Oscar De La Hoya

[Dynamite Kid]

Underrated imo.

I had him losing to Sturm, Quartey but beating Mosley 2, Trinidad and Whitaker.

Oscar has good wins over guys like Oba Carr,Gatti,Camacho,Ruelas,Genaro Hernandez,Leija,Paez,Molina,Wilfredo Rivera,then you have his wins over Chavez,Vargas,Maryorga.

Imagine how much better DLH's record would look if he had not gotten raw deals in the Mosley rematch, Trinidad fight.

[IMDAZED]

Underrated imo.

I had him losing to Sturm, Quartey but beating Mosley 2, Trinidad and Whitaker.

Oscar has good wins over guys like Oba Carr,Gatti,Camacho,Ruelas,Genaro Hernandez,Leija,Paez,Molina,Wilfredo Rivera,then you have his wins over Chavez,Vargas,Maryorga.

Imagine how much better DLH's record would look if he had not gotten raw deals in the Mosley rematch, Trinidad fight.

Or worse if the Molina, Whitaker and Sturm fights allw ent in the opposite direction.

[Dynamite Kid]

Or worse if the Molina, Whitaker and Sturm fights allw ent in the opposite direction.

Well i dont recall much controversy about the Molina fight although its been a while since i saw it.

The Whitaker fight was extremely close fight that IMO neither of them deserved to win, that said id lean to DLH if pushed. You dont seem to like DLH maybe thats why you would rather look at it from a negative aspect, none of those fights were clear losses for DLH except for the Sturm fight, what your doing is making every conceivable close fight he had go against him and saying what happens if his record looks like this, thats clearly not fair.



Oscar Dela Hoya vs Pernerll Whitaker

Round 1 Whitaker or even

I felt Whitaker was a litte more active with the jab, DLH was a little less
active but landed the occasionaly cuffing shot

Round 2 Oscar Dela Hoya (clearer)

DLH got the jab to score this round and he landed some counter right hands
Whitaker was more tentive of attacking because he knew DLH got his
counter punching game together

Round 3 Even

Very hard round to score imo. Whitaker was more consistent
but DLH landed the harder shots

Gave this round to Whitaker but because of the WBC ruling of taking a point from the uncut fighter
when a butt occurs then it had to be made an even round.


Round 4 Oscar Dela Hoya

DLH scored well early and closed the round out better.

Round 5 Whitaker
Whitaker nailed DLH pretty good early in this round and went onto
dictate the round

Round 6 Whitaker (very very close)
I felt Whitaker may have stolen it right at the end, although DLH landed the
harder shots

Round 7 Oscar Dela Hoya

DLH landed a few good counter right hands this round


Round 8 Oscar Dela Hoya(clearer)
DLH landed some hard clean shots this round

Round 9 Whitaker 10/8

Round 10 Oscar Dela Hoya

Close round where i felt DLH answered Whitaker's punches and landed hard, closed the round
out better.

Round 11 Oscar Dela Hoya (Lederman scored for Whitaker)
I felt he countered and landed with the harder shots, Whitaker was the aggressor but DLH managed
to land some hard counter shots on him. DLH landed the best punch of the round to.

Round 12 Oscar Dela Hoya

DLH was more active





5 rounds to Whitaker with his 10/8 round, 7 rounds to DLH. I would of scored it 6 rounds to Whitaker
but the ****** WBC ruling said that you must take a point from the uncut fighter if there is a clash of heads
so i scored the round he won in round 3 even.


Last time i scored this fight i had it a draw and i saw nothing this time to suggest that either man
deserved the victory. I felt DLH just edged it, although if i was incharge i would not have given it
to either man tbh.

DLH landed the harder shots but threw in spurts, Whitaker threw too many jabs and singles.

DLH actually countered well at times with the right hand.

[donkim]

Or worse if the Molina, Whitaker and Sturm fights allw ent in the opposite direction.

This whole controversy surrounding the verdict given in the Molina fight is probably all down to the incompetent judging on Harold Lederman's part.He was giving Molina rounds purely out of spite towards De La Hoya and he's done this in some Wladimir Klitschko fights too.


The truth is,you'd be hard pressed to find four rounds in which Molina actually won.Molina was a stinker and fought like a stinker.



Anyone who hasn't watched this fight and is thinking about going back and watching it........DON'T!

[IMDAZED]

Well i dont recall much controversy about the Molina fight although its been a while since i saw it.

The Whitaker fight was extremely close fight that IMO neither of them deserved to win, that said id lean to DLH if pushed. You dont seem to like DLH maybe thats why you would rather look at it from a negative aspect, none of those fights were clear losses for DLH except for the Sturm fight, what your doing is making every conceivable close fight he had go against him and saying what happens if his record looks like this, thats clearly not fair.



Oscar Dela Hoya vs Pernerll Whitaker

Round 1 Whitaker or even

I felt Whitaker was a litte more active with the jab, DLH was a little less
active but landed the occasionaly cuffing shot

Round 2 Oscar Dela Hoya (clearer)

DLH got the jab to score this round and he landed some counter right hands
Whitaker was more tentive of attacking because he knew DLH got his
counter punching game together

Round 3 Even

Very hard round to score imo. Whitaker was more consistent
but DLH landed the harder shots

Gave this round to Whitaker but because of the WBC ruling of taking a point from the uncut fighter
when a butt occurs then it had to be made an even round.


Round 4 Oscar Dela Hoya

DLH scored well early and closed the round out better.

Round 5 Whitaker
Whitaker nailed DLH pretty good early in this round and went onto
dictate the round

Round 6 Whitaker (very very close)
I felt Whitaker may have stolen it right at the end, although DLH landed the
harder shots

Round 7 Oscar Dela Hoya

DLH landed a few good counter right hands this round


Round 8 Oscar Dela Hoya(clearer)
DLH landed some hard clean shots this round

Round 9 Whitaker 10/8

Round 10 Oscar Dela Hoya

Close round where i felt DLH answered Whitaker's punches and landed hard, closed the round
out better.

Round 11 Oscar Dela Hoya (Lederman scored for Whitaker)
I felt he countered and landed with the harder shots, Whitaker was the aggressor but DLH managed
to land some hard counter shots on him. DLH landed the best punch of the round to.

Round 12 Oscar Dela Hoya

DLH was more active





5 rounds to Whitaker with his 10/8 round, 7 rounds to DLH. I would of scored it 6 rounds to Whitaker
but the ****** WBC ruling said that you must take a point from the uncut fighter if there is a clash of heads
so i scored the round he won in round 3 even.


Last time i scored this fight i had it a draw and i saw nothing this time to suggest that either man
deserved the victory. I felt DLH just edged it, although if i was incharge i would not have given it
to either man tbh.

DLH landed the harder shots but threw in spurts, Whitaker threw too many jabs and singles.

DLH actually countered well at times with the right hand.

I had Whitaker winning 7-5. Thought he controlled the pace, landed more, threw more, displayed better defense; you name it. Oscar ATG? Hell nah. What was his best win, Vargas? He had a number of solid wins but nothing that would transcend him to that level.

[Dynamite Kid]

I had Whitaker winning 7-5. Thought he controlled the pace, landed more, threw more, displayed better defense; you name it. Oscar ATG? Hell nah. What was his best win, Vargas? He had a number of solid wins but nothing that would transcend him to that level.

Whitaker threw too many single punches and fought too negatively.

7-5 is way to wide,Whitaker showed good defence but he did too much moving and not enough sticking, when he did stick they were only jabs and singles, DLH landed the harder punches and actually did a good job of countering with the right hand at times. When you make someone miss you have to counter, Whitaker usually did this but against DLH he was just making him miss, you dont get subliminal points for making the opponent miss, you have to score.


I dont think either of them deserved to win but no way did Whitaker win 7-5 or show any superiority in that fight, neither guy was effective enough to do that. You should watch it again, then again would you be able to be objective regarding DLH?

Who did Mike Tyson beat to make him an ATG? many people consider him an ATG though.

[IMDAZED]

Whitaker threw too many single punches and fought too negatively.

7-5 is way to wide,Whitaker showed good defence but he did too much moving and not enough sticking, when he did stick they were only jabs and singles, DLH landed the harder punches and actually did a good job of countering with the right hand at times. When you make someone miss you have to counter, Whitaker usually did this but against DLH he was just making him miss, you dont get subliminal points for making the opponent miss, you have to score.


I dont think either of them deserved to win but no way did Whitaker win 7-5 or show any superiority in that fight, neither guy was effective enough to do that. You should watch it again, then again would you be able to be objective regarding DLH?

Who did Mike Tyson beat to make him an ATG? many people consider him an ATG though.

Generally, Tyson is NOT considered an ATG and I'm not sure how that's relevant.

I have DLH-Whitaker and watched it as recently as last week, actually. I don't know what fighting negative means but Whitaker threw more, landed more and at a higher percentage. Controlled the fight with his jab so it couldn't have been that weak. And no way did Whitaker win 7-5? I'm being generous; I thought you could make a case for 8-4 as well.

[Dynamite Kid]

Generally, Tyson is NOT considered an ATG and I'm not sure how that's relevant.

I have DLH-Whitaker and watched it as recently as last week, actually. I don't know what fighting negative means but Whitaker threw more, landed more and at a higher percentage. Controlled the fight with his jab so it couldn't have been that weak. And no way did Whitaker win 7-5? I'm being generous; I thought you could make a case for 8-4 as well.

Well ive spoken to many people in here who consider him to be, its relevant because many people consider him to be one.


Fighting negatively is going backwards making the opponent miss but not making them pay enough,landing with singles shots that lack authority, its quite simple.

And no way did Whitaker win 7-5? I'm being generous; I thought you could make a case for 8-4 as well


LOL pointless talking to you then its quite obvious you have a dislike for DLH and cant comment objectively on him. Im not a big DLH fan but you are doing him a disservice.

Your blind if you think Whitaker could of won that fight 8-4, particularly when one of those rounds HAD!! to be scored a draw because of the point deduction.

[IMDAZED]

Well ive spoken to many people in here who consider him to be, its relevant because many people consider him to be one.


Fighting negatively is going backwards making the opponent miss but not making them pay enough,landing with singles shots that lack authority, its quite simple.

And no way did Whitaker win 7-5? I'm being generous; I thought you could make a case for 8-4 as well


LOL pointless talking to you then its quite obvious you have a dislike for DLH and cant comment objectively on him. Im not a big DLH fan but you are doing him a disservice.

Your blind if you think Whitaker could of won that fight 8-4, particularly when one of those rounds HAD!! to be scored a draw because of the point deduction.

That's ******ed. No round HAD to be scored a draw. There was also a KD as well - doesn't that even things out? Furthermore, yes, he fought circling and going backwards and made his opponent miss but he also landed more than his opponent. I could easily tell you that you have a hard-on for Oscar which is why you think anyone that had Whitaker winning convincingly is blind. No point in talking to you, I guess.

[Dynamite Kid]

That's ******ed. No round HAD to be scored a draw. There was also a KD as well - doesn't that even things out? Furthermore, yes, he fought circling and going backwards and made his opponent miss but he also landed more than his opponent. I could easily tell you that you have a hard-on for Oscar which is why you think anyone that had Whitaker winning convincingly is blind. No point in talking to you, I guess.

Of coarse it DID!!!!! even if you think Whitaker won the round he had a point taken. Did a KD occur in the round Whitaker had a point taken, well WTF does that have to do with that particular round, its still an even round? so only a tard could score it 8-4 lol


See thats what people do when they hate a particular fighter, they try to pass off their hate by claiming anyone with some objectivity on the fighter in question is a nuthugger of that fight so exonerates them from being a pure hater!

Go back to the NSB as you clearly dont know how to score a fight or be objective.