In a video posted to social media, De La Hoya directly challenged Mayweather’s legacy, arguing that the official 50-0 mark did not reflect how their fight was viewed internally.
De La Hoya is definitely going for the jugular here. He takes aim at the very thing that 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 lost. Your own father said you lost to me 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 turned the tables 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 met.
“What’s crazy is people don’t know we had a one-year rematch clause,” De La Hoya said. “And what are you doing? You are retiring for one year and one day.”
Bringing up the “one year and one day” retirement paints Oscar Floyd not as a defensive master, but as a master of red tape.
It is a fascinating look at the politics of that era. If the rematch clause really did expire after 365 days and Floyd announced his retirement at that limit, it suggests that the “Money” persona was as much about calculating risk outside the ring as it was in it.
De La Hoya’s comments revisit one of the most debated results of his career and introduce a new allegation about how their rivalry ended.
The two have traded public criticism in recent years, but this latest statement focuses on dealing with their original fight agreement rather than a future fight.
