Quote Originally Posted by SweetPea
Quote Originally Posted by MannyP
Quote Originally Posted by SweetPea
Witter has the most accurate statement of any of them:

"De la Hoya is best against people who are coming forward, he is an excellent counter-puncher. But with the style Mayweather has got, he’s not going to rush into anything and make that mistake that de la Hoya needs."
This is what the whole fight boils down to in my opinion, and it's the reason I've been picking Floyd all along. This fight isn't about age or size, it's about fighting styles. Floyd's style is a very bad matchup for Oscar.
Oscar has always been at his best when he's in the ring with a big puncher who will try to stalk him, which forces Oscar into the role of fast counter-puncher.
It's no surprise that Oscar's best performances were against Vargas, Mayorga, the first 9 rounds against Tito....
Time will tell, but I see this as absolutely wrong. Counter-puncher? Needs someone coming forward?
So if you think this is absolutely wrong.... then are you saying that Oscar is better at fighting smaller, faster fighters who can fight going backward, as opposed to big strong punchers who come forward and leave themselves open to counterpunches?
I assume this is what you're saying, and that's dead wrong.

verytime somebody wants to mention how weak Oscar is who do they mention, Sturm? Hopkins?Big guys. Middleweights with size and power. Why would anyone think Mayweather would match up the same way and take advantage off the same things?
I didn't mention those names. In fact, I don't penalize Oscar for either of his fights at 160, because he didn't belong in that division.
I'll give you names.... Pernell Whitaker and Shane Mosley. Two fast smaller fighters. An old, past his prime Whitaker gave DLH fits, and a prime fast Mosley beat Oscar in their first fight. You know why, because in both those fights Oscar came forward against smaller quicker fighters.

The two Mosley fights are the perfect example. First Mosley fight, Shane is small and fast, Oscar comes forward, Shane wins.
3 years later when they fight again, Shane has moved up in weight, focused too much on weightlifting, and has lost a lot of his combination punching and movement, and become more of a slugger who comes forward. Shane comes forward and tries to slug in the second fight, which allowed Oscar to counter.

Floyd is a horrible style matchup for Oscar.
No, what I'm saying is that if you're judging Oscar's potential performance in this fight based on his style and counter-punching against bigger guys, then yes, I believe it's dead wrong. As far as Sturm and Hopkins, you're right, you didn't mention them specifically. I apologize for adding them in your statement. But as far as his style against the one's you did mention, Vargas, Mayorga and Tito, the same argument holds. Bigger stronger guys who were able to threaten him with a quick ending. Nothing to do with this fight whatsoever. He was never as aggressive once he started facing those types of fighters.

You mention Whitaker and Mosely, again, it's off the mark. Whitaker could be a good basis for judging this fight, except that I think Oscar has much more power now to deal with that kind of fight and fighter. That was Oscar's first fight at 147, and as far as I'm concerned, didn't develop the kind of power he had at lightweight until much later. At 147, he was an okay puncher, but not like he was at 135. It took him time to grow into it. Now, relative to his weight and his opponent, his power is much more meaningful.

As far as Mosley, he actually had a reach advantage on Oscar and it drove him crazy. I don't think that it was Mosley's speed that was the decisive factor in those fights, it was his reach and his power. I think sometimes people over-estimate Mosley's strength, he's not a one punch knock out guy, but he did have enough strength to keep Oscar from really going after him. Floyd has neither. Not reach. Not strength. At least not enough to matter to Oscar in this one.