De la Hoya or Calzaghe

I am.

 

I thought he beat Quartey, but lost clearly to Whitaker.

 

The desperate last round charge vs Quartey probably swung it. Its not as if Quartey pulled up too many trees in that fight himself, but, pre the 12th round, his jab had swelled Oscars eye near-closed and his hook in the 6th was better than Oscars half-landed affair.

Oscar vs Quartey is more about the "greatness" of Oscar than about Oscar the "great fighter"

And, no, Jim Lampley, it wasn't quite SRL vs Hearns, "all over again":boring:

 

Seems like a classic case of differing opinions.

 

calzaghe was the greater, more accomplished fighter.

 

Calzaghe simply because DLH struggled with a guy Sly claims he would beat

 

Probably swung it? Does that mean you scored it for DLH?

The last round at least gave DLH an argument for winning a fight on the cards - I don't really think he had one without that kind of final round - but I didn't think it was enough to win the fight.

There was a line by someone after the fight that a stoppage would have been less controversial than the actual decision...not really sure I agree with it, but whatever, the decision was anything but clear cut.

 

::

 

Still, De La Hoya/Quartey was clearly fixed. Oscar could have lost that last round, in fact I think he could have been dropped in that last round, and the fight still goes his way on the cards.

 

Calzagne is one of the biggest fags in the history of boxing

 

Now, by "bundle of sticks" are you referring to his jab?

 

Agreed.

 

maybe, but he was better at boxing than the over rated fag from east los

 

perhaps...not sure I'd go quite that far.

As much as I hate Oscar you can't say he ducked anyone. It's not like he fought Trinidad after Tito lost to Jones. Whitaker after he lost to Boroquez. Oscar fought everyone we wanted him to fight with mixed reviews. Even ultra haters such as myself have to give him credit for that.

 

Career wise, Oscar, ability wise, Calzaghe.

As annoying a person as he is and as duck fest a career as he had, he was one of the hardest fighters to beat in the modern era IMO.

Very quick for a super middle, very unpredictable, very tough, great stamina, adaptable, good range and positioning etc etc.

As dislikeable as he is, he's an exceptional fighter, no question. Personally I think Calzaghe would have beaten any version of Hopkins.

Oscar was an elite fighter, but Calzaghe had a clear edge in ability, and in a P4P fight, would win.

Career wise? You'd have to give it to Oscar, obviously.

 

I've said this many times over the years...the 12th round of the Quartey fight has become a myth...Oscar had a good 30 seconds in that round then punched himself out. He spent the vast majority of it gassed and staying AWAY from Quartey who I think stung him with something toward the end of Oscar's flurry. I've seen it argued that should have been a 10-8 round without a knockdown...that's a big fat NO.

 

delahoya fought better foes and lost most of the time so he had a better career? i dont get it.

 

I thought that round was 10-8, period.

 

I don't think Joe would beat any version of Hopkins, but I do think he'd beat Oscar in a P4P sense.

I'd assume it's universally accepted Joe wouldn't have gotten within sniffing distance of beating the 168 or original 175 version of Jones. In fact, I don't believe Joe thinks he would have either.

 

Of course he wouldn't, Jones was a particularly bad matchup for him, and just a better fighter.

Hopkins? I have a lot of respect for Nard as a fighter, always have done, but I think Calzaghe's speed, southpawness, inclination to hold up close, plus VERY good footwork (very good at getting in and out of range) would beat Hopkins 9 out of 10 times. Ability wise they are both great, I just think Joe had the style to beat him.

Neil - Oscar won some and lost some. But he could always hang at the very highest level.

Taking risks should be rewarded. Calzaghe was better, but played it safe.

 

delahoya won less than he he lost at the highest level, and was rewarded very handsomely for it.

 

Good points

"however"

I can't forget how Bernard walked Joe into the right hand that put him down...'Nard wasn't able to pull the trigger on that shot afterwards...reflexes weren't there.

back 'Nard up to 2001 when he beat Trinidad...just as savvy, reflexes in tact...I think he does Calzaghe despite Calzaghe having his moments.

 

Most feel he beat Trinidad and won the Mosley rematch. Personally I thought he deserved the Whitaker and Quartey fights as well. He should have lost the Sturm fight though, but he didn't even look to be in shape that night.

As far as being rewarded handsomely, guy brought in the fans and had crossover appear, he deserved every penny he ever got.

 

I couldn't vote for Oscar fast enough.

 

You know it doesn't work like that. Tito looked way more dominant against the second tier than Winky, but when they fought he couldn't do shit against him, and i would say Winky was the better fighter.

Oscar is the greater, no doubt, he accomplished much more than Joe, but IMO Calzaghe was the better fighter of the two.

 

Maybe you are shot and can't pull the trigger, like Oscar vs Stevie Forbes.:limp:

 

That joke was about as lame as that wrist.

 

24-3 is about how it should be, too.

Oscar clearly.

 

Speaking of shot, that describes the top names on Joes resume when he fought them. After that there's a long line of nothing special.