Quote Originally Posted by Violent Demise View Post
Quote Originally Posted by TitoFan View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Violent Demise View Post
Quote Originally Posted by TitoFan View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Violent Demise View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Rice View Post
Quote Originally Posted by bigstinkybug View Post
i don't know how u don't rank Oscar over Tito...they both fought eachother and Oscar was robbed... there's not debating Tito lost that fight by at least three rounds or more... where-ever Tito is ranked, Oscar should one ahead of him...


Fighters Tito popped their cherry


Yori Campus
Oba Carr
Oscar De La Hoya
David Reid
Fernando Vargas

Only Oscar was able to go on to other things, everybody else was ruined
Such distortion of the truth. Trinidad didn't beat De La Hoya. So he shouldn't even be up there. Campas and Vargas won titles after fighting Trinidad. How is that ruining them? A lot of Campas best wins came after the Trinidad fight. Vargas was never the same after he had his back surgery. His back problems are what ruined him. Reid went into the Trinidad fight already ruined. Trinidad was a cash out fight for him. His eye was fucked up and there was no way to fix it. As for Oba Carr? When the fuck are people gonna stop overrating him? Carr was never considered "all that" He had a little hype behind him cuz he was a product of the Kronk gym and went into the Trinidad fight with a pretty 32-0 record. But the people who actually follow boxing (and not just look at records and pretend they know more than they really do) knew it was a hollow 32-0. By all rights It should of been 30-2. Pedro Sanchez dropped him and out fought him. And deserved the win. But that doesn't compare to the bullshit SD win Carr got over 600 year old Livingstone Bramble. Bramble dropped him twice and punked him all night. Carr would of took the loss if the fight wasn't in his hometown. It makes me laugh when I hear clueless people say Trinidad ruined Carr. He didn't ruin Carr. Carr was always just an average fighter. He never beat anyone of note before fighting Trinidad or after fighting Trinidad. But don't let facts stand in the way. Carry on with the distorted facts. Trinidad ruined Carr. He turned an average fighter into less average fighter. Yay.


Can't except you to be objective about any argument involving a P.R. fighter and a Mexican one. But I can't help but notice how you steer away from the argument that Oscar made a living out of feasting on Trinidad's leftovers. Fine... tear down the Reid's and the Carr's. It's a no-win argument either way. You know what they say about hindsight, or Monday-morning quarterbacking. Makes everyone look like geniuses. My argument is and has always been that, although admittedly Oscar was the better boxer, Trinidad was the more accomplished fighter AND had the more impressive career. Oscar was more globally popular for the same reason Baby Chavez is globally popular. There's millions and millions of Mexicans and Mexican-Americans who will eagerly throw their weight behind any "paisano" that comes along. You can be coddled (Chavez Jr.), or a known cheater (Margarito)... and you still get all the adulation, deserved or not. No hate, just the facts.
The problem is a very simple one. You're just to damn sensitive. I mean little 10 year old girl sensitive. You take facts as insults. That's why you think I'm always knocking Trinidad. When in reality I'm not. I wasn't tearing Reid or Carr down. I was just simply providing facts. Or am I lying? Feel free to counter anything I said. Prove I'm making shit up or I'm wrong in what I'm saying. And while you're at it, point out to me where I discredited Trinidad like you claim I always do. Like I told you before. Facts are not insults. You just take them that way

Back down, Fido. Down... boy. Nobody's mentioning anything about insults here, only you. In your own predictable fashion, you go off on your (by now very tiresome) tirade about me being overly sensitive and whatnot. I'm only stating my opinion to counter your opinion. Which, by the way, is what it is..... an OPINION. You see.... here's the difference between facts and opinions:

Your opinion is that Oscar had the better career.
My opinion is that Trinidad had the better career.
Follow me? Opinions.

Fact: Trinidad got the decision win over Oscar when they fought.

Deserved or not? Opinion.
See how this shit works?
I'll dumb it down for you and make it less complicated. You said I was tearing down the Reid and Carr wins. When did I do that?



You're too young for Alzheimers, I imagine.

Like.... when you said Reid was already SHOT when he fought Trinidad, and when you said that Carr was OVERRATED?? Maybe my English isn't up to snuff, but..... is that not tearing down or discrediting the Trinidad wins over both of these guys??