Felix Trinidad (Prime) vs Antonio Margarito

@147, 154, 160. Who wins?

 

Trinidad kicks his ass at any weight.

At 147, a young Trinidad probably climbs off the canvas and stops Margarito in 6 rounds. Brutal.

At 154, Trinidad probably beats him worse because Margarito has no proven power at that weight.

Tito at 160 wasn't at his best but he'd still destroy this chump so bad.

 

Trinidad with a target like that? no jab to worry about? gotta like his chances here

 

::

 

Margarito is the perfect fighter to make Trinidad look like Superman.

 

I think these two camps would strike a secret agreement before the fight that no one has to be present during the time of hand wraping.::

But seriously... Tito KO 6 in a slaughter.

 

I don't regard these two fighters as worlds apart, tbh. If you line up 30 non elite welterweight titlists Tito might beat 16 and Tony might beat 11. They're in the same general class of fighter, frankly....

But style wise this is a mismatch and Tony would be fucking murdered.

 

Correct.

 

:notallthere::doh:

 

Tito is very overrated, Tony very underrated right now. Tito is certainly better but I stand by what i said - the difference isn't huge. Tito's list of legitimate wins at welter is no better than Tony's, leaving their mutual controversies with hand wraps aside (and lets do, because that convo is a pandoras box with no good answers).

 

This statement is an absolute INSULT to Tito, and example of him being underrated. You should know better. I never thought I'd say this... but the 147 Tito is truly underrated nowadays. The way some talk about him nowadays, you'd think he was as one dimensional as fuckin Ben Tackie. Saying Marg and Tito are in the same class is like saying Andre Dirrell is in the same class as a prime Roy.

Felix was in another league from Margarito, and Cotto as a fighter, and he would have violently KO'd both of them. No if's, ands, or butts.

Marg is closer to being in the same class as Mayorga, then he is Tito. Only differance being Phony woulda never beaten Vernon Forrest.

 

Based on what? Beating Oba Carr? Hugo Pineda? Hector Camacho, who never won a meaningful fight above 140 in his life?

I think he beats both Tony & Cotto; I think he's better than both - but not by much. Not by much. I only make that point to illustrate that the MM in question's a hideous styles match up - and that Tito butchering Margarito, which would be my pick, is based on that.

 

I pick Trinidad at 147 and 154, but 160 is a real wildcard considering I never saw Tony fight there.

 

Cotto is a broke man's Trinidad, and if Tito was around today... nobody in PR or in the boxing world woulda ever cared about Miguel's boring personality ass.

He's better then both by a GREAT deal. Shit much as I hated him... so was DLH.

 

You're obviously being facetious, but the fight gets easier the higher it goes. It's straight forward at welter, easy at 154 and a rapid murder at 160.

 

I guess Hex decided to make a match-up at 160 because he wanted to envision another Margarita beating.

 

Sorry mate, I didn't notice he'd included 160 among the options :: Yes I agree, he's probably refilming Saw III with a Tony Margarito look-a-like as we speak, masturbating furiously.

 

Very Wrong.

Very Right.

 

I couldnt resist.........:::bears:

 

Trinidad is definitely better than Margarito, but hut is correct that he isnt and never was "great"

 

Well he's sure as shit better than any welterweight Tito ever beat.

 

Incorrect.

Whether or not you agree with the decision...Tito beat De La Hoya. Besides...even the version of Whitaker that Tito beat was better than Margarito.

 

Trinidad did not beat Oscar. Im sorry but I refuse to even discuss that issue further. Decisions that bad aren't even worthy of being mentioned.

And a post crack-old as shit Pernel is not a better welter than Margarito or close. The best welter Tito legitimately beat is Oba Carr.

 

Then Foreman didn't beat Axel Schultz and Eubank didn't beat Dan Sherry and Roy Jones is the 1988 Olympic Champion.

If you refuse to accept a controversial decision then make sure that you are consistent.

Two judges had Tito beating Oscar the third had it a draw. It doesn't matter what Hut*Hut thinks....what matters is that Tito beat Oscar officially.

 

No what matters is that 10 million people have saw and remember that fight and 9,999,997 know exactly what the result of the BOXING was. What 3 fat corrupt stick dicks think is only important in fights where not enough real fans watched for that, real result to be known.

 

Many people outside of the judges either had it a draw or a close win for Trinidad.

Trinidad won the last four rounds for example.

The 1st round was close and the 4th round looked to be his. Harold Lederman of HBO scored the 5th for him also.

So score all of those rounds mentioned for Tito and you have him winning 7-5. The fight was scored on a ten point must system. The fact that Oscar won his rounds MUCH BIGGER than Tito won his rounds doesn't mean Oscar won the fight...if he didn't win MORE rounds.

I had Oscar winning 7-5...but I could accept a draw quite easily. I can't criticize anyone wh scored it for Tito either/.

 

^^^^Was a fight that Oscar could have won but he ran too much. Gave away too many rounds.

And he didn't dominate Trinidad enough in the early goings to hold as big a lead as he thought he had.

And anybody who finishes a fight the way he did does not deserve to walk away with a W. EVER.

 

Idealistically? Yes.

However that's not how a boxing match is (or should be) scored.

 

Tito swept the last four rounds.

For Oscar to have won...he needed to have won 7 of the first 8. That's debatable...is all I'm saying.

 

last three rounds, not four

DLH clearly won that fight, and easily won 7 of the first nine rounds (I had him winning all nine)

Trinidad did what Oscar allowed him to do in that fight, not the other way around

if that isnt winning a fight, I dont know what is