab, and he would have kept it in Pacquiao's face, Cotto showed in the early rounds that the jab can easily disrupt Pacquiao's flow of punches, he's too open for a guy who was a great combination puncher, IMO even the DLH that beat Vargas would have beaten MannyQuote:
Originally Posted by Gocougars3
Prime Oscar would of won a hard fought UD. Oscar would of worked behind the jab and timing Pac as he comes in. DLH wouldnt of stood there and let Manny back him up he would of moved around on the back foot while Pac unloads not just stand there like he did when they fought. Manny would have his moments in the fight but Prime for Prime Oscar takes a close fight imo.
without a doubt.
At 147, I think "Yes"
Sorry i disagree totally, Pernell Whitaker is a totally different fighter to Manny Pacquiao. Yes there both Southpaw's but thats where the similarities end.Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Pernell Whitaker is ridiculously slick and the problems he gave ODLH, Manny Pacquiao wouldn't give him. I mean Hector Camacho was a good Southpaw, and ODLH totally dominated him.
And in ODLH's close decision losses, he should of got the nod over both Mosley 2, Trinidad. And even in his close wins they wern't robberies, well the Felix Sturm one was borderline, but ODLH was out of shape and was no Middleweight.
ODLH was also 5'10 fast/strong, could Manny Pacquiao have handled the power ? just imagine if ODLH's famous left hook landed.
also dont forget that he also used to use the double jab constantly mix it up, 2 jabs up top or he'd jab to the head then to the body, IMO Pacquiao would have been lost in what to do and when to lunge inQuote:
Originally Posted by ICBSorry i disagree totally, Pernell Whitaker is a totally different fighter to Manny Pacquiao. Yes there both Southpaw's but thats where the similarities end.Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
Pernell Whitaker is ridiculously slick and the problems he gave ODLH, Manny Pacquiao wouldn't give him. I mean Hector Camacho was a good Southpaw, and ODLH totally dominated him.
And in ODLH's close decision losses, he should of got the nod over both Mosley 2, Trinidad. And even in his close wins they wern't robberies, well the Felix Sturm one was borderline, but ODLH was out of shape and was no Middleweight.
ODLH was also 5'10 fast/strong, could Manny Pacquiao have handled the power ? just imagine if ODLH's famous left hook landed.
Yup. Oscar at 135 would have defeated the Manny who fought at 135 and under, Manny wasn't yet technically proficient and over 135 I think Oscar's size and skill would have been too much.
But I really think the question is a bit unfair. Manny is, by today's standards, really a 135. Oscar peaked at 147.
I think the ODLH that was ROBBED against Tito would have beaten Pac. Not a dig at Pac as Naturally Oscar was quite a bit bigger!
As Teddy Atlas once said about Oscar De La Hoya, "He finds a way to screw up his big fights and lose." I have Pac beating him just on that. Against All Time Great fighters that were in their prime or still had something he finds a way to mess it up even with everything in his favor.
That's what history said. So a prime Oscar loses to prime Manny based on that.
Maybe ODH could have won the fight but blow it away by running the last few rounds.
Prime Oscar and Prime Mosley both whip Pacquaio. Both were far bigger men, with tremendous talent and power. Elite athletes.
This really is food for thought. Oscar just couldn't seem to drop the hammer in his biggest fights could he? I mean I though he deserved no better than a draw with Sweet Pea and for whatever reason he didn't fight twelve rounds with Tito. Then again he finished strong with Ike.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
At a minimum this makes me think Oscar has to just blow him away. If Manny can stay in the fight...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICB
Prime ODL at 135 yeah. Converted southpaw. Home run left hook. 147? The man who fought Tito, Ike and Shane..yup.
I was thinking the same also. Can Oscar blow out Manny in a few rounds? History says no with Manny's heart and resiliency, unless someone wants to argue that Manny was prime when he got ko by bums in the late 90s as prime. History on the other hand has said that Oscar does not do well with ATG figthers in their prime or had something left. Tito, Hopkins, Floyd, Manny, Mosley, etc. Even the Sweetpea victory is highly disputed and Sweetpea was 33 and slipping. And while Ike was a very good fighter, I would be very hesitant to call him an all time great, at most an hall of famer. Even that fight was close as hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiThis really is food for thought. Oscar just couldn't seem to drop the hammer in his biggest fights could he? I mean I though he deserved no better than a draw with Sweet Pea and for whatever reason he didn't fight twelve rounds with Tito. Then again he finished strong with Ike.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
At a minimum this makes me think Oscar has to just blow him away. If Manny can stay in the fight...
And as someone once said, "Which all time great fighter did Oscar beat in their prime or had something left?"
Oscar wins
You have any idea how many times Teddy has been wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
The fact that Oscar was robbed against Trinidad and Mosley shouldn't be held against him. Yes he made a mistake by giving up the last rounds against Trinidad. Who cares? A fight is judge on rounds won. Not a fighters bad game plan. Oscar deserved the win. And really why people even think the whitaker fight is disputed is beyond me. Despite the bullshit kd Oscar still won by 3 or 4 points. Whitaker defense for that fight was amazing. He had Oscar looking foolish at times. At the same time is offense was horrendus. Jab and a pitter pat punch was all it was. How did anybody think he was winning rounds like that? Or that, that deserve to win them.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogI was thinking the same also. Can Oscar blow out Manny in a few rounds? History says no with Manny's heart and resiliency, unless someone wants to argue that Manny was prime when he got ko by bums in the late 90s as prime. History on the other hand has said that Oscar does not do well with ATG figthers in their prime or had something left. Tito, Hopkins, Floyd, Manny, Mosley, etc. Even the Sweetpea victory is highly disputed and Sweetpea was 33 and slipping. And while Ike was a very good fighter, I would be very hesitant to call him an all time great, at most an hall of famer. Even that fight was close as hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiThis really is food for thought. Oscar just couldn't seem to drop the hammer in his biggest fights could he? I mean I though he deserved no better than a draw with Sweet Pea and for whatever reason he didn't fight twelve rounds with Tito. Then again he finished strong with Ike.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
At a minimum this makes me think Oscar has to just blow him away. If Manny can stay in the fight...
And as someone once said, "Which all time great fighter did Oscar beat in their prime or had something left?"
If one is gonna asked who Oscar beat that was in his prime than one should ask who Pacquiao beat in his prime?
As you know the name of the game is hit and not get hit. Whitaker made Oscar miss a lot, and that's an understatement. Whitaker did enough to win with his offense imo. Whitaker's jab and pitter pat punch as you put up still racked up points in my book. As said, isn't that the name of the game? Hit and not get hit. He was always a master of that. Oscar on the other hand was flurrying to win the round when he heard the 10 second warning while looking horrendous the rest of many rounds. Now how is that winning?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseThe fact that Oscar was robbed against Trinidad and Mosley shouldn't be held against him. Yes he made a mistake by giving up the last rounds against Trinidad. Who cares? A fight is judge on rounds won. Not a fighters bad game plan. Oscar deserved the win. And really why people even think the whitaker fight is disputed is beyond me. Despite the bullshit kd Oscar still won by 3 or 4 points. Whitaker defense for that fight was amazing. He had Oscar looking foolish at times. At the same time is offense was horrendus. Jab and a pitter pat punch was all it was. How did anybody think he was winning rounds like that? Or that, that deserve to win them.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogI was thinking the same also. Can Oscar blow out Manny in a few rounds? History says no with Manny's heart and resiliency, unless someone wants to argue that Manny was prime when he got ko by bums in the late 90s as prime. History on the other hand has said that Oscar does not do well with ATG figthers in their prime or had something left. Tito, Hopkins, Floyd, Manny, Mosley, etc. Even the Sweetpea victory is highly disputed and Sweetpea was 33 and slipping. And while Ike was a very good fighter, I would be very hesitant to call him an all time great, at most an hall of famer. Even that fight was close as hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiThis really is food for thought. Oscar just couldn't seem to drop the hammer in his biggest fights could he? I mean I though he deserved no better than a draw with Sweet Pea and for whatever reason he didn't fight twelve rounds with Tito. Then again he finished strong with Ike.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
At a minimum this makes me think Oscar has to just blow him away. If Manny can stay in the fight...
And as someone once said, "Which all time great fighter did Oscar beat in their prime or had something left?"
If one is gonna asked who Oscar beat that was in his prime than one should ask who Pacquiao beat in his prime?
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f3...ll/4qxyumt.gif
And that's pretty much what a lot of the rounds look like against Whitaker, now how is that beating Whitaker by 3 or 4 points? Whitaker landed more and at a higher connect percentage, plus Oscar missing alot. That's pretty much a Whitaker victory in my book.
As for the Trinidad fight, it can be disputed no doubt. The Shane Mosley fight, the one in 2000 he clearly lost, even Oscar said so himself that he lost in some interview years ago. You can argue he deserves the 2nd against Mosley that fight is disputed by many fans and I gave the fight to him. But all I know on his official record is this. 0-1 Trinidad, 0-2 Mosley, 0-1 Hopkins, 0-1 Mayweather, 0-1 Pacquiao. He is 0-6 against all time great fighters at their peak or near their peak. Even if I give Oscar the Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight he's still 2-4 against them. And he had almost every considerable advantage against guys like Hopkins, Mayweather, Pacquiao and the 1st Mosley fight but still lost, that's the reality. Those 4 fights outcome can't be disputed. The Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight yes it can be argued, not the others.
How in the world did he have an advantage against Mayweather or Hopkins ? against Floyd Mayweather Jr he'd only fought 3 fights in 3 years and was only a part time boxer at that point.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogAs you know the name of the game is hit and not get hit. Whitaker made Oscar miss a lot, and that's an understatement. Whitaker did enough to win with his offense imo. Whitaker's jab and pitter pat punch as you put up still racked up points in my book. As said, isn't that the name of the game? Hit and not get hit. He was always a master of that. Oscar on the other hand was flurrying to win the round when he heard the 10 second warning while looking horrendous the rest of many rounds. Now how is that winning?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseThe fact that Oscar was robbed against Trinidad and Mosley shouldn't be held against him. Yes he made a mistake by giving up the last rounds against Trinidad. Who cares? A fight is judge on rounds won. Not a fighters bad game plan. Oscar deserved the win. And really why people even think the whitaker fight is disputed is beyond me. Despite the bullshit kd Oscar still won by 3 or 4 points. Whitaker defense for that fight was amazing. He had Oscar looking foolish at times. At the same time is offense was horrendus. Jab and a pitter pat punch was all it was. How did anybody think he was winning rounds like that? Or that, that deserve to win them.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogI was thinking the same also. Can Oscar blow out Manny in a few rounds? History says no with Manny's heart and resiliency, unless someone wants to argue that Manny was prime when he got ko by bums in the late 90s as prime. History on the other hand has said that Oscar does not do well with ATG figthers in their prime or had something left. Tito, Hopkins, Floyd, Manny, Mosley, etc. Even the Sweetpea victory is highly disputed and Sweetpea was 33 and slipping. And while Ike was a very good fighter, I would be very hesitant to call him an all time great, at most an hall of famer. Even that fight was close as hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiThis really is food for thought. Oscar just couldn't seem to drop the hammer in his biggest fights could he? I mean I though he deserved no better than a draw with Sweet Pea and for whatever reason he didn't fight twelve rounds with Tito. Then again he finished strong with Ike.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
At a minimum this makes me think Oscar has to just blow him away. If Manny can stay in the fight...
And as someone once said, "Which all time great fighter did Oscar beat in their prime or had something left?"
If one is gonna asked who Oscar beat that was in his prime than one should ask who Pacquiao beat in his prime?
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f3...ll/4qxyumt.gif
And that's pretty much what a lot of the rounds look like against Whitaker, now how is that beating Whitaker by 3 or 4 points? Whitaker landed more and at a higher connect percentage, plus Oscar missing alot. That's pretty much a Whitaker victory in my book.
As for the Trinidad fight, it can be disputed no doubt. The Shane Mosley fight, the one in 2000 he clearly lost, even Oscar said so himself that he lost in some interview years ago. You can argue he deserves the 2nd against Mosley that fight is disputed by many fans and I gave the fight to him. But all I know on his official record is this. 0-1 Trinidad, 0-2 Mosley, 0-1 Hopkins, 0-1 Mayweather, 0-1 Pacquiao. He is 0-6 against all time great fighters at their peak or near their peak. Even if I give Oscar the Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight he's still 2-4 against them. And he had almost every considerable advantage against guys like Hopkins, Mayweather, Pacquiao and the 1st Mosley fight but still lost, that's the reality. Those 4 fights outcome can't be disputed. The Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight yes it can be argued, not the others.
Against Bernard Hopkins he was fighting at a weightclass, he wasn't comfortable at which showed against Felix Sturm. Which was probably one of his worst performances of his career.
Against Manny Pacquiao he fought at a weightclass, he hadn't fought at in almost 10 years.
The worst he could of done in the Trinidad fight was 6-6, and thats being generous to Felix Trinidad. In all honesty forgetting he run for the last 3 rounds, how in the world is it possible he lost 7 rounds on the judges scorecards ? thats ridiculous.
Against Shane Mosley in the 2nd fight, a majority think he won the fight. Infact i haven't come across anyone who thinks Shane Mosley won.
And actually he has two wins over ATG's JCC, Pernell Whitaker. Yes they both were past there prime.
But if your bringing up when ODLH was past his prime vs Mayweather, Pacquiao. Then ODLH's wins over those two should be relevant aswell.
I had Oscar beating Whitaker, only be virtue of winning the last round. I think he beat Tito, lost by a point to Quartey, by 4 rounds to Mosley (I) but won the 2nd Mosely fight. Also lost to Sturm.
One of my all time favorite fighters - never ducked anybody!!
He ducked Vernon Forrest and Winky Wright ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
If you looked at who he DID fight in their peak, I think it's highly unlilkely, he ducked those 2 guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBHe ducked Vernon Forrest and Winky Wright ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
I was being sarcastic BIG H i don't believe he would duck anyone, it makes me laugh how people go off about ODLH's controversial wins. I mean who wouldn't have a few controversial wins against the opposition he fought ? and plus he had a few he lost that should of gone his way aswell.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG HIf you looked at who he DID fight in their peak, I think it's highly unlilkely, he ducked those 2 guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBHe ducked Vernon Forrest and Winky Wright ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Pacquiao's prime is definitely the more impressive of the two. Have to go with prime Pacquiao for the UD.
It's part of the game. There's also something called effective punching. Whitaker landed more punches overall. But 70% of them were jabs. Most of them that weak, keep away from me jab. De La Hoya pressed the fight all night. He landed twice the power shots Whitaker did. There wasn't a great amount of noticeable shots landed that night. But damn near all that were, were landed by De La Hoya. Whitaker also spend a lot of the fight just clowning and hot dogging. Defense counts. Showboating doesn't. You knock Oscar for giving up the last rounds against Trinidad. Yet what did Whitaker do in round 12 against Oscar? Nothing. He posed. Stuck his tongue out. Showboated a little. But did no fighting. Shit goes both waysQuote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogAs you know the name of the game is hit and not get hit. Whitaker made Oscar miss a lot, and that's an understatement. Whitaker did enough to win with his offense imo. Whitaker's jab and pitter pat punch as you put up still racked up points in my book. As said, isn't that the name of the game? Hit and not get hit. He was always a master of that. Oscar on the other hand was flurrying to win the round when he heard the 10 second warning while looking horrendous the rest of many rounds. Now how is that winning?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseThe fact that Oscar was robbed against Trinidad and Mosley shouldn't be held against him. Yes he made a mistake by giving up the last rounds against Trinidad. Who cares? A fight is judge on rounds won. Not a fighters bad game plan. Oscar deserved the win. And really why people even think the whitaker fight is disputed is beyond me. Despite the bullshit kd Oscar still won by 3 or 4 points. Whitaker defense for that fight was amazing. He had Oscar looking foolish at times. At the same time is offense was horrendus. Jab and a pitter pat punch was all it was. How did anybody think he was winning rounds like that? Or that, that deserve to win them.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogI was thinking the same also. Can Oscar blow out Manny in a few rounds? History says no with Manny's heart and resiliency, unless someone wants to argue that Manny was prime when he got ko by bums in the late 90s as prime. History on the other hand has said that Oscar does not do well with ATG figthers in their prime or had something left. Tito, Hopkins, Floyd, Manny, Mosley, etc. Even the Sweetpea victory is highly disputed and Sweetpea was 33 and slipping. And while Ike was a very good fighter, I would be very hesitant to call him an all time great, at most an hall of famer. Even that fight was close as hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiThis really is food for thought. Oscar just couldn't seem to drop the hammer in his biggest fights could he? I mean I though he deserved no better than a draw with Sweet Pea and for whatever reason he didn't fight twelve rounds with Tito. Then again he finished strong with Ike.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
At a minimum this makes me think Oscar has to just blow him away. If Manny can stay in the fight...
And as someone once said, "Which all time great fighter did Oscar beat in their prime or had something left?"
If one is gonna asked who Oscar beat that was in his prime than one should ask who Pacquiao beat in his prime?
And that's pretty much what a lot of the rounds look like against Whitaker, now how is that beating Whitaker by 3 or 4 points? Whitaker landed more and at a higher connect percentage, plus Oscar missing alot. That's pretty much a Whitaker victory in my book.
As for the Trinidad fight, it can be disputed no doubt. The Shane Mosley fight, the one in 2000 he clearly lost, even Oscar said so himself that he lost in some interview years ago. You can argue he deserves the 2nd against Mosley that fight is disputed by many fans and I gave the fight to him. But all I know on his official record is this. 0-1 Trinidad, 0-2 Mosley, 0-1 Hopkins, 0-1 Mayweather, 0-1 Pacquiao. He is 0-6 against all time great fighters at their peak or near their peak. Even if I give Oscar the Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight he's still 2-4 against them. And he had almost every considerable advantage against guys like Hopkins, Mayweather, Pacquiao and the 1st Mosley fight but still lost, that's the reality. Those 4 fights outcome can't be disputed. The Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight yes it can be argued, not the others.
You got Oscar going 0-6 against the ATG's. Officially you say. How the hell can that be? Officially he has a win against Whitaker. Why ain't you counting that one? He's clearly an ATG. As is Julio Cesar Chavez. Whitaker wasn't in his prime when he met De La Hoya. But don't tell he still didn't have something left
Oscar is garbage, maybe the most overhype fighter of all time next to tyson. ;D
I wish Koysta would of fought Oscar. ;)
Mosely is probably the best metric to use, given his combo of speed and power along with aggression. And with that you're left with, well, a question mark. IMO, ODLH holds up well. He probably won the rematch and was likely the victim of Mosely's PED use.
In my view, ODLH is a tad underated. If you reverese the Trinidad and Mosely II decsions, you have an unbelivable resume. He absolutely dominated the lower wieghts in Hearns-like style, KOing a roster of top-level names before becoming the first person to stop JCC. And he dominated Chavez, who was not too far from his prime.
Sweet Pea may have been robbed but ODLH fought him better than anyone had ever done up to that point. Then he absolutely exposes a red-hot prime Trinidad before his 2 battles with Mosely. That leaves B-Hop at middleweight as the only boxer with a winning record against ODLH in his prime.
this comment alone lets everyone know how much of a moron you really are ;D;), the only time garbage should be mentioned with DLH's name is when referring to the version of DLH that Pacquiao beat, and the garbage decisions that were rewarded to Tito and Shane in the rematch, unlike Manny DLH won his championships without catchweights or "advantages", and it'll always go down in history that Pacquiao had to fight a weight drained shot DLH to be able to beat himQuote:
Originally Posted by Julius Rain
I guess ODLH rep hinges on how seriously one takes the official record. There's an argument to be made that Boxing is different. Because of its inherent subjectivity (along with corruption) offical scores mean less that they do in other sports. And close wins are not the same as decisive ones, since things could easily go the other way.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
This analysis also excludes Sweat Pea and Chavez, presumably becase they were not in their prime, but then simultaneously includes PBF and PacMan, even though ODLH was not prime by then. Not to mention Hopkins size.
One thing I like about boxing is, more than any other sport, its not whether you win or lose but how you played the game.
On the Whitaker fight, I guess we're going to disagree on that. All I saw was that Whitaker made him miss a lot and got his punches in, even if they were weak jabs as you say, Whitaker in total punches landed and connect percentage his was higher overall. Now Oscar landed more on power shots but they were still too far and in between for me to give the rounds to Oscar and I can't really justify giving rounds to Oscar when he heard the 10 second warning and decided to flurry and try to win the rounds like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseIt's part of the game. There's also something called effective punching. Whitaker landed more punches overall. But 70% of them were jabs. Most of them that weak, keep away from me jab. De La Hoya pressed the fight all night. He landed twice the power shots Whitaker did. There wasn't a great amount of noticeable shots landed that night. But damn near all that were, were landed by De La Hoya. Whitaker also spend a lot of the fight just clowning and hot dogging. Defense counts. Showboating doesn't. You knock Oscar for giving up the last rounds against Trinidad. Yet what did Whitaker do in round 12 against Oscar? Nothing. He posed. Stuck his tongue out. Showboated a little. But did no fighting. Shit goes both waysQuote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogAs you know the name of the game is hit and not get hit. Whitaker made Oscar miss a lot, and that's an understatement. Whitaker did enough to win with his offense imo. Whitaker's jab and pitter pat punch as you put up still racked up points in my book. As said, isn't that the name of the game? Hit and not get hit. He was always a master of that. Oscar on the other hand was flurrying to win the round when he heard the 10 second warning while looking horrendous the rest of many rounds. Now how is that winning?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseThe fact that Oscar was robbed against Trinidad and Mosley shouldn't be held against him. Yes he made a mistake by giving up the last rounds against Trinidad. Who cares? A fight is judge on rounds won. Not a fighters bad game plan. Oscar deserved the win. And really why people even think the whitaker fight is disputed is beyond me. Despite the bullshit kd Oscar still won by 3 or 4 points. Whitaker defense for that fight was amazing. He had Oscar looking foolish at times. At the same time is offense was horrendus. Jab and a pitter pat punch was all it was. How did anybody think he was winning rounds like that? Or that, that deserve to win them.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogI was thinking the same also. Can Oscar blow out Manny in a few rounds? History says no with Manny's heart and resiliency, unless someone wants to argue that Manny was prime when he got ko by bums in the late 90s as prime. History on the other hand has said that Oscar does not do well with ATG figthers in their prime or had something left. Tito, Hopkins, Floyd, Manny, Mosley, etc. Even the Sweetpea victory is highly disputed and Sweetpea was 33 and slipping. And while Ike was a very good fighter, I would be very hesitant to call him an all time great, at most an hall of famer. Even that fight was close as hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiThis really is food for thought. Oscar just couldn't seem to drop the hammer in his biggest fights could he? I mean I though he deserved no better than a draw with Sweet Pea and for whatever reason he didn't fight twelve rounds with Tito. Then again he finished strong with Ike.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
At a minimum this makes me think Oscar has to just blow him away. If Manny can stay in the fight...
And as someone once said, "Which all time great fighter did Oscar beat in their prime or had something left?"
If one is gonna asked who Oscar beat that was in his prime than one should ask who Pacquiao beat in his prime?
And that's pretty much what a lot of the rounds look like against Whitaker, now how is that beating Whitaker by 3 or 4 points? Whitaker landed more and at a higher connect percentage, plus Oscar missing alot. That's pretty much a Whitaker victory in my book.
As for the Trinidad fight, it can be disputed no doubt. The Shane Mosley fight, the one in 2000 he clearly lost, even Oscar said so himself that he lost in some interview years ago. You can argue he deserves the 2nd against Mosley that fight is disputed by many fans and I gave the fight to him. But all I know on his official record is this. 0-1 Trinidad, 0-2 Mosley, 0-1 Hopkins, 0-1 Mayweather, 0-1 Pacquiao. He is 0-6 against all time great fighters at their peak or near their peak. Even if I give Oscar the Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight he's still 2-4 against them. And he had almost every considerable advantage against guys like Hopkins, Mayweather, Pacquiao and the 1st Mosley fight but still lost, that's the reality. Those 4 fights outcome can't be disputed. The Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight yes it can be argued, not the others.
You got Oscar going 0-6 against the ATG's. Officially you say. How the hell can that be? Officially he has a win against Whitaker. Why ain't you counting that one? He's clearly an ATG. As is Julio Cesar Chavez. Whitaker wasn't in his prime when he met De La Hoya. But don't tell he still didn't have something left
As for Oscar's official record then if you add in the JCC and Whitaker fights to the other 6 fights it's still 2-6 against all time greats. He lost more than he won. Yes he's an all time great for his accomplishments overall in his career, but he's not up there with Mayweather and Pacquiao or even 80s legends like Leonard the Golden boy of boxing in his day. Oscar you can say is a bigger star and has a bigger bank account, but he's not up there with them in terms of legacy or accomplishment. Just my 2 cents.
You inadvertantly revealed another problem with using the offical record. Not every fighter fights the best. Pac and PBF have never fought each other obviously whereas there was no such drama for ODLH and Trinidad. Oscar fought a red-hot prime Mosely yet the two current lb-4-lbers appeared to both wait for him to age more, with PBF retiring while Mosely was younger and PacMan waiting until he dropped down in the rankings.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
I do like the metric of judging a fighter against the best, and I think you can justify denying ODLH first-ballot HOF honors on that. Indeed, I agued on anohter thread that JCC fails on that metric (lost to Sweet Pea, never fought Azumah, controversy against Meldrick, loss and controversy with Frankie Randall, etc).
But ODLH was as willing to fight anyone as any fighter in the modern era. And he did while he held all the cards, ie money and popularity. This means he had an incentive to dodge but didn't. But I guess he's paying the price for those risks.
ODLH has a better record than Floyd Mayweather Jr.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogOn the Whitaker fight, I guess we're going to disagree on that. All I saw was that Whitaker made him miss a lot and got his punches in, even if they were weak jabs as you say, Whitaker in total punches landed and connect percentage his was higher overall. Now Oscar landed more on power shots but they were still too far and in between for me to give the rounds to Oscar and I can't really justify giving rounds to Oscar when he heard the 10 second warning and decided to flurry and try to win the rounds like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseIt's part of the game. There's also something called effective punching. Whitaker landed more punches overall. But 70% of them were jabs. Most of them that weak, keep away from me jab. De La Hoya pressed the fight all night. He landed twice the power shots Whitaker did. There wasn't a great amount of noticeable shots landed that night. But damn near all that were, were landed by De La Hoya. Whitaker also spend a lot of the fight just clowning and hot dogging. Defense counts. Showboating doesn't. You knock Oscar for giving up the last rounds against Trinidad. Yet what did Whitaker do in round 12 against Oscar? Nothing. He posed. Stuck his tongue out. Showboated a little. But did no fighting. Shit goes both waysQuote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogAs you know the name of the game is hit and not get hit. Whitaker made Oscar miss a lot, and that's an understatement. Whitaker did enough to win with his offense imo. Whitaker's jab and pitter pat punch as you put up still racked up points in my book. As said, isn't that the name of the game? Hit and not get hit. He was always a master of that. Oscar on the other hand was flurrying to win the round when he heard the 10 second warning while looking horrendous the rest of many rounds. Now how is that winning?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseThe fact that Oscar was robbed against Trinidad and Mosley shouldn't be held against him. Yes he made a mistake by giving up the last rounds against Trinidad. Who cares? A fight is judge on rounds won. Not a fighters bad game plan. Oscar deserved the win. And really why people even think the whitaker fight is disputed is beyond me. Despite the bullshit kd Oscar still won by 3 or 4 points. Whitaker defense for that fight was amazing. He had Oscar looking foolish at times. At the same time is offense was horrendus. Jab and a pitter pat punch was all it was. How did anybody think he was winning rounds like that? Or that, that deserve to win them.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogI was thinking the same also. Can Oscar blow out Manny in a few rounds? History says no with Manny's heart and resiliency, unless someone wants to argue that Manny was prime when he got ko by bums in the late 90s as prime. History on the other hand has said that Oscar does not do well with ATG figthers in their prime or had something left. Tito, Hopkins, Floyd, Manny, Mosley, etc. Even the Sweetpea victory is highly disputed and Sweetpea was 33 and slipping. And while Ike was a very good fighter, I would be very hesitant to call him an all time great, at most an hall of famer. Even that fight was close as hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiThis really is food for thought. Oscar just couldn't seem to drop the hammer in his biggest fights could he? I mean I though he deserved no better than a draw with Sweet Pea and for whatever reason he didn't fight twelve rounds with Tito. Then again he finished strong with Ike.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
At a minimum this makes me think Oscar has to just blow him away. If Manny can stay in the fight...
And as someone once said, "Which all time great fighter did Oscar beat in their prime or had something left?"
If one is gonna asked who Oscar beat that was in his prime than one should ask who Pacquiao beat in his prime?
And that's pretty much what a lot of the rounds look like against Whitaker, now how is that beating Whitaker by 3 or 4 points? Whitaker landed more and at a higher connect percentage, plus Oscar missing alot. That's pretty much a Whitaker victory in my book.
As for the Trinidad fight, it can be disputed no doubt. The Shane Mosley fight, the one in 2000 he clearly lost, even Oscar said so himself that he lost in some interview years ago. You can argue he deserves the 2nd against Mosley that fight is disputed by many fans and I gave the fight to him. But all I know on his official record is this. 0-1 Trinidad, 0-2 Mosley, 0-1 Hopkins, 0-1 Mayweather, 0-1 Pacquiao. He is 0-6 against all time great fighters at their peak or near their peak. Even if I give Oscar the Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight he's still 2-4 against them. And he had almost every considerable advantage against guys like Hopkins, Mayweather, Pacquiao and the 1st Mosley fight but still lost, that's the reality. Those 4 fights outcome can't be disputed. The Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight yes it can be argued, not the others.
You got Oscar going 0-6 against the ATG's. Officially you say. How the hell can that be? Officially he has a win against Whitaker. Why ain't you counting that one? He's clearly an ATG. As is Julio Cesar Chavez. Whitaker wasn't in his prime when he met De La Hoya. But don't tell he still didn't have something left
As for Oscar's official record then if you add in the JCC and Whitaker fights to the other 6 fights it's still 2-6 against all time greats. He lost more than he won. Yes he's an all time great for his accomplishments overall in his career, but he's not up there with Mayweather and Pacquiao or even 80s legends like Leonard the Golden boy of boxing in his day. Oscar you can say is a bigger star and has a bigger bank account, but he's not up there with them in terms of legacy or accomplishment. Just my 2 cents.
which was a great idea of oscar himself until he got in with a real ATG and got whoop on.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMoralesthis comment alone lets everyone know how much of a moron you really are ;D;), the only time garbage should be mentioned with DLH's name is when referring to the version of DLH that Pacquiao beat, and the garbage decisions that were rewarded to Tito and Shane in the rematch, unlike Manny DLH won his championships without catchweights or "advantages", and it'll always go down in history that Pacquiao had to fight a weight drained shot DLH to be able to beat himQuote:
Originally Posted by Julius Rain
Please explain.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBODLH has a better record than Floyd Mayweather Jr.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogOn the Whitaker fight, I guess we're going to disagree on that. All I saw was that Whitaker made him miss a lot and got his punches in, even if they were weak jabs as you say, Whitaker in total punches landed and connect percentage his was higher overall. Now Oscar landed more on power shots but they were still too far and in between for me to give the rounds to Oscar and I can't really justify giving rounds to Oscar when he heard the 10 second warning and decided to flurry and try to win the rounds like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseIt's part of the game. There's also something called effective punching. Whitaker landed more punches overall. But 70% of them were jabs. Most of them that weak, keep away from me jab. De La Hoya pressed the fight all night. He landed twice the power shots Whitaker did. There wasn't a great amount of noticeable shots landed that night. But damn near all that were, were landed by De La Hoya. Whitaker also spend a lot of the fight just clowning and hot dogging. Defense counts. Showboating doesn't. You knock Oscar for giving up the last rounds against Trinidad. Yet what did Whitaker do in round 12 against Oscar? Nothing. He posed. Stuck his tongue out. Showboated a little. But did no fighting. Shit goes both waysQuote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogAs you know the name of the game is hit and not get hit. Whitaker made Oscar miss a lot, and that's an understatement. Whitaker did enough to win with his offense imo. Whitaker's jab and pitter pat punch as you put up still racked up points in my book. As said, isn't that the name of the game? Hit and not get hit. He was always a master of that. Oscar on the other hand was flurrying to win the round when he heard the 10 second warning while looking horrendous the rest of many rounds. Now how is that winning?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseThe fact that Oscar was robbed against Trinidad and Mosley shouldn't be held against him. Yes he made a mistake by giving up the last rounds against Trinidad. Who cares? A fight is judge on rounds won. Not a fighters bad game plan. Oscar deserved the win. And really why people even think the whitaker fight is disputed is beyond me. Despite the bullshit kd Oscar still won by 3 or 4 points. Whitaker defense for that fight was amazing. He had Oscar looking foolish at times. At the same time is offense was horrendus. Jab and a pitter pat punch was all it was. How did anybody think he was winning rounds like that? Or that, that deserve to win them.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogI was thinking the same also. Can Oscar blow out Manny in a few rounds? History says no with Manny's heart and resiliency, unless someone wants to argue that Manny was prime when he got ko by bums in the late 90s as prime. History on the other hand has said that Oscar does not do well with ATG figthers in their prime or had something left. Tito, Hopkins, Floyd, Manny, Mosley, etc. Even the Sweetpea victory is highly disputed and Sweetpea was 33 and slipping. And while Ike was a very good fighter, I would be very hesitant to call him an all time great, at most an hall of famer. Even that fight was close as hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiThis really is food for thought. Oscar just couldn't seem to drop the hammer in his biggest fights could he? I mean I though he deserved no better than a draw with Sweet Pea and for whatever reason he didn't fight twelve rounds with Tito. Then again he finished strong with Ike.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
At a minimum this makes me think Oscar has to just blow him away. If Manny can stay in the fight...
And as someone once said, "Which all time great fighter did Oscar beat in their prime or had something left?"
If one is gonna asked who Oscar beat that was in his prime than one should ask who Pacquiao beat in his prime?
And that's pretty much what a lot of the rounds look like against Whitaker, now how is that beating Whitaker by 3 or 4 points? Whitaker landed more and at a higher connect percentage, plus Oscar missing alot. That's pretty much a Whitaker victory in my book.
As for the Trinidad fight, it can be disputed no doubt. The Shane Mosley fight, the one in 2000 he clearly lost, even Oscar said so himself that he lost in some interview years ago. You can argue he deserves the 2nd against Mosley that fight is disputed by many fans and I gave the fight to him. But all I know on his official record is this. 0-1 Trinidad, 0-2 Mosley, 0-1 Hopkins, 0-1 Mayweather, 0-1 Pacquiao. He is 0-6 against all time great fighters at their peak or near their peak. Even if I give Oscar the Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight he's still 2-4 against them. And he had almost every considerable advantage against guys like Hopkins, Mayweather, Pacquiao and the 1st Mosley fight but still lost, that's the reality. Those 4 fights outcome can't be disputed. The Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight yes it can be argued, not the others.
You got Oscar going 0-6 against the ATG's. Officially you say. How the hell can that be? Officially he has a win against Whitaker. Why ain't you counting that one? He's clearly an ATG. As is Julio Cesar Chavez. Whitaker wasn't in his prime when he met De La Hoya. But don't tell he still didn't have something left
As for Oscar's official record then if you add in the JCC and Whitaker fights to the other 6 fights it's still 2-6 against all time greats. He lost more than he won. Yes he's an all time great for his accomplishments overall in his career, but he's not up there with Mayweather and Pacquiao or even 80s legends like Leonard the Golden boy of boxing in his day. Oscar you can say is a bigger star and has a bigger bank account, but he's not up there with them in terms of legacy or accomplishment. Just my 2 cents.
[
and seems that Manny is running with the idea again cause he refuses to face Martinez anywhere but 147, again weight draining an opponent, either way 154 and up and Sergio Martinez makes both Floyd Jr and Manny his bitches for the evening, Martinez is the true p4p #1Quote:
Originally Posted by Julius Rainwhich was a great idea of oscar himself until he got in with a real ATG and got whoop on.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMoralesthis comment alone lets everyone know how much of a moron you really are ;D;), the only time garbage should be mentioned with DLH's name is when referring to the version of DLH that Pacquiao beat, and the garbage decisions that were rewarded to Tito and Shane in the rematch, unlike Manny DLH won his championships without catchweights or "advantages", and it'll always go down in history that Pacquiao had to fight a weight drained shot DLH to be able to beat himQuote:
Originally Posted by Julius Rain
Personally I think ODLH RESUME is the best in boxing for the last 25 years. He pretty much fought everybody and did well against everybody too. I actually think he won against Sweet Pea, Quartey, Mosley (2nd fight), definitely Tito, did very well against Floyd and in hindsight was doing amazingly against Hopkins too. I say in hindsight vs Hopkins because I thought at the time that Hopkins was going to show his very advanced age that night ;D .Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBODLH has a better record than Floyd Mayweather Jr.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogOn the Whitaker fight, I guess we're going to disagree on that. All I saw was that Whitaker made him miss a lot and got his punches in, even if they were weak jabs as you say, Whitaker in total punches landed and connect percentage his was higher overall. Now Oscar landed more on power shots but they were still too far and in between for me to give the rounds to Oscar and I can't really justify giving rounds to Oscar when he heard the 10 second warning and decided to flurry and try to win the rounds like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseIt's part of the game. There's also something called effective punching. Whitaker landed more punches overall. But 70% of them were jabs. Most of them that weak, keep away from me jab. De La Hoya pressed the fight all night. He landed twice the power shots Whitaker did. There wasn't a great amount of noticeable shots landed that night. But damn near all that were, were landed by De La Hoya. Whitaker also spend a lot of the fight just clowning and hot dogging. Defense counts. Showboating doesn't. You knock Oscar for giving up the last rounds against Trinidad. Yet what did Whitaker do in round 12 against Oscar? Nothing. He posed. Stuck his tongue out. Showboated a little. But did no fighting. Shit goes both waysQuote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogAs you know the name of the game is hit and not get hit. Whitaker made Oscar miss a lot, and that's an understatement. Whitaker did enough to win with his offense imo. Whitaker's jab and pitter pat punch as you put up still racked up points in my book. As said, isn't that the name of the game? Hit and not get hit. He was always a master of that. Oscar on the other hand was flurrying to win the round when he heard the 10 second warning while looking horrendous the rest of many rounds. Now how is that winning?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseThe fact that Oscar was robbed against Trinidad and Mosley shouldn't be held against him. Yes he made a mistake by giving up the last rounds against Trinidad. Who cares? A fight is judge on rounds won. Not a fighters bad game plan. Oscar deserved the win. And really why people even think the whitaker fight is disputed is beyond me. Despite the bullshit kd Oscar still won by 3 or 4 points. Whitaker defense for that fight was amazing. He had Oscar looking foolish at times. At the same time is offense was horrendus. Jab and a pitter pat punch was all it was. How did anybody think he was winning rounds like that? Or that, that deserve to win them.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogI was thinking the same also. Can Oscar blow out Manny in a few rounds? History says no with Manny's heart and resiliency, unless someone wants to argue that Manny was prime when he got ko by bums in the late 90s as prime. History on the other hand has said that Oscar does not do well with ATG figthers in their prime or had something left. Tito, Hopkins, Floyd, Manny, Mosley, etc. Even the Sweetpea victory is highly disputed and Sweetpea was 33 and slipping. And while Ike was a very good fighter, I would be very hesitant to call him an all time great, at most an hall of famer. Even that fight was close as hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiThis really is food for thought. Oscar just couldn't seem to drop the hammer in his biggest fights could he? I mean I though he deserved no better than a draw with Sweet Pea and for whatever reason he didn't fight twelve rounds with Tito. Then again he finished strong with Ike.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
At a minimum this makes me think Oscar has to just blow him away. If Manny can stay in the fight...
And as someone once said, "Which all time great fighter did Oscar beat in their prime or had something left?"
If one is gonna asked who Oscar beat that was in his prime than one should ask who Pacquiao beat in his prime?
And that's pretty much what a lot of the rounds look like against Whitaker, now how is that beating Whitaker by 3 or 4 points? Whitaker landed more and at a higher connect percentage, plus Oscar missing alot. That's pretty much a Whitaker victory in my book.
As for the Trinidad fight, it can be disputed no doubt. The Shane Mosley fight, the one in 2000 he clearly lost, even Oscar said so himself that he lost in some interview years ago. You can argue he deserves the 2nd against Mosley that fight is disputed by many fans and I gave the fight to him. But all I know on his official record is this. 0-1 Trinidad, 0-2 Mosley, 0-1 Hopkins, 0-1 Mayweather, 0-1 Pacquiao. He is 0-6 against all time great fighters at their peak or near their peak. Even if I give Oscar the Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight he's still 2-4 against them. And he had almost every considerable advantage against guys like Hopkins, Mayweather, Pacquiao and the 1st Mosley fight but still lost, that's the reality. Those 4 fights outcome can't be disputed. The Trinidad and 2nd Mosley fight yes it can be argued, not the others.
You got Oscar going 0-6 against the ATG's. Officially you say. How the hell can that be? Officially he has a win against Whitaker. Why ain't you counting that one? He's clearly an ATG. As is Julio Cesar Chavez. Whitaker wasn't in his prime when he met De La Hoya. But don't tell he still didn't have something left
As for Oscar's official record then if you add in the JCC and Whitaker fights to the other 6 fights it's still 2-6 against all time greats. He lost more than he won. Yes he's an all time great for his accomplishments overall in his career, but he's not up there with Mayweather and Pacquiao or even 80s legends like Leonard the Golden boy of boxing in his day. Oscar you can say is a bigger star and has a bigger bank account, but he's not up there with them in terms of legacy or accomplishment. Just my 2 cents.