No offense to you Diane although I don't think you'll take any.

What a garbage article written by somebody who clearly has no idea what the hell he's talking about. First off, I'm almost 99% sure that Julio Cesar Chavez wasn't called the Baby Faced Assassin. I might be wrong on that but in all the Chavez fights I've watched I've never heard him called that.

I wanted to stop reading after the first fight he mentioned. Anybody who criticizes De La Hoya's early competition is a fool. I don't care if Jeff Mayweather was a strawweight before he fought De La Hoya, very few fighters have ever had the type of competition De La Hoya did in his first 20 or so fights. I think the precedent for that is Pete Rademacher and that didn't turn out so well for him. The fact is the best boxers of all time beat up on dishwashers and cab drivers to start their career. De La Hoya was fighting world champions that is something you can not possible discredit. Any attempt to do so is, for lack of a better word, retarded. That's the only way I can describe it.

So the first 6 should never have been published end of. Even if it's a blog it's disappointing to read that someone (himself) actually believes these things he's saying.

On to number 7, what more needs to be said? He's slamming Oscar's stellar 21-0 record calling all his opponents, a good portion being world champions, while praising JCC's record which was notoriously padded with bums. Not discounting JCC at all but that's the truth. I've never seen his fight with Miguel Angel Gonzalez though I doubt this chump has either. Why he put the win over parentheses is beyond me but again that's the intellect we're dealing with here.

Number 9, oh boy. Well first off if this hater had seen the fight then surely he would have latched on to the fact that it was an older Whitaker who gave De La Hoya a close fight and he would have hammered that down. But obviously he didn't see the fight, only the scorecards and the tale of the tape so he chose to focus on that. What more is there to say? Anyone who thinks Whitaker didn't belong in the ring with De La Hoya doesn't need to be blogging about a Toughman contest much less this fight.

The last one, the Camacho fight is a footnote it's not a legacy defining fight. The only reason it dragged to decision was because Camacho was about as dirty as one could be, constantly holding and even picking Oscar up and slamming him on his head.

Enough of that, hopefully no one actually agrees with that dope. It's one thing to criticize De La Hoya, it's another thing to criticize him COMPLETELY WRONG. I mean really how off the mark could one guy be? I think my blood pressure just rose a little.