Exposing the Oscar De la Hoya hypocrisy!!

I know there are some strange people who deny this guy greatness but let's look at the facts...

At the top of his game from 1994-2008....Yep that's 14 years...How many was Hagler there for.....???

How many genuine world class fighters or champions did Hagler beat??? (Duran at 160, Hearns, Minter,Briscoe maybe a few others).....

We know that DelaHoya beat Chavez twice (bonafide great)...Whittaker (bonafide great)....

Sure Hagler beat world class fighters.....we know however that DelaHoya beat 13 champions at or nearly at the top of their game!!

Mayorga, Vargas, Quartey, Sturm, Gatti, Camacho (maybe not), Gonzales, Molina, Paez, Hernandez, Whittaker, Chavez twice..(Not forgetting mosley was contentious twice)

Yes Oscar lost fights but hey I'm always told that Duran lost to fighters at higher weights....Hearns, Hagler, Sims, Laing etc....Yep Oscar lost to some greats too...and he started at 130....

Those defeats don't cost Duran do they....

He didn't clean up a division and reign there for years is another slap....Sorry but he looked for hard fights and the names....More impressive than another so-called great (Pedroza)....Hagler let's face it didn't fancy Spinks who called him out..

In conclusion I know Oscar is a latter modern day fighter but his record and longevity more than matches Hagler...Who has every right to HOF status...This isn't a Hagler bashing thread..

Please give him the respect he's due..one of the best fighters I've had the pleasure of seeing..Bonafide great..

Thankyou..

he was an average fighter who lost most of the major fights in his career

Shame trash talk isn't still here for the trash to go on..

He lost the fights that, had he won, would have made him a great.

Fighting b-class fighters like Gatti, robbing an average Sturm, and beating on washed up legends like Chavez. That's ridiculous to claim greatness.

You slate Khan etc for their legend bashing (Barrera etc) but you let Oscar get away with it.

He was famous for his looks. End of.

Still reackon he is a great - but What robert said rings true - he always found some way to lose his biggest fights.

Hagler lost two fights before he was champion..lost to Leonard and drew with Vito but we won't count that aginst him...

Duran gets hammered off Hearns...loses to Laing and Dejesus before that..

Whittaker and Chavez not big????

Oh yes Duran won a contentious decision over Leonard...What other big fights did he win....Hearns, Leonard 2, Hagler????

Buchanan and Dejesus no better than some of the guys DelaHoya beat..

14 years at the top......Calzaghe's great with 10!!

Your argument doesn't hold water..

Come on boys....Let's have it Dejesus beat a prime Duran at his best weight!! Oscar never lost at 130-135-140.....

His best win Leonard 1..lost the return!!! Apart from that lost all his big fights!! (To use your criteria)

Dela Hoya beat Chavez twice and Whittaker - 3 bona fide legends..Apart from that lost all his big fights (Which is bull)

they had the same longevity...

See....................rebuttal comes ever so easy..

Don't think you can really compare De La Hoya to the likes of Duran or Hagler who were for the most part mixing it with better opposition.

Who were better????Than Chavez, Whittaker, Hopkins....

What I'm saying is............

Duran beat Leonard and lost to Leonard who else did he beat in Whittaker and Chavez atg league??? sure he lost to plenty..

Plus the fact Oscar beat 14 champions....

Ghosty you are talking rubbish..

You know as well as me Truss that Chavez and Whitaker had seen far better days by the time they faced De La Hoya, the wins sound more impressive when you don't consider the context.

Hearns had lost to Leonard when Hagler beat him and he was a welter..

Duran had seen better days when Hagler limped past him...

Hagler was champ for 7 years who'd he beat....

DelaHoya fought far better fighters....end of..

Hypocrisy and you know it..

Simply put I don't think he did face better fighters Truss and your immaturity when an opinion of yours is challenged is getting quite tedious.

Your immaturity lies in your lack of desire to answer the question??

Okay...Bowe should be higher than Lewis because he beat a peak Holy twice..

therefore he beat better fighters (Holy twice) who weren't past it...

end of....easy isn't it...

De La Hoyas top level wins consisted of Chavez and De La Hoya this is far outweighed by losses to Mosley, Hopkins, Mayweather and Trinidad. It's very true that almost every time he stepped up he lost and if we call the losses to Trinidad or Mosley as contentious then we must also question his wins over Sturm and Quartey.

If I'm reading this correctly, I believe that Truss raises a very good point.

No matter how objective we endeavour to be we are, being only human, susceptible to being influenced by the dominant characteristics which a fighter exhibits.

We ( mostly, ) love Duran because he was an ugly, snarling, mean, rough 'n tough dyed - in - the - wool fighter, ( which is probably why his boxing skills are often overlooked, ) whereas there's a tendency to condescend to Oscar because we perceive him to have been a glamour boy, first and foremost.

I'm reminded of Gene Tunney. Erudite, sophisticated and a friend of Bernard Shaw and Hemingway. Would his reputation have survived intact had he shipped so many losses as, by way of example, Archie Moore?

I would doubt it.

Not convinced, by any means, that De La Hoya belongs in the same pack as Duran or Hagler, but I do believe that Truss' underlying point is bang on, and that we do under appreciate Oscar.

I don't think he deserves to be in their league..he should be in Hagler's perhaps.....

The fact is we are happy to have guys like Pedroza being great but not this guy...

As for Whittaker and chavez being past it....Well Manny, Mayweather are 1 and 2 and they've had just as much mileage...

Say it again Hagler jumped on Hearns and avoided a rematch....He drew with Vito...

Who else did he beat in Whittaker and Chavez class..???

hypocrisy end of...

The problem for De La Hoya Truss is that some his significant wins were far from clear cut victories. However, you could also say that about his a couple defeats in his rematch with 'Suagr' Shane and fight with 'Tito' Trinidad.

I would say he was a modern great due to he did not beat enough real top level fighters who were near their prime. Apart from his wins against Ruealas and Quartey, all of his other named fighters were already on the slide. Chavez had was finished after Randall had taken him apart in two fights; Vargas had already been dominated by Trinidad; Hernandez was too small; Camacho, Paez, Gonzales, Molina, Hernandez were all way past it and Gatti and Mayorga were not in my opinion were not top level fighters.

However, you can't ignore that Oscar was willing to fight the best available and having defeats on his CV to Moseley (I think Oscar won the rematch), Hopkins, Trinidad (very questionable decision)m Mayweather (I still think this was Floyd's toughest fight) and after he himself was well past it, Manny Pac should not hide that Oscar was a hell of a fighter and would have been comeptitve in any era.

If the the questionable decisions he did not get went his way (Trinidad, Moseley 2) and the in exchange for those he did get (Whittaker and Strum) I still think he would be looked upon in the same way.

Chavez was clear cut...Vargas, Mayorga was clear cut.....

I had him beating Mosley twice!!!! works both ways Mate..

You say in Chavez or Whitakers class but Hearns and Duran more than match them, you'll no doubt say Duran was a blown up lightweight but Chavez started at super featherweight and was far smaller than De La Hoya.

Duran doesn't at 160......lost to Benitez , Laing and Leonard......before Hagler..

Come on....Telling me Duran at 160 is better than Pernell??

You're better than this Mate..

Chavez had lost to Randall, your point is what exactly?

Duran at 160 is better than Chavez at 147lbs.

He avenged randall.....

What has Chavez got to do with...Whittaker and Duran at 160!!

nice try..

Point being that a win over Hearns is more significant than a win over Whitaker while a win over Duran at middleweight is more significant than a win over Chavez at Welterweight.

Why Is a win over Hearns more valid!!!!

Whittaker is higher than Hearns in most listings......

Hearns had lost by ko to Leonard at welter...

We'll disagree on that one..

De la Hoya is one of the best boxers of all time imo. Duran is massively overrated he lost all his big fights and quit against Leonard which was shameful.

De la Hoya would destroy Duran who is not as good. Too much skill for Duran.

Really, Waingro?

Then the village idiot joins in.

If we're honest Truss while he may be highly regarded amongst those in the know a win over Whitaker is never going to mean as much as a win over Hearns.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Then the village idiot joins in.
If we're honest Truss while he may be highly regarded amongst those in the know a win over Whitaker is never going to mean as much as a win over Hearns.

Haha. There is a world of tiredness behind that statement.

Waingro wrote:De la Hoya is one of the best boxers of all time imo. Duran is massively overrated he lost all his big fights and quit against Leonard which was shameful.

De la Hoya would destroy Duran who is not as good. Too much skill for Duran.

What about Hatton Vs Duran?

We can agree or disagree on Whitaker/hearns but the fact is Chavez/Whittaker alone are higher company than Hagler kept out during his reign..

ShahenshahG wrote:

Waingro wrote:De la Hoya is one of the best boxers of all time imo. Duran is massively overrated he lost all his big fights and quit against Leonard which was shameful.

De la Hoya would destroy Duran who is not as good. Too much skill for Duran.

What about Hatton Vs Duran?

This would be a good fight i would love to see it. Who would win? I think it wouled be close but Duran lost most of his big fights and Hatton would have been one of his biggest fights so I think Hatton would win a close fight maybe he would wear him down like he did against Kosta or else he would win on points in a close fight like against Collazo who is very underrated.

In fairness hatton wouldn't be an easy night would he????

Never lacked heart..I'd certainly pay to se it...

Duran was smarter though but wouldn't bet the house Duran wins...Hatton never lost a tear up..as Roberto didn't..

Pick Duran though with reservations..

Waingro wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

Waingro wrote:De la Hoya is one of the best boxers of all time imo. Duran is massively overrated he lost all his big fights and quit against Leonard which was shameful.

De la Hoya would destroy Duran who is not as good. Too much skill for Duran.

What about Hatton Vs Duran?

This would be a good fight i would love to see it. Who would win? I think it wouled be close but Duran lost most of his big fights and Hatton would have been one of his biggest fights so I think Hatton would win a close fight maybe he would wear him down like he did against Kosta or else he would win on points in a close fight like against Collazo who is very underrated.

I laugh to the tune of our national anthem.

HAA HA HA HAA HAHAA HA HA HA HAA HAHA HA HA HAA. HA HAAHA HA HA HA, HA HA HA HAA HA HA HA HA HA HAA.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:In fairness hatton wouldn't be an easy night would he????

Never lacked heart..I'd certainly pay to se it...

Duran was smarter though but wouldn't bet the house Duran wins...Hatton never lost a tear up..as Roberto didn't..

Pick Duran though with reservations..

That is a good point Hatton had more heart. Duran quit when things were against him would Hatton quit like that?? I dont think he would.

I don't believe any champion ever had opponents with a higher winning percentage.

Duran had a lot of heart....Frustrated against leonard in the 2nd fight.....

However Hatton would be more to his taste than say a boxer like Benitez...

Hatton though as against Kosta never lost a tear up and I think it would be one..

Side with Duran..

Waingro wrote:Duran quit when things were against him

You would dismiss a man's entire career for one moment of madness?

Thank Heavens we at v2 are more charitable. For example, if you were to ever write a sensible comment about boxing I'm sure we wouldn't dismiss all your previous input and thereafter regard your opinions as being knowledgeable.

That wasn't quite the schooling many believe either, Waingro.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Leonard only up by one or two at the time?

mikeymax71 wrote:
I would say he was a modern great due to he did not beat enough real top level fighters who were near their prime. Apart from his wins against Ruealas and Quartey, all of his other named fighters were already on the slide. Chavez had was finished after Randall had taken him apart in two fights; Vargas had already been dominated by Trinidad; Hernandez was too small; Camacho, Paez, Gonzales, Molina, Hernandez were all way past it and Gatti and Mayorga were not in my opinion were not top level fighters.

Isn't that an argument you could make for almost all modern day greats? Who does Pacquiao have that wasn't on the slide? Or Leonard exploiting a partied out Duran and a sliding Hagler? Eubank and Hopkins in their prime when Calzaghe beat them? And Don't even get me started on Lewis' resume.

Duran was a quitter how can you deny that?? In one of his biggest fights he quit which was shameful.

Did Hatton or De la Hoya ever quit like that??

Duran would be far too heavy handed and tough for Hatton to compete with let alone beat.

Waingro wrote:Duran was a quitter how can you deny that?? In one of his biggest fights he quit which was shameful.

Did Hatton ever quit like that??

No, our Mancunian coke-snorting, pie munching alcoholic never did anything shameful. He preferred to duck a fighter altogether, rather than quit half way through.

Waingro wrote:Duran was a quitter how can you deny that?? In one of his biggest fights he quit which was shameful.

Did Hatton or De la Hoya ever quit like that??

Did Hatton ever beat say Buchanan, De Jesus, Leonard, Cuevas and Palomino during his career? No he has one very good win over Tzuyu and a series of decent but not great wins over Castillo, Urango, Maussa and Malignaggi.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:

Waingro wrote:Duran was a quitter how can you deny that?? In one of his biggest fights he quit which was shameful.

Did Hatton or De la Hoya ever quit like that??

Did Hatton ever beat say Buchanan, De Jesus, Leonard, Cuevas and Palomino during his career? No he has one very good win over Tzuyu and a series of decent but not great wins over Castillo, Urango, Maussa and Malignaggi.

I think Hatton would have beaten those guys apart from Leonard who was quality and would beat Hatton.

Would Duran have beaten guys like Kosta? Im not sure he would have Kosta had huge power and Duran was easy to hit I think it would be a close fight.

Hatton only lost to the best in the world who were MAyweather and Pacquiao both those guys would beat Duran who lost to far more guys than Hatton.

Big Hatton fan, but Duran very painful night for Ricky I'm afraid and to call a 4 weight world champion a quitter is shameful.

Kosta was heavy handed..he competed with him....

Stop selling top quality fighters short..Robbo was slapping out Hearns easy the other night..according to you..

Duran - Easy to hit Hatton is Pep Reincarnated is he?

ShahenshahG wrote:Duran - Easy to hit Hatton is Pep Reincarnated is he?

Your going to explain that one to Waingro, about pep.