BoxRec

douglas beats tyson- tyson is the better fighter

norton beats ali- does not make him better then ali (some argue that he lost twice)

braddock beat baer- baer is the better fighter

upsets happen. in his own right de la hoya is a HOF and a great fighter but still is not as great a fighter as chavez

Upsets do happen, but when I fighter goes 2-0 against another, as De La Hoya did against Chavez...it's not considered an upset!


>>>Robinson came pretty close, he beat the lightweight champion Sammy Angott when the title wasn't on the line, won the welterweight belt,the middleweight belt several times and beat the lightheavyweight champion for 13 rounds and then due to unusual circumstances had to stop.<<<


Robinson didn't come close to winning three world titles within a year...he had a lot of titles spread out over many years, but he did not come close to accomplishing what Armstrong did...Terry McGovern was the only fighter who came near it as he won the bantam, feather and beat the lightweight champion within a year time frame...of course Armstrong almost had four titles spanning in weight from 126 to 160, that's just incredible.

The thing about Delahoya is that he never beat anyone approaching Chavez at 130 and the Chavez at his best at 130 was a different fighter to the one that Oscar beat at 147. Delahoya is another fighter who was managed very well... many of the top fighter he fought were past their best when they fought him imo.

The Trinidad and Mosley bouts were losses, but controversial to say the least. He did fight a few that were past their prime, which Chavez was one of them, but his record is loaded with great fighters. The only fighter that really beat him was Hopkins, although I thought that Quartey got the better of their bout. The competetion that De La Hoya has faced stands up to any fighters record of the last 30, or 40 years. He's not one of my all-time favorites, but he has earned respect.

barry wrote:The Trinidad and Mosley bouts were losses, but controversial to say the least. He did fight a few that were past their prime, which Chavez was one of them, but his record is loaded with great fighters. The only fighter that really beat him was Hopkins, although I thought that Quartey got the better of their bout. The competetion that De La Hoya has faced stands up to any fighters record of the last 30, or 40 years. He's not one of my all-time favorites, but he has earned respect.

I have to agree. DLH was well managed as Silkov says but he fought just about everyone at his weight limits. I can't think of a single worthwhile opponent that he didn't fight. In my book this means more than makes up for a few losses.

Ezzard wrote:

barry wrote:The Trinidad and Mosley bouts were losses, but controversial to say the least. He did fight a few that were past their prime, which Chavez was one of them, but his record is loaded with great fighters. The only fighter that really beat him was Hopkins, although I thought that Quartey got the better of their bout. The competetion that De La Hoya has faced stands up to any fighters record of the last 30, or 40 years. He's not one of my all-time favorites, but he has earned respect.

I have to agree. DLH was well managed as Silkov says but he fought just about everyone at his weight limits. I can't think of a single worthwhile opponent that he didn't fight. In my book this means more than makes up for a few losses.

But his time at 130 and 135 is not really comparable to Chavezs. Delahoya was impressive at the lower weights but he didn't hang around there that long and clean up the divisions.

jwizard wrote:Walshb, I think you miss the point of Pound for Pound rankings.

What people are looking for which fighter had the greatest set of skills, irregardless of weight, ever?

George Foreman would've beaten Sugar Ray in a boxing match...but was he a BETTER fighter? Was he more skilled? No way in hell.

That's what these rankings are all about.

Also, it can be argued that Sugar Ray Robinson fought the greatest competition of any fighter ever. He defeated 10 Hall of Famers and 16 World Champions over his career.

Mate, I don't miss the point at all. It's just that I don't see the sense or point in it. To me anyway, there is nothing more skillful, beautiful, and amazing as watching a 15+ stone 6ft 3 inch fighter like an Ali dancing in a ring throwing beautiful crisp combinations. Nothing in sport compares. So all these lighter weight guys were amazing, I'm not saying otherwise, but to say they were more skillful than the heavies is not true as far as I'm concerned.

in terms of career, chavez was greater than DeLaHoya. He was the consensus pick for best fighter p4p for years, i dont think Delahoya ever was.
Chavez was so dominating, that Ring Magizine had published an article questioning Chavez's chances of eclipsing Sugar ray Robinson as the greatest p4p ever. Not too many people at that time thought it was such a stretch. Chavez at his best seemed so invincible that 100-0 inevitable.
For 89 fights he seemed the perfect fighting machine. Never for one second did the thought or even the possibility of him losing ever entered my mind. I know I wasnt alone. The defeat by Randell is still the most shocking and unexpected sports moment of my life.

If you want to get really techincal, Chavez really lost very early in his career and anyone that actually thinks that Chavez beat Meldrick Taylor, well they have closed eyes. Chavez is one of my all-time favorites. He beat some very good challengers, but he also beat a large number of fighters that should not have been in the ring with him, but as for an overall consensus as the best fighter...he only had that for a couple of years because Pernell Whitaker was always right there with him throughout those years. For overall quality his record, or no one else's really can match De la hoya for sustain quality competition because De La Hoya only had a couple of gimme matches, Chavez's record is littered with gimme matches, but it also has names like Rosario, Mayweather, Ramirez and Camacho, but aside from those fighters a lot of the opponents on his record were not the best fighters around. De La Hoya never stayed at the lower weights because he physically couldn't...he was too tall and had a lot of growing to do when he first started, so staying at 130 wasn't an option, although Rafael Ruelas was suppose to be the biggest challenge for him at 135 and he decimnated Ruelas.

barry wrote:If you want to get really techincal, Chavez really lost very early in his career and anyone that actually thinks that Chavez beat Meldrick Taylor, well they have closed eyes. Chavez is one of my all-time favorites. He beat some very good challengers, but he also beat a large number of fighters that should not have been in the ring with him, but as for an overall consensus as the best fighter...he only had that for a couple of years because Pernell Whitaker was always right there with him throughout those years. For overall quality his record, or no one else's really can match De la hoya for sustain quality competition because De La Hoya only had a couple of gimme matches, Chavez's record is littered with gimme matches, but it also has names like Rosario, Mayweather, Ramirez and Camacho, but aside from those fighters a lot of the opponents on his record were not the best fighters around. De La Hoya never stayed at the lower weights because he physically couldn't...he was too tall and had a lot of growing to do when he first started, so staying at 130 wasn't an option, although Rafael Ruelas was suppose to be the biggest challenge for him at 135 and he decimnated Ruelas.

I'd say Chavez certainly fought the much better opposition at 130 to 140... his record is full of good fighters and exchamps much more so than Delahoyas. Chavez fought a fair share of selected opposition true but so did Oscar and most of Oscars lighter weight opponents were of the selected variety while Chavezs opposition had a good mix of very good opposition in it.
Aside from the late stoppage the Taylor fight was much closer than many seem to beleive and Taylor was in a terrible state at the end which is borne out by the fact that he was never the same boxer again. The fight probably should have been stopped two rounds earlier by Taylors corner.

I agree about Taylor at the end...he was busted up bad, but he still outfought and outpointed Chavez pretty comfortably. No doubt had it been a 15 round fight Taylor would have been rightly stopped, but then again he may have suffered serious damage at the time had it been a longer fight...the condition that Taylor is in now no doubt is a result of the heavy shots that Chavez landed on him. At 130 Chavez is one of the best, actually he's one of the best up to 140, but I think he has a very difficult time with De La Hoya at any time in his career...although I'm sure he would not have quit back in the late 80s and early 90s.

silkov wrote:

Ezzard wrote:

barry wrote:The Trinidad and Mosley bouts were losses, but controversial to say the least. He did fight a few that were past their prime, which Chavez was one of them, but his record is loaded with great fighters. The only fighter that really beat him was Hopkins, although I thought that Quartey got the better of their bout. The competetion that De La Hoya has faced stands up to any fighters record of the last 30, or 40 years. He's not one of my all-time favorites, but he has earned respect.

I have to agree. DLH was well managed as Silkov says but he fought just about everyone at his weight limits. I can't think of a single worthwhile opponent that he didn't fight. In my book this means more than makes up for a few losses.

But his time at 130 and 135 is not really comparable to Chavezs. Delahoya was impressive at the lower weights but he didn't hang around there that long and clean up the divisions.

I agree. DLH suffers a little because of his marquee appeal. yes, he amde more money than others becasue of it but sometimes people don't take him seriously becasue of it. I just wanted to make the point that he was a top fighter who deserves the plaudits. I think at 135 Chavez wins.

b]If you want to get really techincal, Chavez really lost very early in his career[/b]
Very early in his career Chavez was disqualified in a fight he was winning handidly. the disqualification was appealed and the Culican boxing commision changed it to a tko. Ramon Felix, Chavez manager, was a member of the commision, but a big deal was not made out of it because their was alot of validity to the appeal. If the loss did stand, it still should not take away from his greatness.

For overall quality his record, or no one else's really can match De la hoya for sustain quality competition because De La Hoya only had a couple of gimme matches, Chavez's record is littered with gimme matches

I think is fair to say by looking at both their records that Chavez prime was basically from 84 the year he won his first title to 93. Even though he beat Haugen in 93 it was evident to anyone who followed Chavez that he had hit the wall. It was evident in his now pudgy body and in the over aggressive way he fought, not cutting off the ring, no head movement,head hunting. Dela hoya;'s prime was from '94 when he won his first title to 93. Relatively nine years each. In that time span chavez's championship fight record was 27-0-1. Dela Hoya's was 19-4.
Chavez top ten opponents in that time span, in no order were:

Mario Martinez- top contender
Roger Mayweather- very good champion
Rocky Lockridge- Top contender/former champ
Juan Laporte-Top Contender/former champ
Edwin Rosario-top Lightweight champ
Jose Luis Ramirez-fellow champion
Angel Hernandez- top contender
Meldrick Taylor- fellow champ/would have been hall of famer if not for chavez
Hector Camacho- Still in prime deserving hall of famer.
Rueben Castillo-Top Contender

Delahoya's top ten in no order:
Rafael Ruelas- lightweight champ
Gerano Hernandez-former and future jrlight weight champ
Jesse James Leija- top contender/former champ
shane Mosely- former lightweight champ/loss twice
julio Cesar chavez- past his prime great
Pernell Whitaker-past his prime great/win was controversial
Hector camacho- past his prime great
Ike Quartey- fellow champ
felix Trinidad-controversial loss.
Oba Carr- top contender
Fernando Vargas- champion

All of the chavez top ten wins were against quality opponents in or close to their prime. Alot of Delahoya wins were against under sized oppenents
and fighters past thier prime. This does not take away from his greatness considering wins over Ike Quartey, Fernando Vargas and a very controversial loss to Trinidad can attest to his greatness.
But all of chavez big wins were against guys at or very near thier prime who were naturally his size or bigger.
As for gimmie matches, they, are not always guarenteed wins. Many great fighters have suffered losses in gimme fights or close to, or at their prime.
Ali,Argulleo, Duran,Griffith,Sandler,Liston,Moore and of host of other, including Erik Morales's recently, have lost supposedly easy or warm up matches. Although chavez routinly fought these kind of matches, from one to two a year,and over the weight at that, he has to be given credit for at least fighting two quality opponents a year.
As for a fight between them in thier prime i think chavez wins. Dela hoya has always been vulnerable to body shots as John-John Molina and Miguel angel Gonzales, and some others although losing, proved. Prime Chavez was one of the best body punchers ever. Delahoya even in his prime had a bad habit of getting winded midway through a fight. Chavez in his prime could go 12 rounds and look as fresh as a daisy. Delahoya had a good chin, but Chavez could take punches much better. Delahoya was fast and light on his feet, but Chavez used to cut the ring in half with the best of them.
I see the fight starting with Delahoya winning the first few rounds with his boxing and speed. chavez, who didnt just chase back then, would deflty start cutting off the ring and scoring with devastating body shots. as the fight progressed delahoya would be sucking wind and Chavez would pour it on, taking full command of the fight. Oscar, with his great heart would be able to last to the final bell and Chavez would take home a hard fought UN decision.

I added 11 opponents to Delahoya by accident. Consider Sammy Fuentes on Chavez list, just to make it even.

made another mistake with DelaHoya. His championship fight record in his prime should read 22-3.

It's funny how you list all of the Chavez opponents as top contenders, or very good champions, but for De La Hoya you state that his opponents were "past their prime “or” a controversial Loss." What about the controversial wins of Chavez...his bout with Juan LaPorte certainly was, as was his bout with Rocky Lockridge or Camacho was very much past his prime when Chavez dominated him, so was Ruben Castillo and Jose Luis Ramirez and I don't even see Pernell Whitaker listed, who took Chavez to school. You can't have a double standard if you want to be taken seriously; you have to be fair to both fighters regardless even if you absolutely cannot stand a certain fighter, which you're not doing! Like I said Chavez is one of my all-time favorites, De La Hoya is not, but that's not going to cloud my judgment as to what is right and you can’t just pick out the fights that you want to of Chavez and leave out a couple of the most important bouts just because he didn’t look good in those bouts, like Whitaker and Frankie Randall…Chavez was still undefeated

It's funny how you list all of the Chavez opponents as top contenders, or very good champions, but for De La Hoya you state that his opponents were "past their prime “or” a controversial Loss."
Why would this be funny? It is part of my argument of why Chavez p4p is greater than Oscar. And I stated only three of them, Chavez,Whitaker and Camacho as past thier prime, which they absolutely were.

What about the controversial wins of Chavez...his bout with Juan LaPorte certainly was, as was his bout with Rocky Lockridge

The bouts with Laporte and Lockridge were very close and and some people thought Laporte should have one his fight with Chavez, but the consensus was that Chavez won, and the fight is not considered a robbery. Just like Delahoyas win against Quartey. Alot more people thought Quartey beat Delahoya (including myself) but the fight was close enough that to call it a robbery would be unjust. You have to allow that you could be wrong about about the way you scored a round two. Thats why I gave Delahoyas full credit for the win. Oscars fight with Whitaker I
believe was a robbery. Delahoya i believe, was a clearcut loser in that fight. As Felix Trinidad was against Delahoya. Oscar should have won that fight by a wide margin and was straight up robbed. This "loss" was Oscar's most impressive fight, and its a shame it will go in the record books as an L.

Camacho was very much past his prime when Chavez dominated him, so was Ruben Castillo and Jose Luis Ramirez
You are absolutely right about Castillo; although good, his best days were well enough behind him. I should have noted that. Ramirez and Camacho are another matter. Only two men in the world at lightweight were better than Ramirez when he fought Chavez; Chavez and Whitaker. Camacho was still close enough to the top of his game that many thought he would win the fight. If he were past his prime when he fought Chavez,what was he five years later when he fought Oscar at welterwight?

you have to be fair to both fighters regardless even if you absolutely cannot stand a certain fighter

When did I say i coudldnt stand Delahoya? Just because I think Chavez is greater that implies I dont like Delahoya?

Chavez and leave out a couple of the most important bouts just because he didn’t look good in those bouts, like Whitaker and Frankie Randall…

Like I stated earlier, it is my opinion that Chavez began his decline right about the time he fought Haugen.Any wins or losses after that I did not include because they did not represent him at his peak. It was physically apparent to me in his style and physique when Chavez was starting to hit the wall.
Against Whitaker and Randell he was definitly not the same fighter and against Whitaker, was fighting at a weight class he had no business being in. Remember, I did not include Delahoyas loss to Hopskins or his gift decision over Felix Strum, because he should not have been fighting at middleweight in the first place.

Rubio MHS wrote:

computerrank wrote:BoxRec all time ratings say:

Muhammad Ali 1,779 1960 - 1981 56-5-0
Sugar Ray Robinson 1,777 1940 - 1965 173-19-6
Carlos Monzon 1,747 1963 - 1977 87-3-9
Ezzard Charles 1,738 1940 - 1959 97-25-1
Joe Louis 1,728 1934 - 1951 68-3-0
Carlos Ortiz 1,727 1955 - 1972 60-7-1
Oscar De La Hoya 1,720 1992 - 2004 37-4-0
Julio Cesar Chavez 1,716 1980 - 2005 108-6-2

Quite close, I think...

the fact that delahoya is so high on that list kills all credibility.

I agree!... and where is Henry Armstrong and Harry Greb on that list if its a list of all time greats?.... to name but two???.
Its laughable really to put Oscar in the top 10 all time greats list...

I basically have two lists and they are the top 10 greatest Heavies and then the top ten greatest lighter weight fighters...

Ali number 1, and Robinson number 1
in no particular order, Louis, Foreman, Marciano, Frazier, Dempsey, Holyfield, Holmes, Johnson, Tyson

Also in no particular order, Monzon, Ray Leonard, Duran, Emilie Griffith, Harry Greb, Julio Cesar Chavez, Marvin Hagler (his peak yrs), Eder Jofre, Azumah Nelson