I have always said ODLCTAKH looks for the most advantages he can get.
Read it - about time someone told it as it is re Oscar.
PBF at Light Middle
He wanted Hatton
Forbes at 150lbs and now he is after one time Superfly Pacman.
What a tosser!
Neither...I'd be saving my money for Khan - PrescottDavidPayne wrote:Which PPV would you be more likely to buy?
Mike Tyson v Henry Akinwande
or
Mike Tyson v Prince Naseem Hamed?
Ya see....not as daft as you think is it!
True, but he had nothing to lose and It wouldn't effect his legacy and reputation at all.Loftgroov wrote:Hopkins was smaller too was he?
Oscar can do no wrong and Floyd can do no right.Deserter wrote:DG, I know I've debated the Oscar issue with you in the past and historically I've felt you were too harsh - great performances against Quartey, Vargas, Trinidad and Moseley etc. However, there's no doubt his recent track record is pretty shocking with the Forbes fight in particular being completely unjustifiable.
However, I do think you need to be consistent as Floyd has been equally culpable if not more so in this regard - avoiding the Margaritos and Williams of this world while facing Hatton etc. And yet I haven't seen you take the same stance with him.
Deserter wrote:DG, I know I've debated the Oscar issue with you in the past and historically I've felt you were too harsh - great performances against Quartey, Vargas, Trinidad and Moseley etc. However, there's no doubt his recent track record is pretty shocking with the Forbes fight in particular being completely unjustifiable.
However, I do think you need to be consistent as Floyd has been equally culpable if not more so in this regard - avoiding the Margaritos and Williams of this world while facing Hatton etc. And yet I haven't seen you take the same stance with him.
Loftgroov wrote:Hopkins was smaller too was he?
Oliver, I'm merely pointing out DG's biased stance - we all know how easy it is to perform a bit of historical revisionism and what you've said above doesn't detract from what I was saying.oliverfennell wrote:Oscar can do no wrong and Floyd can do no right.Deserter wrote:DG, I know I've debated the Oscar issue with you in the past and historically I've felt you were too harsh - great performances against Quartey, Vargas, Trinidad and Moseley etc. However, there's no doubt his recent track record is pretty shocking with the Forbes fight in particular being completely unjustifiable.
However, I do think you need to be consistent as Floyd has been equally culpable if not more so in this regard - avoiding the Margaritos and Williams of this world while facing Hatton etc. And yet I haven't seen you take the same stance with him.
Pre-fight, Mayweather-Hatton was seen as an interesting test at worst, and a fascinating match at best. A great many knowledgeable fans picked Ricky to win. He was the undisputed and undefeated 10st champ. The fact Floyd won easily does not detract from any of that. In fact, if Floyd had fought and beaten Margarito or Cotto instead on that night, the critics would then be saying he was avoiding Hatton. You might scoff at that now you know Floyd beat Hatton easily, but if they hadn't fought then and Hatton was still unbeaten now, that would have been the scenario.
Max Molyneux wrote:True, but he had nothing to loseLoftgroov wrote:Hopkins was smaller too was he?
You can't keep on saying PBF was/is a super-feather as De La Hoya started in the same division! Both outgrew it, and I fully accept that Oscar's natural weight now is probably around light-middle whereas Floyd could probably still make light-welter, but to claim he's still to all intents and purposes a super-feather is laughable.DG. wrote:Deserter wrote:DG, I know I've debated the Oscar issue with you in the past and historically I've felt you were too harsh - great performances against Quartey, Vargas, Trinidad and Moseley etc. However, there's no doubt his recent track record is pretty shocking with the Forbes fight in particular being completely unjustifiable.
However, I do think you need to be consistent as Floyd has been equally culpable if not more so in this regard - avoiding the Margaritos and Williams of this world while facing Hatton etc. And yet I haven't seen you take the same stance with him.
PBF was a Superfeather always fighting bigger men. I wish he fought Cotto and Margariito!
To the poster who mentioned Hatton....PBF was not bigger than HATTON ever. Hatton was/is bigger.
Post Hopkins ( remember OSCAR BAILED OUT AT THE FIRST SIGN OF TROUBLE and made Hopkins come in light 158 ?- but Hopkins called him bluff and came in at 156) Oscar has been taking the piss!
PBF should fight Margarito - but we all Know that is the fight that Oscar shoiuld take, but he knows Margarito whoops dat.
Also,
Quartey. Oscar faked a cut eye to keep Quatey out of the ring for 18 months.
Mosley was much smaller in the first fight and still beat Oscar.
Vargas, Oscar waited for Trinidad to RUIN him - DLH wanted no part of a hot Vargas.
He ran like a thief against Trinidad.
Remember - according to the judges - Oscar has lost most of the big fights you mentioned apart from a shot Vargas.
Mosley x 2
Trinidad x 1
Hopkins x 1 ( bailed out)
I think PBF could make Lt welter with ease. He walks around at 10st 10lbs.Deserter wrote:You can't keep on saying PBF was/is a super-feather as De La Hoya started in the same division! Both outgrew it, and I fully accept that Oscar's natural weight now is probably around light-middle whereas Floyd could probably still make light-welter, but to claim he's still to all intents and purposes a super-feather is laughable.DG. wrote:Deserter wrote:DG, I know I've debated the Oscar issue with you in the past and historically I've felt you were too harsh - great performances against Quartey, Vargas, Trinidad and Moseley etc. However, there's no doubt his recent track record is pretty shocking with the Forbes fight in particular being completely unjustifiable.
However, I do think you need to be consistent as Floyd has been equally culpable if not more so in this regard - avoiding the Margaritos and Williams of this world while facing Hatton etc. And yet I haven't seen you take the same stance with him.
PBF was a Superfeather always fighting bigger men. I wish he fought Cotto and Margariito!
To the poster who mentioned Hatton....PBF was not bigger than HATTON ever. Hatton was/is bigger.
Post Hopkins ( remember OSCAR BAILED OUT AT THE FIRST SIGN OF TROUBLE and made Hopkins come in light 158 ?- but Hopkins called him bluff and came in at 156) Oscar has been taking the piss!
PBF should fight Margarito - but we all Know that is the fight that Oscar shoiuld take, but he knows Margarito whoops dat.
Also,
Quartey. Oscar faked a cut eye to keep Quatey out of the ring for 18 months.
Mosley was much smaller in the first fight and still beat Oscar.
Vargas, Oscar waited for Trinidad to RUIN him - DLH wanted no part of a hot Vargas.
He ran like a thief against Trinidad.
Remember - according to the judges - Oscar has lost most of the big fights you mentioned apart from a shot Vargas.
Mosley x 2
Trinidad x 1
Hopkins x 1 ( bailed out)
The claims you've made regarding Mosley and Trinidad are just so ridiculously skewed as to not even be worthy of a reply.
De La Hoya's no legend, but there are few fighters in this era who've got the sort of resume he has.
Floyd's the better fighter, but facing the likes of Bruseles, Mitchell and Gatti at light-welter was truly shocking, and by your own admission he's never faced the men who would give him his toughest test at Welter, so how is any of that justifiable?
Sorry, I don't get your point. I said Mayweather-Hatton was a good match and I also thought De La Hoya-Trinidad was also a good match.Deserter wrote:Oliver, I'm merely pointing out DG's biased stance - we all know how easy it is to perform a bit of historical revisionism and what you've said above doesn't detract from what I was saying.oliverfennell wrote:Oscar can do no wrong and Floyd can do no right.Deserter wrote:DG, I know I've debated the Oscar issue with you in the past and historically I've felt you were too harsh - great performances against Quartey, Vargas, Trinidad and Moseley etc. However, there's no doubt his recent track record is pretty shocking with the Forbes fight in particular being completely unjustifiable.
However, I do think you need to be consistent as Floyd has been equally culpable if not more so in this regard - avoiding the Margaritos and Williams of this world while facing Hatton etc. And yet I haven't seen you take the same stance with him.
Pre-fight, Mayweather-Hatton was seen as an interesting test at worst, and a fascinating match at best. A great many knowledgeable fans picked Ricky to win. He was the undisputed and undefeated 10st champ. The fact Floyd won easily does not detract from any of that. In fact, if Floyd had fought and beaten Margarito or Cotto instead on that night, the critics would then be saying he was avoiding Hatton. You might scoff at that now you know Floyd beat Hatton easily, but if they hadn't fought then and Hatton was still unbeaten now, that would have been the scenario.
Mayweather-Hatton was indeed seen as an interesting test, but so was De La Hoya versus Trinidad etc. You can't have one rule for one and one for the other.
DG. wrote:Deserter wrote:
Why doesn't Oscar fight Margarito? - answer me that! GO ON!!
You directly quoted me earlier and stated in your first line "Oscar can do no wrong and Floyd can do no right", but that wasn't my point at all. I was simply pointing out that the accusations that DG throws at Oscar can be aimed at other fighters like Floyd, hence the reference to historical revisionism. I've got no problem with him making those accusations but he has to be consistent and apply it across the board, rather than being 'misled' by his personal sentiments regarding a fighter.oliverfennell wrote:Oscar can do no wrong and Floyd can do no right.
Pre-fight, Mayweather-Hatton was seen as an interesting test at worst, and a fascinating match at best. A great many knowledgeable fans picked Ricky to win. He was the undisputed and undefeated 10st champ. The fact Floyd won easily does not detract from any of that. In fact, if Floyd had fought and beaten Margarito or Cotto instead on that night, the critics would then be saying he was avoiding Hatton. You might scoff at that now you know Floyd beat Hatton easily, but if they hadn't fought then and Hatton was still unbeaten now, that would have been the scenario.
Oliver, I'm merely pointing out DG's biased stance - we all know how easy it is to perform a bit of historical revisionism and what you've said above doesn't detract from what I was saying.
Mayweather-Hatton was indeed seen as an interesting test, but so was De La Hoya versus Trinidad etc. You can't have one rule for one and one for the other.
Sorry, I don't get your point. I said Mayweather-Hatton was a good match and I also thought De La Hoya-Trinidad was also a good match.
I like both Oscar and Floyd as boxers and I think neither man's resume can be seriously criticised, however much people try to put a negative spin on things.
So Floyd "avoided" one or two welters by fighting the world's leading light-middle... how is that a bad thing?? People bend over backwards to criticise Floyd - if he came back and trounced Margarito, they'd only say "well, Margarito had been beaten five times before, I wish Mayweather would stop ducking X and Y...."
Personalities have always sold PPV's and tickets since the dawn of man (Ok maybe not that long) Mohammed Ali was boxing in front of 2,000 people 1 night, and after the show he went to see "Gorgeous George (no, I have no idea who he is either) wrestle in front of 20,000.DavidPayne wrote:Which PPV would you be more likely to buy?
Mike Tyson v Henry Akinwande
or
Mike Tyson v Prince Naseem Hamed?
Ya see....not as daft as you think is it!
If i may play Devils Advocate for a moment, who has fought in better class than DLH over the last 10 years?DavidPayne wrote:And as the pinnacle attraction in the world of PPV, those sentiments are magnified in DLH's case.