In a video posted to social media, De La Hoya challenged Mayweather’s legacy directly, arguing that the official 50-0 mark does not reflect how their fight was viewed internally.
De La Hoya is definitely going for the jugular here. He’s taking aim at the very thing Floyd values most: his mathematical claim to perfection.
“Fight a real fight,” De La Hoya said. “You’re still trying to protect your O. Yes, you’re 50-0 on paper, but people know you’ve lost. Your own father said you lost against me back when we fought.”
Oscar’s point about people “knowing” Floyd lost is a sentiment shared by a vocal segment of boxing fans who still argue Oscar’s jab and activity should have tipped the cards in 2007. By explaining it this way, Oscar is trying to retroactively change the narrative from 50-0 to 49-1 in the court of public opinion.
The two met in May 2007, with Mayweather winning a split decision in one of the biggest events of that era. De La Hoya now claims the aftermath included a rematch clause that was never honored.
“What’s crazy is that people don’t know that we had a rematch clause for one year,” De La Hoya said. “And what do you do? You retire for one year and one day.”
By bringing up the “one year and one day” retirement, Oscar is painting Floyd not as a defensive master but as a master of red tape.
It’s a fascinating look into the politics of that era. If the rematch clause truly expired after 365 days and Floyd announced his retirement right at that limit, it suggests the “Money” persona was as much about calculating risk outside the ring as it was inside it.
De La Hoya’s comments revisit one of the most debated results of his career and introduce a new claim about how their rivalry ended.
The two have exchanged public criticism in recent years, but this latest statement focuses on the handling of their original fight agreement rather than a future bout.
Read the full article here