Who Is The Most Overrated Boxer In The Last 30 Years?

First topic message reminder :

1. Oscar De la Hoya
2. Joe Calzaghe
3. Lennox Lewis
4. Mike Tyson
5. Riddick Bowe
6. Roy Jones
7. Wladimir Klitschko
8. Bernard Hopkins
9. Shane Mosely
10. Naseem Hamed

AdamT wrote:My back is broken.

Put the fat American down......immediately!

Hahaha

So in conclusion...

Oscar was a ducking coward despite the fact he took on everybody..

Oscar's best wins were attained by lucky close decisions or by picking on midgets..

His biggest defeats were by close decision batterings or by ripped off-ownings..

Mike Katz is a journalist so he's unbiased as all journalists are that agree with the OP...

I blame the parents !!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:So in conclusion...

Oscar was a ducking coward despite the fact he took on everybody..

Oscar's best wins were attained by lucky close decisions or by picking on midgets..

His biggest defeats were by close decision batterings or by ripped off-ownings..

Mike Katz is a journalist so he's unbiased as all journalists are that agree with the OP...

I blame the parents !!

That's what you took away? I'm wasted round here. Wasted!

I think Richard Lopez is an interesting one.

It's not that I don't think he was a great fighter. I do. But I remember cobbling together an article on him about eighteen months back and realising that, to be honest, I don't think his resume reads any better on paper than someone like Calzaghe's, maybe even marginally less impressively than Calzaghe's in fact, albeit that's worth a separate argument. But the point is, I don't really consider Calzaghe an all-time great, whereas I'd never really questioned Lopez's claim to be a part of that bracket at all beforehand.

That's on paper, of course. The eye test tells us that he dealt with a similar level of competition to Calzaghe with generally more aplomb and dominance over the course of his career. It also tells us that he had a greater array of skills and a more complete game than Joe as well, so fair enough that he's ahead of Calzaghe in most all-time lists. But I think the overall quality of Strawweight and Light-Flyweight is often questionable at the best of times, and fights against Humberto Gonzalez, Michael Carbajal, Myung-Woo Yuh, Yuri Arbachakov etc never materalised despite them being on 3 lb or, in Arbachakov's case, 7 lb north of Lopez. All of those names are arguably an advance on the best name on Lopez's ledger, which is Rosendo Alvarez - a man against whom he had his hands full, albeit his rematch victory over him was deserved and a wonderful fight. Yet Lopez didn't make the step up until 1999, by which time a formerly exciting and relatively talent-laden Light-Flyweight division had pretty much petered out.

Calzaghe rightly gets scrutinised for remaining in his comfort zone for so long when there were decent fights just a plane journey or 7 lb away, but Lopez doesn't seem to get the same treatment. No doubting Lopez's pedigree or that he had the all-round skillset to leave anyone bedazzled, but for a guy who is often put in third position behind only Chavez Sr and Salvador Sanchez in the pantheon on Mexican greats, I'd expect a little more quality on his record in terms of top names.

Hell of a fighter all the same, mind you. But food for thought.

You been on holiday Chris... or just reading over one of your own old posts and it's kept you busy for a few weeks? ☺

DuransHorse wrote:You been on holiday Chris... or just reading over one of your own old posts and it's kept you busy for a few weeks?

hazharrison wrote:

1. The source is in the article I linked (the one you'd already read). Oscar agreed to a 48-52 split and so King agreed to shelve the Reid fight and the demand to fight at 154.
2. You got me, Mosley invaded welter in '99 to chase an Oscar fight. Oscar still believed he'd be too big (as did most observers) - hence Mosley's position as 2-1 underdog.
3. Oscar could have made a Trinidad rematch at any point (as he could have made an Ike Quartey rematch - one he was quizzed about immediately afterwards but dismissed). King and Arum negotiated the rematch but, ultimately, it was Oscar's decision to go another route. Firstly, he refused to cancel the Coley fight (when Trinidad offered to cancel the Reid fight) and secondly, he made the call to fight Mosley when they renegotiated that summer. I'll pull out some BMs in a bit to offer some further "evidence" if that makes you happier.
4. Oscar publicly refused to entertain a Vargas fight due to Fernando's perceived "disrespect". After Mosley eliminated him from 147 (once again) he moved to 154 (just after Tito had left funnily enough) and suddenly forgave Vargas (who, incidentally, had looked faded in fights with Flores and Rivera). Again, will pull out some mags later to provide some "expert opinion".

Enjoy the beer! Let me know if you need any further clarification!

i keep trying to leave this debate, but someone reversed the hearse with the rotting corpse in it, and it ain't half humming so...

1. yup read that. Says 'backed down on weight jump' not agreed to 147. Same article also says Tito didn't agree to arum's new financial offer at that time and was holding out for more. When they did renegotiate, at the time of the foley fight, they finally agreed on money, but not on weight. What does that tell you? here's the timeline:
- late '99 king pulls trinidad out of ongoing rematch negotiations and signs him to fight Reid. Yes that's trinidad's promoter pulling out.
- oscar then signs to fight foley
- further discussions happen, your article reports oscar lowers financial demands and that king lowers weight demands and suggests both pull out of their contracted fights. Tito wants more money and there's no agreement.
- around the time of foley fight, feb 2000, they agree on economics... but not on weight.... 'straight talking' katz reports oscar offers catchweight
- still no resolution, oscar pulls out, blaming tito senior. Signs to fight mosley.... all before trinidad has fought at light middle.

Who knows whose fault any of this was, but it takes a unique eye to look at the facts you've presented and blame oscar. One thing's for sure, if 147 was ever offered, it was reneged on.  Even king was talking about blowing millions over a few pounds. Oscar may well have subsequently been terrified by trinidad's devastating displays at 154 as you suggest, but these negotiations we've been debating went pear-shaped before trinidad had even fought at 154.

2. Thanks ... and for the insightful if largely irrelevant fight odds!

3. See point 1. Just risible. Especially the bit that Oscar is to blame for not cancelling the fight - he only took when trinidad pulled out of negotiations to fight someone else. He's expected to do this? And without financial agreement? OK.

4. Lots of nice fight reports on vargas thanks. Not sure why you're posting them as I don't think I'd ever debated he showed some vulnerability post trinidad. You paint a nice narrative of oscar ducking his amateur rival, bad blood etc.
So lets do another timeline. I like timelines
- de la hoya turns pro as olympic champion, late 2002, when vargas is 15 years old. Must have been a great amateur rivalry.
- sometime later at a de la hoya training camp, vargas feels slighted by de la hoya not helping him out of a snow drift. Yup you couldn't make it up.
- vargas turns pro and makes a rapid journey through the light middles, yapping away at de la hoya to increase exposure, wins a world title and then back to back wins at the end of '99 and spring of 2000 against winky wright and quartey, bring him into the A league. - So now he's a viable opponent for a superfight.... a weight above oscar.
- trinidad 'ruins' vargas not long after oscar mosley.

So when was de la hoya realistically going to have a big superfight with vargas before vargas trinidad? Maybe he would have stayed clear of him, but as it happens oscar had a contract dispute, took a money spinner with gatti, moved up won a belt, took vargas as a unification in his next fight. Timing is everything in matchmaking, maybe they did quake in their boots until vargas lost to trinidad, but in reality, whatever the state of vargas,  they fought a 'grudge match' unification money spinner when they could. And most people thought vargas was pretty competitive in it for a shot fighter.. PED fueled or otherwise.

burn baby burn.

I remember Oscar getting a lot of stick in his younger days for being a cherry picking hype job. That was until he fought Trinidad (and was robbed beyond belief). He gained the respect he deserved from that fight.
Some may see it differently but that's how I remember it.

milkyboy wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

1. The source is in the article I linked (the one you'd already read). Oscar agreed to a 48-52 split and so King agreed to shelve the Reid fight and the demand to fight at 154.
2. You got me, Mosley invaded welter in '99 to chase an Oscar fight. Oscar still believed he'd be too big (as did most observers) - hence Mosley's position as 2-1 underdog.
3. Oscar could have made a Trinidad rematch at any point (as he could have made an Ike Quartey rematch - one he was quizzed about immediately afterwards but dismissed). King and Arum negotiated the rematch but, ultimately, it was Oscar's decision to go another route. Firstly, he refused to cancel the Coley fight (when Trinidad offered to cancel the Reid fight) and secondly, he made the call to fight Mosley when they renegotiated that summer. I'll pull out some BMs in a bit to offer some further "evidence" if that makes you happier.
4. Oscar publicly refused to entertain a Vargas fight due to Fernando's perceived "disrespect". After Mosley eliminated him from 147 (once again) he moved to 154 (just after Tito had left funnily enough) and suddenly forgave Vargas (who, incidentally, had looked faded in fights with Flores and Rivera). Again, will pull out some mags later to provide some "expert opinion".

Enjoy the beer! Let me know if you need any further clarification!

i keep trying to leave this debate, but someone reversed the hearse with the rotting corpse in it, and it ain't half humming so...

1. yup read that. Says 'backed down on weight jump' not agreed to 147. Same article also says Tito didn't agree to arum's new financial offer at that time and was holding out for more. When they did renegotiate, at the time of the foley fight, they finally agreed on money, but not on weight. What does that tell you? here's the timeline:
- late '99 king pulls trinidad out of ongoing rematch negotiations and signs him to fight Reid. Yes that's trinidad's promoter pulling out.
- oscar then signs to fight foley
- further discussions happen, your article reports oscar lowers financial demands and that king lowers weight demands and suggests both pull out of their contracted fights. Tito wants more money and there's no agreement.
- around the time of foley fight, feb 2000, they agree on economics... but not on weight.... 'straight talking' katz reports oscar offers catchweight
- still no resolution, oscar pulls out, blaming tito senior. Signs to fight mosley.... all before trinidad has fought at light middle.

Who knows whose fault any of this was, but it takes a unique eye to look at the facts you've presented and blame oscar. One thing's for sure, if 147 was ever offered, it was reneged on.  Even king was talking about blowing millions over a few pounds. Oscar may well have subsequently been terrified by trinidad's devastating displays at 154 as you suggest, but these negotiations we've been debating went pear-shaped before trinidad had even fought at 154.

2. Thanks ... and for the insightful if largely irrelevant fight odds!

3. See point 1. Just risible. Especially the bit that Oscar is to blame for not cancelling the fight - he only took when trinidad pulled out of negotiations to fight someone else. He's expected to do this? And without financial agreement? OK.

4. Lots of nice fight reports on vargas thanks. Not sure why you're posting them as I don't think I'd ever debated he showed some vulnerability post trinidad. You paint a nice narrative of oscar ducking his amateur rival, bad blood etc.
So lets do another timeline. I like timelines
- de la hoya turns pro as olympic champion, late 2002, when vargas is 15 years old. Must have been a great amateur rivalry.
- sometime later at a de la hoya training camp, vargas feels slighted by de la hoya not helping him out of a snow drift. Yup you couldn't make it up.
- vargas turns pro and makes a rapid journey through the light middles, yapping away at de la hoya to increase exposure, wins a world title and then back to back wins at the end of '99 and spring of 2000 against winky wright and quartey, bring him into the A league. - So now he's a viable opponent for a superfight.... a weight above oscar.
- trinidad 'ruins' vargas not long after oscar mosley.

So when was de la hoya realistically going to have a big superfight with vargas before vargas trinidad? Maybe he would have stayed clear of him, but as it happens oscar had a contract dispute, took a money spinner with gatti, moved up won a belt, took vargas as a unification in his next fight. Timing is everything in matchmaking, maybe they did quake in their boots until vargas lost to trinidad, but in reality, whatever the state of vargas,  they fought a 'grudge match' unification money spinner when they could. And most people thought vargas was pretty competitive in it for a shot fighter.. PED fueled or otherwise.

burn baby burn.

Foley? What is this Beverly Hills Cop Out? Will have some fun with this at work!

good typo spot haz, foley coley heineken schmeineken. I hope the rest of your detailed rebuttal is as insightful! I'll give you the typo for 2002 instead of 1992 as a starter!

I'm sure you've been beavering away at those back copies of BM to find some more expert opinion to support your case, Good luck and well done if you've found some. No amount of new articles can change the slant you put on the sources already presented. I make no claims to be an expert on boxing, or this era specifically, all i've done here is use your own sources to highlight your lack of balance on this subject and pick up on the odd clearly incorrect statement. You are on record as being a fan of tito and have a history of oscar bashing. It shows.

But have some fun regardless if it makes you feel better

Oscar is overrated because.......

He had the audacity to be bigger at the weight than Chavez...Meaningless wins x 2

All his legacy victories Whittaker, Quartey etc..were close decisions..Meaningless !!

All his legacy defeats were close decision hammerings or rip off-hammerings by Mosley x 2 and Trinidad...Meaningful !!!

Picked Vargas and Mayorga at the right time.......Meaningless !!


Where as "Great" Marciano beat Walcott, Charles and Louis in their primes and Archie Moore was really a natural heavy and he beat him too....

Milky is full of crap !!! Never been a more objective poster than HAZ on here..

milkyboy wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

1. The source is in the article I linked (the one you'd already read). Oscar agreed to a 48-52 split and so King agreed to shelve the Reid fight and the demand to fight at 154.
2. You got me, Mosley invaded welter in '99 to chase an Oscar fight. Oscar still believed he'd be too big (as did most observers) - hence Mosley's position as 2-1 underdog.
3. Oscar could have made a Trinidad rematch at any point (as he could have made an Ike Quartey rematch - one he was quizzed about immediately afterwards but dismissed). King and Arum negotiated the rematch but, ultimately, it was Oscar's decision to go another route. Firstly, he refused to cancel the Coley fight (when Trinidad offered to cancel the Reid fight) and secondly, he made the call to fight Mosley when they renegotiated that summer. I'll pull out some BMs in a bit to offer some further "evidence" if that makes you happier.
4. Oscar publicly refused to entertain a Vargas fight due to Fernando's perceived "disrespect". After Mosley eliminated him from 147 (once again) he moved to 154 (just after Tito had left funnily enough) and suddenly forgave Vargas (who, incidentally, had looked faded in fights with Flores and Rivera). Again, will pull out some mags later to provide some "expert opinion".

Enjoy the beer! Let me know if you need any further clarification!

i keep trying to leave this debate, but someone reversed the hearse with the rotting corpse in it, and it ain't half humming so...

1. yup read that. Says 'backed down on weight jump' not agreed to 147. Same article also says Tito didn't agree to arum's new financial offer at that time and was holding out for more. When they did renegotiate, at the time of the foley fight, they finally agreed on money, but not on weight. What does that tell you? here's the timeline:
- late '99 king pulls trinidad out of ongoing rematch negotiations and signs him to fight Reid. Yes that's trinidad's promoter pulling out.
- oscar then signs to fight foley
- further discussions happen, your article reports oscar lowers financial demands and that king lowers weight demands and suggests both pull out of their contracted fights. Tito wants more money and there's no agreement.
- around the time of foley fight, feb 2000, they agree on economics... but not on weight.... 'straight talking' katz reports oscar offers catchweight
- still no resolution, oscar pulls out, blaming tito senior. Signs to fight mosley.... all before trinidad has fought at light middle.

Who knows whose fault any of this was, but it takes a unique eye to look at the facts you've presented and blame oscar. One thing's for sure, if 147 was ever offered, it was reneged on.  Even king was talking about blowing millions over a few pounds. Oscar may well have subsequently been terrified by trinidad's devastating displays at 154 as you suggest, but these negotiations we've been debating went pear-shaped before trinidad had even fought at 154.

2. Thanks ... and for the insightful if largely irrelevant fight odds!

3. See point 1. Just risible. Especially the bit that Oscar is to blame for not cancelling the fight - he only took when trinidad pulled out of negotiations to fight someone else. He's expected to do this? And without financial agreement? OK.

4. Lots of nice fight reports on vargas thanks. Not sure why you're posting them as I don't think I'd ever debated he showed some vulnerability post trinidad. You paint a nice narrative of oscar ducking his amateur rival, bad blood etc.
So lets do another timeline. I like timelines
- de la hoya turns pro as olympic champion, late 2002, when vargas is 15 years old. Must have been a great amateur rivalry.
- sometime later at a de la hoya training camp, vargas feels slighted by de la hoya not helping him out of a snow drift. Yup you couldn't make it up.
- vargas turns pro and makes a rapid journey through the light middles, yapping away at de la hoya to increase exposure, wins a world title and then back to back wins at the end of '99 and spring of 2000 against winky wright and quartey, bring him into the A league. - So now he's a viable opponent for a superfight.... a weight above oscar.
- trinidad 'ruins' vargas not long after oscar mosley.

So when was de la hoya realistically going to have a big superfight with vargas before vargas trinidad? Maybe he would have stayed clear of him, but as it happens oscar had a contract dispute, took a money spinner with gatti, moved up won a belt, took vargas as a unification in his next fight. Timing is everything in matchmaking, maybe they did quake in their boots until vargas lost to trinidad, but in reality, whatever the state of vargas,  they fought a 'grudge match' unification money spinner when they could. And most people thought vargas was pretty competitive in it for a shot fighter.. PED fueled or otherwise.

burn baby burn.

1. Let's look at the situation: who lost more kudos in the Trinidad-De la Hoya fight? While neither man covered themselves in glory, it was Oscar who had been deemed to have let himself down. Boxing Monthly made the result its cover story late in ’99 with the headline: ‘Who Dared Won – why did Oscar turn his back on a place in history?’

De la Hoya received heavy criticism in the media for his display – especially in the Latino community. Fernando Vargas went as far as claiming Oscar had disgraced his Mexican heritage by running around the ring in the last three rounds of his narrow loss to Trinidad (you’ll no doubt argue: well he would! – regardless, it was a public shaming). If you recall, that fight created a backlash from a plethora of Mexican fighters over the remainder of Oscar’s career. Years later, the likes of Antonio Margarito, Julio Cesar Chavez, Julio Cesar Chavez Jr., Jorge Arce and Erik Morales were part of a “Mexicans for Pacquiao” group backing Pacman over Oscar.  

Oscar had everything to gain from a rematch yet he turned it down over money and a dislike of Tito’s father? Does that sound realistic?

As for your timeline (I’ll help you out a bit here):

After Arum/Oscar refused to move to 154 King made a power move (cynics labelled it a marketing ploy) in signing Tito to fight Reid. In December ’99 Oscar then signed to fight Ahmed Kotiev. The WBC threatened to strip Trinidad for failing to fight Coley (which King batted away). Trinidad had to agree to fight Coley after Reid or risk losing his belts. De la Hoya then signs to fight Coley rather than Kotiev.

The teams entered into further negotiations prior to the Reid/Coley fights: King agreed to fight at 147 and scrap the Reid fight. Arum/Oscar refused to scrap the Coley fight (for a $5m purse rather than the $20m purse on offer). This from Arum: “De la Hoya could have fought Trinidad at 154. No problem, but no rush either. There was no beef from Top Rank when Trinidad’s father said his son couldn’t do 147 any more. Our schedule says Oscar will make the move to junior middle sometime in 2001”.

Trinidad fights Reid. Two days before the fight, Oscar signs to fight Mosley!

I contend that Oscar and Arum were in the box seat during negotiations. They didn’t like having to give purse parity to King/Trinidad but if Oscar had truly wanted the fight, he could have clinched it. As Arum said, it was Oscar’s call in the end. Trinidad called him out for the rest of his career (even after the Hopkins fight) but Oscar didn’t want to know. Why was that? Arum claimed the match could wait until 2001, so Trinidad got on with mopping up 154 and set his sights on a Roy Jones fight instead.

2. My point was that the Mosley fight wasn’t deemed as great a challenge for Oscar as the Trinidad rematch would have been. There were some wise old heads (Angelo Dundee and Larry Merchant) who tipped Shane to upset the applecart but that was about it. In attempting to flip Tito the bird, they walked into a custard pie.
3. Which part of this is “just risible”?:

Oscar could have made a Trinidad rematch at any point (as he could have made an Ike Quartey rematch - one he was quizzed about immediately afterwards but dismissed). King and Arum negotiated the rematch but, ultimately, it was Oscar's decision to go another route. Firstly, he refused to cancel the Coley fight (when Trinidad offered to cancel the Reid fight) and secondly, he made the call to fight Mosley when they renegotiated that summer. I'll pull out some BMs in a bit to offer some further "evidence" if that makes you happier.

Oscar could have accepted King’s terms. If he was the warrior you paint him out to be why – considering the immense wealth he’d already accumulated at that point – would he pass up the chance to avenge the Tito defeat and address the accusations he faced in the aftermath (of fighting scared) over money? That doesn’t quite add up does it?
4. You cast aspersions over whether Vargas was shot. That was the reason I cited fight reports that indicated he’d slipped badly. Here’s a snippet from Graham Houston’s De la Hoya-Vargas fight preview (Graham’s as straight a shooter as it gets):

“The crux of the matter seems to have been a sparring session when Vargas, then a 16-year-old, felt that the much more experienced De la Hoya took liberties.

So “Ferocious” Fernando has had a long time to stoke the fires of resentment and his harsh feelings towards De la Hoya have been vigorously expressed.

So much so that De la Hoya, 29, at one time seemed disinclined to fight Vargas, 24, saying that the younger man’s disrespectful comments did not deserve the reward of an Oscar mega-fight purse.

But De la Hoya has changed his mind, in part, I suspect, because Vargas is widely perceived to be damaged goods after his crushing, five-knockdown defeat against…Trinidad in December 2000.

In his two fights since, Vargas has not looked impressive and his chin has not looked too sound. De la Hoya, the WBC champion, might see the fight as the perfect opportunity to put an upstart decisively in his place and close the book on Vargas while making millions.”

The snow story was almost certainly promotional fluff but Vargas’s festering hatred of De la Hoya stemmed from Oscar beating him up when Vargas was a 16-year-old amateur. That was the amateur rivalry I made reference to (bloody obvious Oscar was already a pro Columbo). It’s a sure sign someone’s losing a debate when they start picking up on semantics.

This was opportune matchmaking. Nothing wrong with that but you attempted to pass this off as Oscar testing himself – which didn’t ring true at the time.

As for your final point: why not take Vargas in 2000 after the Mosley defeat? Vargas was flying and had defeated both Winky Wright and Ike Quartey. It would have been a natural. Oscar reiterated he'd never face Vargas at that point and so Trinidad took him on and ruined him. It was only after Vargas looked vulnerable that Oscar decided he'd like to "settle the score". That's my take.

wow. who's putting words into who's mouth now...and you've shocked the world by pulling another 'straight shooter' out of the bag! We didn't see that coming. The guy's who say it was the snowdrift are bent shooters! Doesn't matter the alleged events actually took place a the same time. Made me smile regardless, 'amateur rivalry' suggests they were amateur rivals haz. But yeh, I was being a pedant because i was losing the argument!

Your original point was a valid one, he wasn't always seen as a 'fight anyone' guy by all at the time, it's also true that some fights look bigger in retrospect than they did at the time, oscar mosley 1 probably being one, though it was still a big fight. Then you go into a hatchet job and select the points that suit your argument and bluster your way or ignore the ones that don't.

You've had your chance to scour the internet and your back catalogues and introduced nothing that alters the debate. The best you've got is offering an opinion that oscar could have accepted kings terms, because he was the one in control and the one who needed it.  He certainly copped some flak for chucking the fight away by getting on his bike, whilst  tito's rep took a knock for being outboxed and getting a 'w' on his record that few felt he'd deserved. Not really a rabbit out of the hat that one.

When you're reduced to offering that you 'contend' this and your 'take' is that, I consider that progress.

My take is this, (and it's just my take I have no expert opinion to support it) you think conceding points is a sign of weakness haz, when in reality its a sign of maturity. You know far more about this era than me, but you're too busy being determined to be right and 'prove' your opinion. Sometimes I do the same.

But then, I don't hold a strong opinion on who is to blame for this rematch not happening. Contract talks break down all the time. There is nothing factual to indicate one party's responsibility over the other. Same with Vargas, there is an opinion that oscar timed the vargas fight and the opinion he went to light middle when he was ready to... in fact when uncle bob had said they planned to according to your quote... and fought him then - very probably delighted that vargas had looked a bit shaky of late.

milkyboy wrote:wow. who's putting words into who's mouth now...and you've shocked the world by pulling another 'straight shooter' out of the bag! We didn't see that coming. The guy's who say it was the snowdrift are bent shooters! Doesn't matter the alleged events actually took place a the same time. Made me smile regardless, 'amateur rivalry' suggests they were amateur rivals haz. But yeh, I was being a pedant because i was losing the argument!

Your original point was a valid one, he wasn't always seen as a 'fight anyone' guy by all at the time, it's also true that some fights look bigger in retrospect than they did at the time, oscar mosley 1 probably being one, though it was still a big fight. Then you go into a hatchet job and select the points that suit your argument and bluster your way or ignore the ones that don't.

You've had your chance to scour the internet and your back catalogues and introduced nothing that alters the debate. The best you've got is offering an opinion that oscar could have accepted kings terms, because he was the one in control and the one who needed it.  He certainly copped some flak for chucking the fight away by getting on his bike, whilst  tito's rep took a knock for being outboxed and getting a 'w' on his record that few felt he'd deserved. Not really a rabbit out of the hat that one.

When you're reduced to offering that you 'contend' this and your 'take' is that, I consider that progress.

My take is this, (and it's just my take I have no expert opinion to support it) you think conceding points is a sign of weakness haz, when in reality its a sign of maturity. You know far more about this era than me, but you're too busy being determined to be right and 'prove' your opinion. Sometimes I do the same.

But then, I don't hold a strong opinion on who is to blame for this rematch not happening. Contract talks break down all the time. There is nothing factual to indicate one party's responsibility over the other. Same with Vargas, there is an opinion that oscar timed the vargas fight and the opinion he went to light middle when he was ready to... in fact when uncle bob had said they planned to according to your quote... and fought him then - very probably delighted that vargas had looked a bit shaky of late.

That's a bigger climb down than Oscar against Trinidad!

I'll rename you "Running Coyote".

Really what have i climbed down on? Are you you going to edit bits of my posts out of context to prove your point?!

milkyboy wrote:Really what have i climbed down on? Are you you going to edit bits of my posts out of context to prove your point?!

I don't do that mate. I've made a pretty comprehensive case to back my opinion. You've sort of given up the ghost with it RC. Shame, was enjoying it!

You seem to mistake backing down with losing the will to live, but given how much you've been mistaken with on this thread that's no surprise!

He who shouts loudest and all that. You win Mr Relentless...hope it feels all warm and fuzzy!

Sadly I have work to do today... back to the grind

milkyboy wrote:You seem to mistake backing down with losing the will to live, but given how much you've been mistaken with on this thread that's no surprise!

He who shouts loudest and all that. You win Mr Relentless...hope it feels all warm and fuzzy!

Sadly I have work to do today... back to the grind

That's what my wife calls me Running Coyote! They won't say you lost this debate in 15 years - they'll say talks broke down and who's to say whose fault that was?

the judges gave me the decision haz, but in 20 years everyone will spot the quiet beating you gave me. At the moment only you can see it... and hugh mcilvanney if he's reading.

milkyboy wrote:the judges gave me the decision haz, but in 20 years everyone will spot the quiet beating you gave me. At the moment only you can see it... and hugh mcilvanney if he's reading.

You need some new material bud. There was nothing quiet about this TKO RC.

You still think you won the hagler debate though haz... the one where you claimed there hadn't been a better crop of middles since hagler's reign.

If you think you're napoleon, you think you're napoleon. It ain't my fault the drugs don't work.

milkyboy wrote:You still think you won the hagler debate though haz... the one where you claimed there hadn't been a better crop of middles since hagler's reign.

If you think you're napoleon, you think you're napoleon. It ain't my fault the drugs don't work.

Don't remember that one RC. I'm sure it was littered with "silent beating" jokes, though.

It was a bit like this one, napoleon. You were gamely sticking to your guns, like marlon starling in the interview after the molinares fight... refusing to accept you'd just been knocked out.

Anyway i really do have work to do so you can have the last word... means you win!

Running Coyote haha. It beats Pee Wee any day!

milkyboy wrote:It was a bit like this one, napoleon. You were gamely sticking to your guns, like marlon starling in the interview after the molinares fight... refusing to accept you'd just been knocked out.

Anyway i really do have work to do so you can have the last word... means you win!

I think it's clear who won RC - you knackered down the stretch (in the championship rounds). Just like Oscar, funnily enough....

milkyboy wrote:It was a bit like this one, napoleon. You were gamely sticking to your guns, like marlon starling in the interview after the molinares fight... refusing to accept you'd just been knocked out.

Anyway i really do have work to do so you can have the last word... means you win!

This has been like watching Hearns (Milky) beat down Andries (Haz), it stopped being a contest many rounds ago but the outclassed yo-yo keeps coming back for more.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

milkyboy wrote:It was a bit like this one, napoleon. You were gamely sticking to your guns, like marlon starling in the interview after the molinares fight... refusing to accept you'd just been knocked out.

Anyway i really do have work to do so you can have the last word... means you win!

This has been like watching Hearns (Milky) beat down Andries (Haz), it stopped being a contest many rounds ago but the outclassed yo-yo keeps coming back for more.

Moore vs Durelle sad sack.

Insults are the refuge of the broken man.