:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/photo_images/1558706/GYI0062787030.jpg)
Oscar De La Hoya spoke with Lem Satterfield of The RING about various boxing topics, looking back on his career and some of them men he fought, and imagining him in his prime against various foes. It's really quite a good interview, and is pure boxing talk, which is nice. Oscar hasn't done a lot of pure boxing talk in the last few years.
Among the notables:
- De La Hoya ranks Bernard Hopkins over Floyd Mayweather Jr and Manny Pacquiao.
- He feels that at his best, he would have beaten Mayweather and Pacquiao.
- He believes that a prime vs prime matchup with Julio Cesar Chavez would have gone to Chavez.
- He admits to, as a promoter, fluffing up previous Mayweather fights he's promoted with Juan Manuel Marquez and Shane Mosley (but he feels Victor Ortiz has a real shot).
Look, I don't know what his personal life is really like, so I can't say with 100% certainty that I think he's telling the truth about drug addiction, alcohol abuse, infidelity, wearing lingerie, or whatever else. But this is way more honest and realistic than Oscar has usually been in interviews that discuss, you know, boxing, and having seen his boxing career, I feel comfortable saying I'm buying what the old "Golden Boy" is selling here.
So here's the question I have for all of you: Prime versus prime, at welterweight, who would you pick in fights between Oscar De La Hoya and Floyd Mayweather Jr, Manny Pacquiao, and Julio Cesar Chavez? Oscar says he would have gone 2-1, beating Manny and Floyd but losing to Chavez. Agree? Disagree? Mix-and-match?