Is Oscar De la Hoya a top 20 ATG WW?

[Poet682006]

I'll have to have a play with a list but I doubt he wouldn't figure any higher than the low teens more likely 25 to 30.
Thing to look at was in his era roughly was he the best welter, better than Trinidad and Mosley etc? Even if you say yes its not going to be by a big margin and they don't register on Ruben's list either. Throw in Benetiz, Duran etc and to not even crack the top 30 is no big shame. Thinking h2h I look at fighters like Carlos Palomino who most won't even think about but who I think h2h would give DLH a world of trouble. Ruben's list has a few names on it i'd probably lose or juggle with but as a bench mark it just shows that you are not a DLH hater (and he does get a lot of unwarranted stick) not to have him even top 30 at welter.

I have De La Hoya in my top-20 BUT there's a big caveat to that: If a fighter who was great at Welter but who spent most of his career or was at his best in another division, say Middle or Lightweight, then I don't rank them at Welter.....that means Oscar isn't competing for spots against the likes of Whitaker, Duran, Chavez, Langford, ect.

Poet

[RubenSonny]

I am not argumentative

you clearly made your intial comment to start an argument.

and I do not want to waste time going back and forth with a kid who admittedly picked names off a list,

I didn't pick names in a list, I look at lists all the time and research into them and decide how I think a list should be.

read a wikipedia on a fighter, and then slopped them into a list and based their ranking on how much he liked the way their name looked

.

I haven't once used wikipedia to make a list.

What is the point, and what do I have to gain by going back and forth with you? You have no business making lists and have openly admitted to just sticking names wherever with little thought.

You haven't actually made one solid criticism about my rankings just a bunch of sweeping generalisations and assumptions you have no proof of, the only reason this started is because you hug Oscars nuts.

There is no need to cop out, I just don't have the energy.

Yup, you're full of ****.

You are in the same class as Stereotype, you just run with the general consensus.

Sure, we both disagree with your views on one of your favourite fighters....

And I've debated with many respected posters so.......

Most of the time I am posting from my phone and do not take the time to double check so everything is from memory and knowledge,

unlike you who I'm sure just wiki's stuff.

Another bull**** accusation from you, with absolutely nothing to back it up..what a surprise.

Nice try at sounding knowledgeable but I see right through you and I'm sure others do as well.

Anyone with any sense can see how much of a fool you are from this thread, if you disagree go make a poll about it. At the end of the day we both made claims on Oscars ranking at welterweight and both asked for lists, but one of us came up short....

[RubenSonny]

I spit my coffee when I read that :hahahaha9: Good to see you posting over here.....make it a habit :grin9:

Poet

Co-sign.....

[CarlosG815]

Sure, we both disagree with your views on one of your favourite fighters....

Yup, and with about as much knowledge to back it up as my 1 year old pup. Go make some more lists :bukkake:

[RubenSonny]

Yup, and with about as much knowledge to back it up as my 1 year old pup. Go make some more lists :bukkake:

You are a special guy...

[CarlosG815]

You are a special guy...

Bert Sugar has a top 100, go move some guys around and call it your top 100

[Wild Blue Yonda]

You can make the argument, but I think it's a little bit of a stretch, personally. It's not out-of-the-question material, but I wouldn't mount the case.

It's one of the deepest (& some would say, the deepest) divisions ever, historically. This is somewhat conjecture too, but I consider Jr. Welter, not Welter, De La Hoya's very best weight.

[bojangles1987]

You just can't put him there. There's not really a defining win over a great fighter at welterweight for Oscar. He fought them all, but doesn't have one great win over one of the best welterweights of that time. Arguably lost to Whitaker, arguably lost to Quartey, Chavez was past it, there's no defining win.

[CarlosG815]

You just can't put him there. There's not really a defining win over a great fighter at welterweight for Oscar. He fought them all, but doesn't have one great win over one of the best welterweights of that time. Arguably lost to Whitaker, arguably lost to Quartey, Chavez was past it, there's no defining win.

haha love the new sig, man. I don't think the Whitaker fight was an arguable loss, and I think Chavez was better than he gets credit for in that fight...

[bojangles1987]

haha love the new sig, man. I don't think the Whitaker fight was an arguable loss, and I think Chavez was better than he gets credit for in that fight...

I had the sig going way further than that, but there's a character limit. So I had to stop at Prescott, even though he's lost.

A lot of people thought Whitaker beat Oscar in that fight, and it was definitely close enough to be debatable. And Chavez is a nice win, but he was definitely past it. If he could have definitely beaten Whitaker, Quartey, or Trinidad, he would have a much better argument here. Not horrible to put him top 20 I guess but there are so many great fighters at welterweight.