Page 5 of 7

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 20 Dec 2008, 16:05
by DG.
Autobarn wrote:

Re Oscar - I find it fvcking hilarious that he lost what appeared to be a weight mismatch going in to the Pac fight. Utter humiliation. That fight is absolutely priceless. He got his comeuppance.

:lol:

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 21 Dec 2008, 12:19
by lowersmiths
dlh won a gold medal at the olympics on a level playing field then fought anyone who was anyone during his pro career.
so what if he got hammered by pacquiao as a dried out 35 year old at the end of it all, that doesn't negate all the big fights he has been in over the years.
it's disheartening to read so-called boxing experts/hardcore fans tear into a man who has kept the game going outside the heavyweight division for the last decade.

PS great to read ant evans criticise how golden boy operates - perhaps one day he will turn that spotlight on the UFC and the cartel they are running. where is the UFC money going ant?????? :TU:

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 21 Dec 2008, 15:25
by Autobarn
is this ant evans or glyn evans you're referring to :lol:

re the worry about DLH's prospects, I think the ESPN deal will work out well for the likes of Danny Jacobs, Victor Ortiz, etc etc. Will get them seen, maybe have to bring in more meaningful opponents, and better than 1 round blowouts on PPV undercards.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 06:19
by Captain Hook
Glyn Leach wrote:
Captain Hook wrote:
Glyn Leach wrote:Graham is class mate, always, pleasure to work with him.

And much as I'd love to see Pacman-PBF, Pacman-Hatton has ever greater appeal - I think Ricky wins that.
Good to see you on here Glyn, but I disagree on Hatton.

Think Pacquaio will have too much for him and possibly even stop him late. The only guy I can se beating him between lightweight and welter is Floyd, if he ever comes back.
How do Hookie, hope life's good mate.

My doubt re Pacman is I need to see him hit regularly by a bigger guy. I thought he looked uncomfortable a couple of times in the last Marquez fight, a bit more so on the extremely rare occasions that Diaz connected, and Oscar connected even less than Diaz, and at a point when his tank was totally empty. I get the feeling that against Hatton we would see Pacman hit for the first time with any regularity by a bigger, stronger man, that's why I'd back Ricky in that one - it'll be a different ballgame to recent Pacman fights. He's gonna have to fight hurt, let's see what's like then. Diaz and Oscar were made for him, Hatton won't be.
Yeah I can't argue with that mate, but I think the outcome will be the same....the guy is in a different league. Hatton will either look superb, as he did v Malignanni, or get cut up and bamboozled in the first four rounds of a tear-up.

Depends which Hatton turns up. Whatever happens, it'll be a beauty...

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 08:09
by Glyn Leach
Pacman 9-4 on, Hatton 18-1!

Vitali 4-1 on, Haye 25-1

Christ, Jennings is only 33-1, what are they looking at?!!

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 08:39
by stujones
lowersmiths wrote:dlh won a gold medal at the olympics on a level playing field then fought anyone who was anyone during his pro career.
so what if he got hammered by pacquiao as a dried out 35 year old at the end of it all, that doesn't negate all the big fights he has been in over the years.
it's disheartening to read so-called boxing experts/hardcore fans tear into a man who has kept the game going outside the heavyweight division for the last decade.
My point exactly, okay Oscar is not above criticism - sure he has taken on his fair share of out sized opponents - but been outsized himself on numerous occasions. Sure he has taken on his fair share of past prime opponent, but they were still the best in the devision at the time.

Despite the opinion that he has a massive ego, which of course is valid - cause he really doesn't need to fight. He has never declared himself as the best, never really hyped himself up as an all timer etc - and while he might have lost more of the big ones than won (lots contensiously) he did give himself a fair share of challenges.

Okay, he lost to Trinidad, Hopkins etc - he still took them on, a "phoney" wouldn't do that.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 09:00
by lowersmiths
stu, i agree - it's extremely difficult to see how anyone who follows boxing can label dlh a quitter or a phoney. who else has got a record like his?

to suggest he quit against pacquiao is laughable. he was flat (dead at the weight and old) from the first bell. it wasn't a mental thing that he wasn't throwing punches, he is finished and just wasn't capable of doing it.

if he was a phoney or a quitter he would have gone down in the seventh or the eighth, when he was way behind and it came on top.

in fact at the end of the eighth - after pac man had blasted him on the ropes with a prolonged barrage - pacquiao actually tapped dlh's gloves when the bell went as if to say 'respect for taking that lot and staying in there'

dlh didn't quit in between rounds, his corner pulled him out (sensibly)

yes, dlh was a big favourite in this fight but there was also enough to suggest it could be a lot closer than first thought - pac man's last performance v dlh's, pac man's youth v dlh's age, dlh killing himself to make weight v pac man eating what he wanted with no worries, pac man's speed v dlh's slowing skills.

as it turned out pac man delivered a brilliant display. did he catch dlh at the right time? possibly - freddie roach certainly thought so. but for some to suggest dlh is anything but one of the greatest boxers of the last 10 years is ridiculous.

compare his record to that of hatton or calzaghe (as two examples) and see how wide the gulf is.
dlh has fought all the big names in and around his weight class over the years in big money fights.
he took a chance against pac man and it didn't pay off - so what? no need to crucify the man who has kept the UFC off the top of the PPV chart for at least another year :DDD

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 09:34
by stujones
I saw the tapping of the gloves - mark of respect, the whole post fight interviews was class amongst the 3 also. I am not so sure why Oscar left Floyd, personally I have never thought they have worked - but Oscar has, and I did see it strange that Oscar would leave after being re-united for the Forbes fight. He looked "okay" vs Forbes, did mistakes - but I thought he was just trying different stuff for the Mayweather rematch. He essentially wasn't shot.

Yes, it is bizarre when people actually condem matches like the Sturm fight - forget about the WBO belt, the criticise Sturm as an opponent - yet when you look at the opponents who get commended by Calzaghe/Hatton fans - Sturm is alot better than most of these.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 09:37
by Glyn Leach
So you don't think Oscar quit against Hopkins? Most fighters believe he did - you just don't go into that Cristiano Ronaldo routine if you have been seriously done by a body shot.

And when, except against Hopkins and Sturm, has Oscar ever been truly outweighed?

And do you not think that fighters and corners have little secret signals to save fighters from embarrassment in such situations? Do you think that Beristain, for all his reputation, as a trainer of one-fight's standing really had permission to call the shots in that situation?

Get real chap, all is rarely as it seems.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 09:38
by Glyn Leach
Stu, it's common knowledge mate, Floyd was already committed to Hatton, that's why he didn't train Oscar.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 09:51
by lowersmiths
Glyn Leach wrote:So you don't think Oscar quit against Hopkins? Most fighters believe he did - you just don't go into that Cristiano Ronaldo routine if you have been seriously done by a body shot.

And when, except against Hopkins and Sturm, has Oscar ever been truly outweighed?

And do you not think that fighters and corners have little secret signals to save fighters from embarrassment in such situations? Do you think that Beristain, for all his reputation, as a trainer of one-fight's standing really had permission to call the shots in that situation?

Get real chap, all is rarely as it seems.
a man builds a thousand bridges and then sucks one cock and he is forever known as a cocksucker....sorry, i don't buy it.

dlh v hopkins - i don't remember tszyu getting the same treatment after hatton made him quit, but then we were all frothing at the mouth at how the WBU kid had finally come good, weren't we.

no need for secret signals. oscar's body language and response to the doctor's questions were enough for those in control to see he wasn't able to carry on. it's not rocket science pal.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 09:57
by stujones
Glyn Leach wrote:So you don't think Oscar quit against Hopkins? Most fighters believe he did - you just don't go into that Cristiano Ronaldo routine if you have been seriously done by a body shot.

And when, except against Hopkins and Sturm, has Oscar ever been truly outweighed?

And do you not think that fighters and corners have little secret signals to save fighters from embarrassment in such situations? Do you think that Beristain, for all his reputation, as a trainer of one-fight's standing really had permission to call the shots in that situation?

Get real chap, all is rarely as it seems.
He started his career as a Super Feather. He fought geniune Light Middles in Vargas and Castilejo - guys who would have campaigns (and in Castilejo's case a successful one) at Middle.

I think he was geniunally the smaller guy against Quartey, Carr, Trinidad and alot of the career long Welterweights he fought. Oscar was labelled by lots of fighters and boxing experts, certainly Darke and Watt repeated it, that he was a "bulked up Light Welter" during his Welterweight campaign. Sure there were some bulked up smaller guys he faced there - Mosley, Whittikar, Chavez etc -he was bigger than these... I think though he was a geniune light welter, thats when his power was at its best - So I think fighters who were career Light Welters or more were the same size or bigger.

Off course the all the fighters Mr fake faced when he was the smaller guy were weight drained? As I have said time and time again, even before GBP started - Oscar will never win with some people. Even if he fought Valuev and went the distance, there would be some critics.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 10:03
by Captain Hook
lowersmiths wrote:
Glyn Leach wrote:So you don't think Oscar quit against Hopkins? Most fighters believe he did - you just don't go into that Cristiano Ronaldo routine if you have been seriously done by a body shot.

And when, except against Hopkins and Sturm, has Oscar ever been truly outweighed?

And do you not think that fighters and corners have little secret signals to save fighters from embarrassment in such situations? Do you think that Beristain, for all his reputation, as a trainer of one-fight's standing really had permission to call the shots in that situation?

Get real chap, all is rarely as it seems.
a man builds a thousand bridges and then sucks one cock and he is forever known as a cocksucker....sorry, i don't buy it.

dlh v hopkins - i don't remember tszyu getting the same treatment after hatton made him quit, but then we were all frothing at the mouth at how the WBU kid had finally come good, weren't we.

no need for secret signals. oscar's body language and response to the doctor's questions were enough for those in control to see he wasn't able to carry on. it's not rocket science pal.

Finally, someone else who can see the light!

All this Oscar-bashing is laughable....the guy is a Hall of Famer, beaten some great guys, been robbed a couple of times (Mosley 2, Trinidad) and has been good for the sport. I appreciate he's more about cash than anything else now, but he's still done a lot for boxing.

Hopkins didn't get this amount of shit when Oscar moved to face him! People forget where he started.

And who the fornicate had Castillo beating Mayweather by 4 rounds! Dioufy? I thought better of you mate you must have been drunk :TU:

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 10:04
by stujones
Glyn Leach wrote:Stu, it's common knowledge mate, Floyd was already committed to Hatton, that's why he didn't train Oscar.
Yes I know, odd that Floyd picked another GBP fighter over Mr Fake. Especially as when Oscar last worked with Floyd, Hatton was still with Graham and Oscar had said "this time we will be working together for Floyd jnr".

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 10:18
by Glyn Leach
Oscar grew comfortably through the divisions, I'd argue, until he went too far, which was middleweight. Unlike Hatton, Oscar has been able to do so.

And Tzsyu vs Hatton was not Oscar vs Hopkins, with all that histrionic floor pounding.

As for 'there are no signals', OK mate, you obviously know your stuff pmsl.

And Floyd was CONTRACTED to train Hatton Stu, there was no choice to be made.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 10:21
by stujones
lowersmiths wrote: dlh v hopkins - i don't remember tszyu getting the same treatment after hatton made him quit, but then we were all frothing at the mouth at how the WBU kid had finally come good, weren't we.

no need for secret signals. oscar's body language and response to the doctor's questions were enough for those in control to see he wasn't able to carry on. it's not rocket science pal.
Yep, and the ref saying - you get caught one more time on the ropes and I am stopping the fight.

I gave Oscar a big chance against Hopkins, he didn't fight how I thought he would - he tried to take it to Hopkins which was the wrong tactics. I wanted him to see him like vs Hernandez or Chavez 1. But he tried to take it to Hopkins, untill Hopkins strength told. I thought it was a commendable effort.

And I think it was an oscar winning performance if that was a "dive" - he was down for minutes. Fighters who have lost the heart don't do that - they usually get up on 10 and try and leave the arena ASAP.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 10:27
by Glyn Leach
I give up, I can't argue against fans armed only with facts - it's the difference between who do you think will win and who do you want to win. I'll leave you boys to it xx

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 10:39
by stujones
Glyn Leach wrote:I give up, I can't argue against fans armed only with facts - it's the difference between who do you think will win and who do you want to win. I'll leave you boys to it xx
What facts?

DLH admitted to diving against Hopkins? Was it a phantom punch? Nope your opinion

Its your opinion that he grew naturally up the weights - even saying that he is a natural light middle now - and now I agree with that, but at the time of the Trinidad, Quartey, Carr fights he was a small Welter - they are pushing 10 years old those fights. Even with that into account, where is the "fact" that he was bigger than boiled down Middles - Vargas and Castilejo.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 10:42
by Lenny
There are no facts Glyn. Whilst I agree punching the canvas whilst you're supposed to be crippled by a liver shot is very strange behavior, only Oscar really knows.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 10:55
by stujones
Lenny wrote:There are no facts Glyn. Whilst I agree punching the canvas whilst you're supposed to be crippled by a liver shot is very strange behavior, only Oscar really knows.
Bernard knows, people react differently to body shots - seen fighters flat on their back, seen fighters turn their back (Castillo), and then just delay knees.

Oscar was down for about 30 seconds before the punching the canvas.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 14:17
by Glyn Leach
stujones wrote:
Glyn Leach wrote:I give up, I can't argue against fans armed only with facts - it's the difference between who do you think will win and who do you want to win. I'll leave you boys to it xx
What facts?

DLH admitted to diving against Hopkins? Was it a phantom punch? Nope your opinion

Its your opinion that he grew naturally up the weights - even saying that he is a natural light middle now - and now I agree with that, but at the time of the Trinidad, Quartey, Carr fights he was a small Welter - they are pushing 10 years old those fights. Even with that into account, where is the "fact" that he was bigger than boiled down Middles - Vargas and Castilejo.
Re the 'phantom punch', it's a widely held opinion - outside his fan club and among fighters - that you do not behave like THAT after being KO'd to the body. Ever seen someone else do it?

Regarding his being a small welter, he'd made half a dozen welterweight title defences before he faced the first of the fighters you mention - I think that might establish his welterweight credentials.

And where did I say he was bigger than Vargas and Castillejo? Don't think I've even mentioned them.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 14:18
by Glyn Leach
Lenny wrote:There are no facts Glyn. Whilst I agree punching the canvas whilst you're supposed to be crippled by a liver shot is very strange behavior, only Oscar really knows.
Agreed Lenny, fact was a poor choice of word

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 14:37
by stujones
Glyn Leach wrote:
And where did I say he was bigger than Vargas and Castillejo? Don't think I've even mentioned them.
You said the only fighters he was smaller than was Hopkins and Sturm.

Trinidad and Quartey were boiled down Light Middles, just as DLH was a boiled down Lightweight when fighting at 9stone 4.

Re: The Phantom Punch I don't know, no I have never seen that reaction, but then its not often TV cameras are still on the fighter 30 seconds after the fight is over which is when he started the "Ronaldo" routine and the hitting the canvas. I've seen people roll from side to their back when they are hurt from a body shot (which is all Oscar did in the count) - seen people crawl also during a count (really out of breath), Oscar did that before the canvas hitting also - but I haven't seen anyone hit the canvas.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 14:52
by Glyn Leach
stujones wrote:
Glyn Leach wrote:
And where did I say he was bigger than Vargas and Castillejo? Don't think I've even mentioned them.
You said the only fighters he was smaller than was Hopkins and Sturm.

Trinidad and Quartey were boiled down Light Middles, just as DLH was a boiled down Lightweight when fighting at 9stone 4.

Re: The Phantom Punch I don't know, no I have never seen that reaction, but then its not often TV cameras are still on the fighter 30 seconds after the fight is over which is when he started the "Ronaldo" routine and the hitting the canvas. I've seen people roll from side to their back when they are hurt from a body shot (which is all Oscar did in the count) - seen people crawl also during a count (really out of breath), Oscar did that before the canvas hitting also - but I haven't seen anyone hit the canvas.
Hopkins and Sturm were middleweight champions, that's the point - most fighters are boiled down. And don't tell me Tito was a middleweight too, because he was blown up. Vargas was a light-middle champ, he fought above 160lbs twice in his entire career, after he fought Oscar, and Castillejo fought at 160lbs tops, three times, again after he fought Oscar. Where is their natural weight advantage? They fought plenty of non title fights. They were light-middles.

Re: Boxing Monthly DLH article.

Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 14:53
by MightyWarrior
Oscar comes over as such a phoney, that it's hard to believe anything he says really. His pounding the canvas just looked a little too "theatrical"...protesting a bit too much if you like.
You sometimes see "opponents" doing a similar thing, after a TKO, just to show they're REALLY hurt, in case anyone was doubting.

Obviously a lot of boxers thought the same thing too, and it's not often you get people saying things like that about such a top level fighter.

Impossible to prove either way of course, so better leave it at that.