Better legacy Trinidad or De La Hoya??

[Del Coqui]

How was chavez a wash up fighter? i'm getting sick of the wash up chavez crap. Wasn't chavez back in 1995 i think still a great fighter? wasn't chavez still the wbc superlightweight champion before he fought oscar? i mean god damn. chavez was only i believe 36 years old, the same age that hopkins took tito to school. But nobody of the oscar haters will mention that. The bottomline is this, oscar beat the hell out of chavez when chavez was the champion and was the man at 140 pounds before oscar beat the living crap out of chavez. Oscar is the only fighter ever to stop chavez and he did that earlier. I bet ya if tito would have beat hopkins alot of tito haters will say tito became undisputed champion by beating up a wash up 36 years old hopkins.

LOL, calm down dude no need to get all bitchy now. No one said JCC was a chump, but, did you see the fight? You know how many fight JCC had when they fought? Oscar was a young champ in his peak. That was a ****** fight for JCC at that point of his career. Both at their peak, thrust me, those two fights would've been a lot more competitive. Are you sure Oscar's been the only fighter to stop JCC? Cum on Rainman...

[raymon123]

So many things that irk me in this argument...

1- A close fight is generally regarded as a controversial fight. That does not mean that the Winner is not a justified winner it just means that there was some contoversy surrounding it. This doesn't take away from the final result, or at least it shouldn't, when discussing a legacy. It is a fact that both DLH and Tito had contoversial wins, that is boxing. None of that should deter from the overall legacies.

2- Tito vs DLH fans will only agree to disagree. There is no point in even discussing this issue at this point. Supreme nuthuggers (Raymon stands out in this one) will not be convinced either way so why try?

3- In the boxing ring it should be agreed that their legacies are very similar, an argument can be made for either one. It is the marketability of DLH, the "golden boy" that puts him over the top, fair or not. The same issue is seen in conversations about other greats such as Leonard vs Hagler vs Duran. Sugar Ray usually is the person most casual boxing fans would pick. This is the same with DLH. Although all boxers named here are greats and arguments can be made for all of them in regards to "GOAT" arguments and such.

4- Vargas was not the same fighter after the Tito fight and Tito demolished him, he did not cheat, that is pure garbage.

There is so much more that i can state but that is it for now....

Tito did cheat, after vargas was all over tito looking for a stoppage after vargas knock tito down, what was tito first punch? yea a low blow to stop vargas from trying to knock tito down. Ummm yea. Vargas was still a same fighter. Like i said if he wasn't the same fighters after the tito fight like you iq 12 yearsold said then vargas would have atleast lost or win in a very close fights to two bum fighters that he fought after the tito fights.

[raymon123]

LOL, calm down dude no need to get all bitchy now. No one said JCC was a chump, but, did you see the fight? You know how many fight JCC had when they fought? Oscar was a young champ in his peak. That was a ****** fight for JCC at that point of his career. Both at their peak, thrust me, those two fights would've been a lot more competitive. Are you sure Oscar's been the only fighter to stop JCC? Cum on Rainman...

Yea chavez had like 99 pro fights which is amazing before he fought de la hoya. And yes i'm sure. Randell beat chavez by a sd. That was chavez first lost. The second lost was a bloody bath beat down by de la hoya.

[thirteen28]

4- Vargas was not the same fighter after the Tito fight and Tito demolished him, he did not cheat, that is pure garbage.

There is so much more that i can state but that is it for now....

Frazier wasn't the same after his demolition by Foreman either, was he? Still doesn't mean he wasn't a helluva fighter, nor does it diminish Ali's win over him in the Thrilla in Manila.

This whole argument of trying to act like DLH's win over Vargas (a goosed-up on steroids Vargas, no less) doesn't mean anything because Tito beat him first is more than just garbage, it's the whole ****ing dump.

As far as legacies of Puerto Rican fighters goes, Trinidad doesn't even have the best of that group. Wilfred Benitez at age 17 totally schooled an older, more experienced Antonio Cervantes, beat a damn good WW champ in Carlos Palomino at age 20, and knocked the holy **** out of Jr. Middle champ Maurice Hope by age 22. He was a great boxer, great counterpuncher, great defensive fighter, and had knockout power in either hand, knew how to adapt in the ring and knew how to bounce back from a defeat. Tito never showed any of those things. His legacy doesn't even begin to compare to that of Benitez.

[donchicho21]

Tito beating Vargas made him a different fighter and the main thing that it did to him was make Vargas question himself. I think Vargas' big strength was that he had a great will and really believed that he was the best and could take a punch. When Tito hit him and hit him again I think Vargas' will was broken down. Not taken away but broken down. So yes he went on to beat a few other guys (nowhere near the class of Tito or DLH) but when it came to the DLH fight it was something else. He may have been confident before the fight but once he really felt the power of DLH I think he started to remember Tito and how he just beat him. So i think in that way Tito did help DLH win that one. However, that does not take away from the fact that DLH is a good fighter, only a good fighter would be able to test the will of Vargas again, as seen by the two "bums" who he walked over post-Tito and pre-DLH.
That was a bit long winded but I hope you see what I am saying..

[raymon123]

Frazier wasn't the same after his demolition by Foreman either, was he? Still doesn't mean he wasn't a helluva fighter, nor does it diminish Ali's win over him in the Thrilla in Manila.

This whole argument of trying to act like DLH's win over Vargas (a goosed-up on steroids Vargas, no less) doesn't mean anything because Tito beat him first is more than just garbage, it's the whole ****ing dump.

As far as legacies of Puerto Rican fighters goes, Trinidad doesn't even have the best of that group. Wilfred Benitez at age 17 totally schooled an older, more experienced Antonio Cervantes, beat a damn good WW champ in Carlos Palomino at age 20, and knocked the holy **** out of Jr. Middle champ Maurice Hope by age 22. He was a great boxer, great counterpuncher, great defensive fighter, and had knockout power in either hand, knew how to adapt in the ring and knew how to bounce back from a defeat. Tito never showed any of those things. His legacy doesn't even begin to compare to that of Benitez.

Very well said. Then ali that beat frazier in the 3rd fight means nothing cause foremen destroy frazier. Hell i got one better, holyfield beating tyson means nothing cause buster dougles already did that by beating the hell out of tyson.

[donchicho21]

Apples and Oranges. Raymon do you believe anything you say or are you just trying to get bad reactions out of people?

[raymon123]

Tito beating Vargas made him a different fighter and the main thing that it did to him was make Vargas question himself. I think Vargas' big strength was that he had a great will and really believed that he was the best and could take a punch. When Tito hit him and hit him again I think Vargas' will was broken down. Not taken away but broken down. So yes he went on to beat a few other guys (nowhere near the class of Tito or DLH) but when it came to the DLH fight it was something else. He may have been confident before the fight but once he really felt the power of DLH I think he started to remember Tito and how he just beat him. So i think in that way Tito did help DLH win that one. However, that does not take away from the fact that DLH is a good fighter, only a good fighter would be able to test the will of Vargas again, as seen by the two "bums" who he walked over post-Tito and pre-DLH.
That was a bit long winded but I hope you see what I am saying..

Then holyfield win over tyson was nothing cause dougles already beat the hell out of tyson. I guess ali beating frazier in the 2nd and 3rd fight don't mean crap cause foremen already destroy frazier. Hell then i guess hagler beating hearns don't mean nothing cause sugar ray already did that bad. So if vargas wasn't the same fighter after he lost to tito then then the same thing can be said about tyson after dougles, frazier after foremen, hearns after sugar ray.

[raymon123]

Apples and Oranges. Raymon do you believe anything you say or are you just trying to get bad reactions out of people?

i'm sick of ppl like yourself is discreting oscar wins cause mostly was tito ****** leftovers. People act like tito is a terminator. If that's the case then holyfield beating tyson was nothing cause that's dougles left overs. Ali beating frazier in the 2nd and 3rd fight don't mean crap cause thats foremens left overs. I'm sick of these left overs excuses. Oscar would have still beat vargas if vargas never fought tito.

[vB Martin]

******mon, your nose is so far up De La Hoya's ass I bet you have to wipe the **** from behind your ears every time he comes to a sudden stop.