And It's About Time!!

Am I the only one who isn't going to miss Oscar de la Hoya after he retires?

At the risk of being bashed as a hater, I want to confess that I've never been a de la Hoya fan. I was glad for him when he won a gold medal in Barcelona, but I thought flyweight Eric Griffin (who had to settle for a bronze medal after a series of terribly judged fights) was a better fighter. The incompetent and/or corrupt judges that denied him gold or silver, lack of good management and the lack of interest in the flyweight division in the US meant that Eric Griffin would be neither a millionaire nor a Hall of Famer as a professional, but he was the best fighter on the '92 Olympic team. It was Oscar, however, who got the lion's share of the publicity before the Games and the multi-million dollar career after. Yes, he won the gold and that certainly helped, but he was a hot property before the gold medal. Nor was he markedly better than the American fighters (most noticeably Griffin) who were robbed of clear wins in fights they dominated and therefore failed to win gold medals of their own.

When he went professional, de la Hoya was followed everywhere he went by a media circus he had earned primarily by being the only American not cheated by the judges. He made millions of dollars in HBO bonuses for fighting four round prelims, and was the feature of multiple boxing writers in many publications long before he won his first alphabet title. His first alphabet titles were won, and defended, against older and smaller men. Even against these older and smaller men, he failed to dazzle. He was arguably beaten by Pernell Whitaker, whose career was headed downhill already. His two bouts with Julio Cesar Chavez were one-sided circus shows in which everyone knew who was intended to be the gladiator and who the tiger, with cut claws, chained to a post.

Through the great years of his success and popularity, particularly among hometown fans in Southern California and Hispanics around the country, he whined about the lack of respect he was receiving and his inability to be become a big star in Mexico. He made poorly judged comments to the boxing press, such as his famous averment that black fighters could not take bodypunches.

When he began to fight his rivals at the top level of the above-featherweight-below-middleweight field of boxing, he lost his aura of invincibility. He was challenged throughout his fight with Ike Quartey and there were hints of controversy greeting the decision in de la Hoya's favor. Against Felix Trinidad, he lost. Many believed he deserved to win, but he had made the conscious decision to grandstand by running from Felix Trinidad for the last two rounds of their fight, which caused the judges to award crucial rounds to Trinidad. He was beaten soundly by Shane Mosley. After his rebound win over Fernando Vargas, he was outboxed by Felix Sturm (who lost in one of the worst decisions in boxing history, far worse than any close decision an American fighter has ever lost in Germany) and stopped by Bernard Hopkins. Ironically, it was a black fighter who delivered the body blow de la Hoya could not take.

Since then, despite his lack of any wins against meaningful opponents, de la Hoya as remained the biggest star in boxing. His tune-up with contender-alum and former 130 lb star Steve Forbes sold better than many serious title fights. His last fight, allegedly next up, is highly anticipated. Likely, it is against Manny Pacquiao, who only recently made the move up from 130 to 135. The symbolism is clear, de la Hoya would rather go out the winner of a big, flashy, profitable show than he would fight the best opposition available.

To be fair, I don't think de la Hoya is afraid of Antonio Margarito. He would have fought budding star Miguel Cotto, had Cotto beaten Margarito in their recent fight. I just don't think he sees Margarito as good box-office. He's not worthy, not privileged enough to share the stage. He's not de la Hoya's equal, not a fellow celebrity.

The reason de la Hoya never became a star in Mexico is because he has always been too 'Hollywood', to much the kind of flash and dazzle that Mexicans identify as being American. In seeking a Hollywood finish to his career, a spectacular triumph over a fellow star before thousands of adoring groupies, he has illustrated his lack of appeal to hard-core fight fans in Mexico and the US: like Sugar Ray Leonard and Muhammad Ali before him, there was a clinging tinge of privilege. The sense that someone had decided that de la Hoya was the best, so he was the best, without ever having to prove it. The difference between de la Hoya and those other two great boxing celebrities, however, is that even if they never had to prove it, they proved it over and over anyway.

Oscar de la Hoya has never had to prove he was the best. Someone, in a media office in 1992, decided that, out of all the boxers on the U.S. Olympic team that year, de la Hoya was the star of the movie. Ever since then, he has worn that robe of privilege through all his bouts and interviews and press conferences.

Many boxing writers aver firmly that De La Hoya's career has been a good thing for boxing, because his fights have brought money into boxing and his career has drawn attention to boxing in the public consciousness. I can't completely degree. Better fighters than de la Hoya, starting with Eric Griffin on the US team in 1992 to Antonio Margarito today, have had to take a back seat as de la Hoya gathered his applause and took his curtain calls. These fighters deserved that attention and did not get it despite earning it repeatedly with their best efforts, while it was simply given to de la Hoya from his amateur days.

I can't wait for de la Hoya's last fight to be over and for his promised retirement to commence. I want to give him the chance to prove to me that his emerging status as a promoter will be used in a way truly good for the sport, not merely good for his celebrity. His decision to give us all a big show, against Pacquiao, instead of a great fight against Margarito doesn't fill me with confidence.