De La Hoya was the measuring stick for which greatness was determined

[gibo]

What really ****ed and exposed delajoto up, was the *ss whipping he got from jr. lightweight MANNY PACQUIAO. Now that was the TRUE MEASURING STICK!!!!!!!

[bojangles1987]

Oscar is disrespected as all hell on here. The guy fought and gave hell to a lot of great fighters.

[Spray_resistant]

I would just like to say that Sturm beat him hands down......and he should have gotten the nod over Tito, he actually made him look foolish early in the fight. His career after that was not so good even though he made alot money anyway.

[Allucard]

Right, like I said, some wins/losses were debatable. But somehow now that his careers over, you can look and see that the way it played out, the greats beat him, the "goods" did not.

Yes and lets not forget Quartey also arguably beat him too. Still very good point.

[dans]

Quartey (Good, but not great) controversial

Yes, my mistake Dynamite. In fact, I believe Quartey clearly won that fight. But again, it's funny because even though it was controversial, it ended up how it always did.

If you were good - You lost to DLH
If you were great - You beat DLH

Funny how it all worked out in the end.

[S A M U R A I]

The work of art at 0:12 was the measuring stick for greatness.





100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

[savorduhflavor]

What's great about Oscar is that his competition was second to none in spite of it not having to be. He was a huge draw, he could have hand picked his opponents and still got paid, but he went out of his way to fight the best. He deserves respect for that.

That said, he lost to Quartey no doubt.

[El_Cholo]

one thing Oscar did and that was take the hard fights, he never ducked anyone, sadly though he didn't win against the great fighters.

[dans]

What's great about Oscar is that his competition was second to none in spite of it not having to be. He was a huge draw, he could have hand picked his opponents and still got paid, but he went out of his way to fight the best. He deserves respect for that.

That said, he lost to Quartey no doubt.

Thinking about it. Had DLH hand picked his opponents, his record may have been much better and he might have won more titles. That being sad, his level of competition is one of his major assets in terms of credentials.

[one-Punch]

If you take a look at Oscar's career, and his opponents, it's easy to see Oscar was the measuring stick for greatness throughout his career.

Take a look at Oscar's career:

Wins
Ruelas (Good, not great)
Genaro Hernandez (Good, not great)
Julion Cesar Chavez (Great, but he was only "good" when DLH fought him)
Whitaker (Great, but he was only "good" when DLH fought him)
Camacho (Great, but he was only "good" when DLH fought him)
Quartey (Good, but not great)
Oba Carr (Good, not great)
Gatti (Good, not great)
Castillejo (Good, not great)
Vargas (Good, not great)
Sturm (Good, not great, controversial)
Mayorga (Good, not great)

Losses
Trinidad (Great, but since it was controversial, it could've been Oscar's only GREAT win)
Mosley (Great)
Hopkins (Great)
Mayweather (Great)
Pacquiao (Great)

The Sturm and Trinidad fights are really the only exceptions. Sturm most people believe beat Oscar, including me. Trinidad, many thought Oscar did enough to win. If those two decisions were reversed, Oscar would have 1 win against a great, and only 1 loss against a "good" fighter.

But amazingly enough, even the controversial decisions prove the point that Oscar was the measuring stick for boxing throughout his career. If you were great, you beat Oscar, if you were just good, you didn't.

Pretty incredible how his career played out.

The 2nd fight with Mosley was defiantly controversial. Trinidad controversial. Mayweather controversial (this fight could of went either way, face it floyd fans, ur boy did the opposite of what he said he was going to do, FIGHT)