Sunday, June 18, 2000
Golden Boy Reduced To Mortal ----------------------------
Look, I like Oscar De La Hoya. I think he's a good guy and I'd trade my looks for his in a New York minute. But can we please stop the hype.
Oscar De La Hoya is a good fighter. That's all. June 17, the whole world saw what happens when the publicity machine goes a little too far.
The way NBC used to toot the Lakers horn before got to town. After 3 years they stopped that because they couldn't get anywhere close to the Finals. NBC was evenhanded this season because the Lakers didn't look very good on paper. All of a sudden, Bam! the Lakers break out with a great team.
Where am I going with this? I'm trying to tell you that we build up teams and athletes way too much. How many of you knew a lot about Sugar Shane Mosley before he beat Oscar on a split decision Saturday June 17th in Los Angeles? Not much. You probably didn't know he was the 1998 Fighter of the Year and his father, Jack, was the Trainer of the Year also.
Don't feel bad, the so called experts picked De La Hoya too. Wally Mathews of the New York Post said Mosley couldn't outjab The Golden Boy and win. Well, Wally Sugar Shane landed at a 42% clip to Oscars's 36% in the punch department.
Legenary trainer, Teddy Atlas, felt Sugar Shane would get knocked out because of his lack of experience and recent move up to 147.
Sugar Ray Leonard said Oscar would win because of his height and experience in major bouts. Sugar put his words on the wrong guy.
Shane Mosely worked Oscar De La Hoya over because he was the better fighter. He was the better fighter before the two men entered the ring. This just in, every great fighter isn't on HBO for all of their fights.
Just a few months ago I drove out to a California Indian reservation to see Mosley's first fight in the welterweight division. A knockout over Wilfredo Riveria. A fighter De La Hoya defeated on a TKO.
Boxing is politics and the great breaks of come The Golden Boy's way.
The split decision Mosley won shouldn't have been that. Mosley won on Lou Filipo's card 116-112, Pat Russell had it 115-113 for Mosley, and Marty Sammon called it 115-113 for De La Hoya. I had Sugar winning by 4 points on my card.
Somebody tell me what fight Sammon saw!! The Golden Boy was taking Sugar Jabs to his face all night. When Oscar tried to trade, Mosley gave it right back. The 4 inches in height De La Hoya had were worthless. This fight should have been a unaminous decision.
The fight was great action. These two LA kids traded blows and jabs all night. It was a treat to see. Oscar didn't run, a la, Trinidad.
We will see a rematch this fall. Oscar's promoter knew his Golden Ticket could get beat and already put in the contract for an immediate rematch.
I want to hear Oscar's excuses now. Every fight he says he's in the best shape of his life. Yet, after close calls against Quartery, Trinidad and others, he claimed not to be in shape.
His plan to take on four opponents and knock out each one in 2000 is scrapped for now.
De La Hoya must find a way to pick up his game. The pub machine can't save him now. He can't dispute this loss as he did with Trinidad. He didn't run, but he didn't win. That's why he gets paid big..to win. Oscar has now lost his last 2 major fights. I don't count that stiff he knocked out earlier this year.
At 32-2, what do we make of The Golden Boy now. Fernando Vargas has long spoke negatively of the 1992 Olympic champs as, "No real Mexican fighter". Maybe their is truth in that remark after all.
Sugar Shane Mosley is now 35-0 and holds the WBC welterweight title. He beat Oscar when he was 12 and now at 28. Oscar said he never remembered their earlier fight. What's that old line, those who fail to understand history are deemed to repeat it. Something like that.
Oscar De La Hoya won't forget this loss. And the Top Rank promotions team can't spin it either.
 |
Read NewDawg.com's previous My Words:
2/28/2000 |
3/1/2000 |
3/7/2000 |
3/13/2000 |
3/17/2000 |
3/20/2000 |
4/3/2000 |
4/7/2000 |
4/12/2000 |
4/17/2000 |
4/18/2000 |
5/1/2000 |
5/2/2000 |
5/5/2000 |
5/7/2000 |
5/8/2000 |
5/21/2000 |
6/14/2000 |
6/15/2000 |
6/18/2000 |
6/19/2000 |
6/20/2000 |
6/22/2000 |
6/27/2000 |
6/28/2000 |
6/29/2000 |
7/3/2000 |
7/7/2000 |
7/10/2000 |
7/17/2000 |
7/18/2000 |
7/19/2000 |
7/20/2000 |
7/26/2000 |
7/27/2000 |
8/8/2000 |
8/14/2000 |
8/17/2000 |
9/5/2000 |
9/8/2000 |
9/12/2000 |
9/20/2000 |
10/20/2000 |
10/23/2000 |
10/25/2000 |
11/3/2000 |
11/6/2000 |
11/14/2000 |
11/15/2000 |
11/16/2000 |
12/5/2000 |
12/12/2000 |
12/13/2000 |
12/28/2000 |
1/3/2001 |
1/11/2001 |
1/19/2001 |
1/29/2001 |
2/7/2001 |
2/8/2001 |
2/12/2001 |
2/23/2001 |
3/6/2001 |
3/12/2001 |
3/21/2001 |
3/26/2001 |
4/2/2001 |
4/6/2001 |
4/30/2001 |
5/3/2001 |
8/27/2001 |
8/28/2001 |
8/29/2001 |
8/30/2001 |
9/6/2001 |
9/7/2001 |
9/14/2001 |
1/31/2002 |
6/24/2002 |
6/26/2002 |
6/27/2002 |
7/5/2002 |
7/10/2002 |
7/17/2002 |
8/11/2002 |
8/31/2002 |
9/8/2002 |
9/14/2002 |
9/24/2002 |
12/4/2002 |
12/6/2002 |
12/10/2002 |
12/13/2002 |
12/16/2002 |
12/31/2002 |
1/5/2003 |
1/6/2003 |
1/8/2003 |
1/20/2003 |
1/22/2003 |
1/27/2003 |
1/29/2003 |
2/6/2003 |
4/3/2003 |
4/9/2003 |
4/18/2003 |
4/26/2003 |
4/27/2003 |
5/4/2003 |
5/6/2003 |
5/7/2003 |
5/9/2003 |
5/11/2003 |
5/18/2003 |
5/19/2003 |
5/20/2003 |
5/24/2003 |
5/25/2003 |
5/28/2003 |
6/1/2003 |
6/3/2003 |
6/12/2003 |
6/13/2003 |
6/25/2003 |
6/27/2003 |
7/15/2003 |
7/20/2003 |
8/10/2003 |
8/16/2003 |
9/8/2003 |
9/21/2003 |
9/24/2003 |
11/15/2003 |
12/7/2003 |
12/26/2003 |
1/7/2004 |
2/1/2004 |
2/8/2004 |
2/11/2004 |
2/16/2004 |
2/19/2004 |
2/25/2004 |
3/1/2004 |
3/9/2004 |
3/14/2004 |
3/20/2004 |
3/24/2004 |
4/1/2004 |
4/6/2004 |
4/12/2004 |
4/17/2004 |
4/23/2004 |
4/25/2004 |
5/2/2004 |
5/8/2004 |
5/17/2004 |
5/22/2004 |
6/5/2004 |
6/25/2004 |
7/10/2004 |
7/11/2004 |
9/3/2004 |
9/10/2004 |
9/24/2004 |
9/25/2004 |
10/2/2004 |
10/12/2004 |
11/5/2004 |
11/19/2004 |
11/20/2004 |
12/5/2004 |
12/15/2004 |
1/14/2005 |
1/31/2005 |
2/11/2005 |
4/18/2005 |
4/24/2005 |
5/29/2005 |
7/10/2005 |
7/16/2005 |
7/26/2005 |
8/27/2005 |
9/2/2005 |
9/16/2005 |
9/20/2005 |
9/24/2005 |
10/7/2005 |
10/8/2005 |
10/15/2005 |
10/22/2005 |
10/30/2005 |
11/12/2005 |
11/19/2005 |
11/30/2005 |
12/9/2005 |
12/24/2005 |
12/30/2005 |
1/4/2006 |
1/12/2006 |
1/15/2006 |
2/4/2006 |
2/6/2006 |
2/9/2006 |
2/19/2006 |
3/5/2006 |
3/23/2006 |
3/29/2006 |
4/16/2006 |
4/28/2006 |
5/15/2006 |
6/26/2006 |
6/27/2006 |
7/3/2006 |
7/4/2006 |
7/6/2006 |
7/7/2006 |
7/9/2006 |
7/15/2006 |
7/16/2006 |
7/18/2006 |
7/27/2006 |
8/23/2006 |
8/25/2006 |
8/27/2006 |
9/1/2006 |
9/2/2006 |
9/5/2006 |
9/8/2006 |
9/9/2006 |
9/10/2006 |
9/14/2006 |
9/15/2006 |
9/17/2006 |
9/20/2006 |
9/23/2006 |
9/29/2006 |
9/30/2006 |
10/7/2006 |
10/15/2006 |
10/23/2006 |
10/27/2006 |
10/29/2006 |
10/30/2006 |
11/4/2006 |
11/11/2006 |
11/15/2006 |
11/19/2006 |
11/25/2006 |
12/9/2006 |
12/11/2006 |
12/14/2006 |
12/20/2006 |
12/22/2006 |
12/23/2006 |
12/25/2006 |
12/27/2006 |
12/28/2006 |
1/8/2007 |
1/14/2007 |
1/26/2007 |
1/28/2007 |
2/6/2007 |
2/17/2007 |
7/23/2007 |
7/25/2007 |
7/28/2007 |
8/1/2007 |
8/4/2007 |
8/17/2007 |
8/19/2007 |
8/25/2007 |
9/2/2007 |
9/13/2007 |
9/15/2007 |
9/23/2007 |
9/28/2007 |
9/29/2007 |
10/1/2007 |
10/19/2007 |
11/1/2007 |
11/3/2007 |
11/5/2007 |
11/30/2007 |
12/15/2007 |
1/2/2008 |
1/4/2008 |
1/6/2008 |
1/10/2008 |
1/14/2008 |
1/18/2008 |
1/19/2008 |
1/20/2008 |
2/26/2008 |
3/25/2008 |
3/29/2008 |
3/31/2008 |
4/11/2008 |
4/12/2008 |
4/17/2008 |
4/19/2008 |
4/28/2008 |
5/2/2008 |
5/3/2008 |
5/10/2008 |
5/24/2008 |
6/9/2008 |
6/15/2008 |
9/1/2008 |
9/20/2008 |
10/4/2008 |
10/24/2008 |
11/9/2008 |
12/9/2008 |
12/13/2008 |
12/20/2008 |
12/29/2008 |
1/19/2009 |
1/25/2009 |
2/1/2009 |
2/20/2009 |
2/28/2009 |
3/5/2009 |
3/29/2009 |
4/24/2009 |
6/26/2009 |
9/6/2009 |
10/4/2009 |
12/29/2009 |
4/10/2010 |
7/25/2010 |
|