# Lomachenko vs 130lb Mayweather



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Who'd win? I realize that some of you are going to find this question too ridiculous to even answer, but this Lomachenko hype is at extremely high levels. He is obviously advanced for the stage of his career he is in, but how do you think he'd do against 130lb FMJ, the one who fought Diego Corrales?


----------



## rjjfan (May 17, 2013)

The only worthwhile fantasy matchup would be Vitali vs Lomachenko. 

Vitali SD Lomachenko.


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

Mayweather mollywhops him.

Lomachenko would need to beat Mayweather over 12. He is surely not getting a stoppage.

He hasnt fought over 12 rounds before. How is he gonna pull it off against one of the finer fighters on tape?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Who did Mayweather beat at 130? Corrales? Do you think Roy Jones beating up Vinnie Paz demonstrated that Roy was the greatest super middle of all time as well?


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Fukin stupid thread.

We don't know how good loma is going to be.

It would be like doing a Rico v Donaire thread 3 years ago. This shit can't be assumed, it should be proven in the ring.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> Mayweather mollywhops him.
> 
> Lomachenko would need to beat Mayweather over 12. He is surely not getting a stoppage.
> 
> He hasnt fought over 12 rounds before. How is he gonna pull it off against one of the finer fighters on tape?


Castillo did. Augustus gave him hell. Ancient De La Hoya almost beat him. Zab Judah swept the first 4 rounds. Ancient Cotto gave him a tough fight.
Lomachenko is so far below those guys? Please.


----------



## rjjfan (May 17, 2013)

The only fighter I can see clearly beating Lomachenko would be prime Muhammad Ali but that may change when Lomachenko beats Andre Ward.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> Castillo did. Augustus gave him hell. Ancient De La Hoya almost beat him. Zab Judah swept the first 4 rounds. Ancient Cotto gave him a tough fight.
> Lomachenko is so far below those guys? Please.


none of those were at 130.


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Castillo did. Augustus gave him hell. Ancient De La Hoya almost beat him. Zab Judah swept the first 4 rounds. Ancient Cotto gave him a tough fight.
> Lomachenko is so far below those guys? Please.


Your nuthugging of amateurs is getting out of hand...


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Luf said:


> none of those were at 130.


My apologies, there isn't much to mention from 130. Hernandez, Corrales and.... :huh Mayweather was obviously the GOAT at 130.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Castillo did. Augustus gave him hell. Ancient De La Hoya almost beat him. Zab Judah swept the first 4 rounds. Ancient Cotto gave him a tough fight.
> Lomachenko is so far below those guys? Please.


:lol: dude, give me a fucking break. We're actually talking about featherweight Mayweather here, but the points you make above...Castillo was a tough, close fight, no doubt, but if it was a Castillo win on the books today, it would be just as controversial. I thought FMJ won by a hair. Augustus gave FMJ somewhat of a tough fight, but so what? Toldeo gave Loma a tough fight, as did Selimov in their WSB figth. De La Hoya didn't almost beat him. Zab did okay for the first few rounds, but wasn't dominating even close to as much as FMJ did for the last eight rounds. Cotto is no bum, him giving FMJ a tough fight means what, exactly?


----------



## Mexi-Box (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Who did Mayweather beat at 130? Corrales? Do you think Roy Jones beating up Vinnie Paz demonstrated that Roy was the greatest super middle of all time as well?


People overrate the hell out of the Corrales win. I voted Loma only because I really don't care.:smile


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

El Mexi-Box said:


> People overrate the hell out of the Corrales win. I voted Loma only because I really don't care.:smile


My man! That vote will reflect very well on your intelligence given time, congratulations.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

El Mexi-Box said:


> People overrate the hell out of the Corrales win. I voted Loma only because I really don't care.:smile


Troll vote, but at least you voted. Dealt_with won't even vote because he knows what he says regarding that is bullshit. I do respect the fact that he has enough integrity not to go against what he really thinks, though. I think the only advantage Loma has over featherweight Mayweather is footwork. His footwork and pivoting is incredible. His punches look a bit wingy at times, though.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

oops


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Castillo did.


Huge with stylistic advantage. Mayweather injured. Cleared up with immediate rematch.

Castillo is arguably 1-1 with Floyd. Whats next?



> Augustus gave him hell.


Augustus got a beat down, but was awkward and unpredictable enough to land shots and make him uncomfortable.



> Ancient De La Hoya almost beat him.


Much bigger, wasnt ancient. Floyds first fight at the weight. Lost by at least four rounds. Conveniently, Mayweather took over fully when he found out the cards were close



> Zab Judah swept the first 4 rounds


Judah was competitive for 4 rounds. Youd have to have Floyd issues to think he swept anything.

The only sweeping was the last two thirds. By Mayweather.



> Ancient Cotto gave him a tough fight.


Ancient Miguel was younger than Mayweather, much more accustomed to the weight and had an excellent plan.

He didnt look ancient in his next fight either



> Lomachenko is so far below those guys? Please.


Hes much less proven and has never gone past five rounds.

Comb over a 44 fight career spanning all the way from super feather to junior middle all you want, we already know Mayweather is the real thing. The fact that you have such a short list over so many weights and different styles (Lomachenko provides none, or very few of the same issues)

Jury is still out on Lomachenko. Stepping up and beating a prime ATG in your first fight never happens. I know Robinson couldnt have. I know Lomachenko couldnt have either.

Youre in a minority for a reason .


----------



## Elliot (Jun 4, 2013)

Mayweather all day, so much more proven.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> Youre in a minority for a reason .


I'm in the minority because people don't respect the amateur game, and people are conditioned to believe hype (which is what the pro game is about). Very few people are objective and unbiased when considering all things.
Mayweather is very good, but he is far from the unbeatable monster the majority thinks he is. He has picked opponents carefully over the years and the opponents I mentioned shouldn't be taking rounds of Floyd if he was what his fans say he is. I respect that you at least attempted to break down those performances, but Money May is all about the money and hype. Respect to Mayweather for fighting Canelo, IF Mayweather gets past him I give him big credit.


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

I think people do underestimate amateurs to be fair. Rigo taught me that lesson very well.

But the difference between Donaire and Mayweather is many, many levels.

Maybe Lomachenko will prove himself worthy to be mentioned against Kid Money, but right now he hasnt.


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

Floyd overrated? U clowns act like you've never seen Floyd in action in his prime (which may be true for some of u).
Kid was the total package and a once in a generation talent. And yes, he's the closest thing to being unbeatable in the game today..

I'm sure if Floyd decided to stay in the amateurs til his 30's he'd also have a gold medal or two.. he was already robbed of one during a tme of much stiffer competition.

But americans tend to grow up instead of continuing to fight 4 round fights with teens and headgear.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> Floyd overrated? U clowns act like you've never seen Floyd in action in his prime (which may be true for some of u).
> Kid was the total package and a once in a generation talent. And yes, he's the closest thing to being unbeatable in the game today..
> 
> I'm sure if Floyd decided to stay in the amateurs til his 30's he'd also have a gold medal or two.. he was already robbed of one during a tme of much stiffer competition.
> ...


:lol: Much stiffer competition, good one. Lomachenko 396-1, 2 golds, 2 worlds, 2 different weight classes at the age of 24. Mayweather, 84-6, a bronze medal. Oh America


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Light welter Floyd > Super feather Floyd.
BTW who is the best fighter Floyd has ever fought? He hasn't fought one other ATG in his prime. GOAT? :lol:


----------



## shaunster101 (Jun 3, 2012)

So are people saying that there is not a fighter in the world at 126 and 130 that Loma couldn't beat over 12 rounds?


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> :lol: Much stiffer competition, good one. Lomachenko 396-1, 2 golds, 2 worlds, 2 different weight classes at the age of 24. Mayweather, 84-6, a bronze medal. Oh America


 loma won't even accomish as much as Zab in the pro game. Bank on it.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> loma won't even accomish as much as Zab in the pro game. Bank on it.


:lol: You truly DKSAB


----------



## Earl-Hickey (Jul 26, 2012)

This lomachenko shit is getting out of hand


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> :lol: Much stiffer competition, good one. Lomachenko 396-1, 2 golds, 2 worlds, 2 different weight classes at the age of 24. Mayweather, 84-6, a bronze medal. Oh America


Jesus Christ, are you fucking trolling or what? FMJ got robbed in the Olympics. He should have a gold medal, not a bronze. Lomachenko had the fortune of having his bullshit loss to Robson Conceica overturned. I still haven't seen any concrete evidence that Lomachenko won all those amateur matches.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> I think people do underestimate amateurs to be fair. Rigo taught me that lesson very well.
> 
> But the difference between Donaire and Mayweather is many, many levels.
> 
> Maybe Lomachenko will prove himself worthy to be mentioned against Kid Money, but right now he hasnt.


Nobody underestimates the amateurs. Amateurs like Rigo and Lomachenko aren't common, by any means. One can even call them anomalies. Not everyone who fought in the Olympics and WSB are on their level. That's all the WSB is, really, a crop of very good amateurs, not a crop of elite level pros.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> Jesus Christ, are you fucking trolling or what? FMJ got robbed in the Olympics. He should have a gold medal, not a bronze. Lomachenko had the fortune of having his bullshit loss to Robson Conceica overturned. I still haven't seen any concrete evidence that Lomachenko won all those amateur matches.


Floyd was lucky to get the decision against the Cuban in his previous fight. So Floyd woud've automatically won the gold medal bout right?

Lomachenko himself said it. Here's the closest you'll get to anything official: http://www.aiba-london2012.com/index.php/boxers/b-men-s-light-60kg/370-vasyl-lomachenko
That contains his record since he's been on the world scene, and that's where he's most likely to lose a match. He isn't losing to the likes Augie Sanchez at olympic trials.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

@Abraham

Calm down. You don't need to make a whole friggin thread about it. You're taking serious issue to all of this, you're one of 'those' personality types.

I clicked Lomachenko decision because I believe its possible, ONLY after Lomachenko is comfortable with 12 rounders. I don't know how many times he'll fight a year, twice? Let's say a 27 year old Lomachenko would beat a 130lb Mayweather. To throw Loma in the ring with 130lb Mayweather right now is WAY to early, hell I even think throwing him to Salido in his first fight is probably two early too, even though Loma once adjusted will beat Salido.

And we know that amateur Loma would beat amateur Mayweather, as I've said before.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> Floyd overrated? U clowns act like you've never seen Floyd in action in his prime (which may be true for some of u).
> Kid was the total package and a once in a generation talent. And yes, he's the closest thing to being unbeatable in the game today..
> 
> I'm sure if Floyd decided to stay in the amateurs til his 30's he'd also have a gold medal or two.. he was already robbed of one during a tme of much stiffer competition.
> ...


It blows my mind that anyone can say FMJ is overrated. Some things he can do/has done in the ring are unparalleled. I don't think any fighter in history has shown such an extraordinary ability to adjust and figure his opponents out. He is one of the greatest defensive fighters of all time. When FMJ gets in the zone, he is virtually unbeatable.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> It blows my mind that anyone can say FMJ is overrated. Some things he can do/has done in the ring are unparalleled. I don't think any fighter in history has shown such an extraordinary ability to adjust and figure his opponents out. He is one of the greatest defensive fighters of all time. When FMJ gets in the zone, he is virtually unbeatable.


I completely agree with this, but you know my position.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> @Abraham
> 
> Calm down. You don't need to make a whole friggin thread about it. You're taking serious issue to all of this, you're one of 'those' personality types.
> 
> ...


Dealt_with is the one who said that in his present state, Loma would beat 130lb Mayweather, although I doubt if he seriously believes that. I'm not taking issue. It's a funny little discussion. Like I said, I like Loma a lot, and knew about him before Bejing, even, but this hype is ridiculous, and as a fan, I do take it kind of personal when people make such ludicrous statements, although I should take a step back, because in all likelihood, they are troll statements.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

I don't think it's the right way to go about hyping Lomachenko to this level, we should allow him to brew gently and gracefully in people's minds and allow people to appreciate the talent that he is. I remember I hated on Pacquiao solely because of the Pactards. 
@Dealt_with , we shall do what the Pactards were too dumb to do.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> My apologies, there isn't much to mention from 130. Hernandez, Corrales and.... :huh Mayweather was obviously the GOAT at 130.


nothing obvious about it pal, boxing is a subjective sport.

by my reckoning no filmed sfw has looked as good as floyd has. but with the likes of arguello, camacho, saddler, ellorde, nelson and chavez nothing is obvious.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> Dealt_with is the one who said that in his present state, Loma would beat 130lb Mayweather, although I doubt if he seriously believes that. I'm not taking issue. It's a funny little discussion. Like I said, I like Loma a lot, and knew about him before Bejing, even, but this hype is ridiculous, and as a fan, I do take it kind of personal when people make such ludicrous statements, although I should take a step back, because in all likelihood, they are troll statements.


Well I don't see why anyone would think Lomachenko will have to make any sort of *improvement* in order to beat Mayweather.

I wrote something similar earlier on the other thread, but if you actually read this, you will realise at least in one certain dimension, what me and the Lomatards are talking about...

Think about this logic:
Lomachenko > Floyd at amateurs. 
Lomachenko = Very pro style, so no need to refashion so much like Shiming would need to. 
Lomachenko = 30 rounds in 'pro' format against KINGS of the few-round fights. This is a huge point. And by the way, these aren't bums. 
Lomachenko = 6-0 in pro format. 
Rigondeaux = 23 rounds as a 'pro' against bums before his title fight with Cordoba. 
Rigondeaux = Less of a pro-style than Lomachenko, Lomachenko is thus better tuned towards pro's, and virtually no adjusting required. 
Mayweather = His first 30 rounds were against complete bums which didn't really help him learn any more as he was just knocking these guys out within the first few rounds. 
Mayweather = After Felipe Garcia on his resume (after 30 rounds in the pro game), he fought only 23 rounds against bums before his fight against Tony Pep.
Lomachenko = will need virtually two 12 rounders to be even with Mayweather in terms of pro rounds fought, at this stage.

Conclusion: 
Are you telling me that Lomachenko who needs 2x12 rounders to adjust, who was already better and greater than Mayweather in the amateurs, would definitely lose to a 130lb Mayweather?

Remember that going 6-0 on 5 rounders against the elite fighters in WSB is far more educational than what Mayweather would have learned fighting a 12-15-1 Tony Duran, who Mayweather TKO1'd.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> It blows my mind that anyone can say FMJ is overrated. Some things he can do/has done in the ring are unparalleled. I don't think any fighter in history has shown such an extraordinary ability to adjust and figure his opponents out. He is one of the greatest defensive fighters of all time. When FMJ gets in the zone, he is virtually unbeatable.


Answer me this... what ATG has Floyd beat in his prime? What are his best wins? It's not a positive that Floyd is forced to adapt to win fights, he should be able to do it from the start of the fight. There's no pride in allowing Zab Judah to beat you for four rounds, there's no pride in letting Castillo beat you, ancient Cotto and DLH taking rounds, letting ancient Mosley rock to your boots... why is it that Floyd fans see these things as positives? If he was as unparalleled as you say then why do those things happen in the first place?
Answer me this... From Floyd's best wins, which opponent hasn't been beaten worse by a fighter other than Floyd? The only one is JMM, but we know that bloated version wasn't ever going to be in that fight. Money May has been very careful selecting his opponents, until Canelo. I really think Canelo is going to take that 0.


----------



## LuckyLuke (Jun 6, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Answer me this... what ATG has Floyd beat in his prime? What are his best wins? It's not a positive that Floyd is forced to adapt to win fights, he should be able to do it from the start of the fight. There's no pride in allowing Zab Judah to beat you for four rounds, there's no pride in letting Castillo beat you, ancient Cotto and DLH taking rounds, letting ancient Mosley rock to your boots... why is it that Floyd fans see these things as positives? If he was as unparalleled as you say then why do those things happen in the first place?
> Answer me this... From Floyd's best wins, which opponent hasn't been beaten worse by a fighter other than Floyd? The only one is JMM, but we know that bloated version wasn't ever going to be in that fight. Money May has been very careful selecting his opponents, until Canelo. I really think Canelo is going to take that 0.


What ATG did Lomachenko beat?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I don't think it's the right way to go about hyping Lomachenko to this level, we should allow him to brew gently and gracefully in people's minds and allow people to appreciate the talent that he is. I remember I hated on Pacquiao solely because of the Pactards.
> @Dealt_with , we shall do what the Pactards were too dumb to do.


I don't think it's smart to ever hate on a fighter because of their fans.. I'll cool it with the hype once Loma is more appreciated. I'm just being honest here and stating my opinion, if people disagree or come up with valid points to dispute what I'm saying then I'll say okay.. I'm not a blind fan. I truly think Lomachenko is the most complete all round boxer I've ever seen, I'm a big fan of defence and I've never seen anyone combine it with offence in the way Lomachenko does, apart from maybe a prime Mike Tyson. Lomachenko isn't just that though, he can be slick defensively ala Whitaker, he can be flashy and explosive like Jones or Gamboa, he can run circles around his opponents like Pac, he can bang the body like JCC, Bute, Rigo etc. he can literally do it all. You can't even say what style he is, you talk adaptable and Lomachenko is the definition.
People see the amateur and pro ranks as completely different sports and as a long time fan of the amateur game I know for sure that's untrue, particularly in recent years. That's why I'm a bit vocal, people just don't know. The same shit happened with Rigo, everybody was claiming that he's just an amateur blah blah. Boxing skills are boxing skills whether amateur or professional. There's a reason why the Whitaker's, Ward's and Ali's won gold medals.


----------



## Bladerunner (Oct 22, 2012)

With this massive amount of hype surrounding Lomachenko , if he doesnt achieve ATG status hes a bust plain and simple, the guy hasnt even turned pro and we get guys hyping him up like hes the best thing since sliced bread and talking as if hes the best fighter in the world, he better live up to expectations otherwise there will be a lot of people here looking like dumbasses.


----------



## DrMo (Jun 6, 2012)

The WSB is *not *professional boxing.

I really like the format but people need to stop saying its just like the pros when it clearly isn't. The ref's are still of an amateur mindset, there are standing 8's & fights are often stopped at the first sight of blood.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Bladerunner said:


> With this massive amount of hype surrounding Lomachenko , if he doesnt achieve ATG status hes a bust plain and simple, the guy hasnt even turned pro and we get guys hyping him up like hes the best thing since sliced bread and talking as if hes the best fighter in the world, he better live up to expectations otherwise there will be a lot of people here looking like dumbasses.


Lomachenko > Floyd at amateurs. 
Lomachenko = Very pro style, so no need to refashion so much like Shiming would need to. 
Lomachenko = 30 rounds in 'pro' format against KINGS of the few-round fights. This is a huge point. And by the way, these aren't bums. 
Lomachenko = 6-0 in pro format, against fighters that provide more education than a TKO2 win against bums.
Rigondeaux = 23 rounds as a 'pro' against bums before his title fight with Cordoba. 
Rigondeaux = Less of a pro-style than Lomachenko, Lomachenko is thus better tuned towards pro's, and virtually no adjusting required. 
Mayweather = His first 30 rounds were against complete bums which didn't really help him learn any more as he was just knocking these guys out within the first few rounds. 
Mayweather = After Felipe Garcia on his resume (after 30 rounds in the pro game), he fought only 23 rounds against bums before his fight against Tony Pep.
Lomachenko = will need virtually two 12 rounders to be even with Mayweather in terms of pro rounds fought, at this stage.

....He is the best thing since sliced bread.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

LuckyLuke said:


> What ATG did Lomachenko beat?


He's had 0 full professional fights. How come Mayweather hasn't beaten any ATG's in their prime? He's had 44 fights. Don't duck a question with an irrelevant question.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

DrMo said:


> The WSB is *not *professional boxing.
> 
> I really like the format but people need to stop saying its just like the pros when it clearly isn't. The ref's are still of an amateur mindset, there are standing 8's & fights are often stopped at the first sight of blood.


This guy can't see my reply but this just goes to show how credible he is, from all the WSB boxing I've watched I've never seen a ref once stop a bout because of some blood.


----------



## DrMo (Jun 6, 2012)

@Dealt_with

I have you on ignore, please stop quoting my posts


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

DrMo said:


> The WSB is *not *professional boxing.
> 
> I really like the format but people need to stop saying its just like the pros when it clearly isn't. The ref's are still of an amateur mindset, there are standing 8's & fights are often stopped at the first sight of blood.


With the way Loma's 6-0 was handled, it was no different. 'Oh My God! Standing 8 count!' Valentino was bloodied but they didn't stop the fight 
It was more useful than ALL of Mayweather's wins leading to Tony Pep.

from all the WSB boxing I've watched I've never seen a ref once stop a bout because of some blood - this.


----------



## DrMo (Jun 6, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> With the way Loma's 6-0 was handled, it was no different.


Yes it was. None of them were professional fights.



> 'Oh My God! Standing 8 count!' Valentino was bloodied but they didn't stop the fight
> *It was more useful than ALL of Mayweather's wins leading to Tony Pep*.


Agreed, the WSB is a fanstastic bridge between the amateurs & professionals. I really like the format but its not professional boxing, end of.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

DrMo said:


> Yes it was. None of them were professional fights.
> 
> Agreed, the WSB is a fanstastic bridge between the amateurs & professionals. I really like the format but its not professional boxing, end of.


You're missing the point. It doesn't need the word 'professional boxing' underneath it for us to realise Loma under those rules where you're fighting eachother without the headgear, was awesome, and as you agreed, it's more useful.

It's like me giving you a banana and you saying 'nope, it's not from Britain'...the way it was executed for Loma's fights made no real difference.


----------



## DrMo (Jun 6, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> from all the WSB boxing I've watched I've never seen a ref once stop a bout because of some blood.


I was 2 rows from ringside watching this live. Do you think this would've been stopped had it been a professional contest?


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

DrMo said:


> I was 2 rows from ringside watching this live. Do you think this would've been stopped had it been a professional contest?


It was a bad cut, stoppages can happen on cuts in pro ranks, and this was bleeding quite a lot! 
Nevertheless, taking it back to the topic rather than a side-note, Valentino was bloodied but the fight didn't stop. If there were reyes gloves..just imagine a TKO4 against a great olympian in your first few fights as a pro..


----------



## DrMo (Jun 6, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> You're missing the point. It doesn't need the word 'professional boxing' underneath it for us to realise Loma under those rules where you're fighting eachother without the headgear, was awesome, and as you agreed, it's more useful.


But you do understand that in the professionals, Loma will be fighting under different rules, wearing different gloves & with professional refs?

The WSB was a fantastic showcase for Loma, but he was still fighting other amateurs.



> It's like me giving you a banana and you saying 'nope, it's not from Britain'...the way it was executed for Loma's fights made no real difference.


I like bananas but don't understand what you're saying here



The Undefeated Gaul said:


> It was a bad cut, stoppages can happen on cuts in pro ranks, and this was bleeding quite a lot!
> Nevertheless, taking it back to the topic rather than a side-note, Valentino was bloodied but the fight didn't stop. If there were reyes gloves..just imagine a TKO4 against a great olympian in your first few fights as a pro..


I honestly can't think of any pro fight I've seen stopped because of a cut that size on the cheek, below the eye.

Often in the WSB as soon as someone gets a bloody nose the fight gets halted while the Dr cleans up, as soon as someone gets hurt the ref gives a standing 8.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

What's the record for fewest fights to becoming title holder? Loma should aim for that.


----------



## Rico (Jun 3, 2013)

Mayweather by KO. Anything else at this point is delusional.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

DrMo said:


> But you do understand that in the professionals, Loma will be fighting under different rules, wearing different gloves & with professional refs?
> 
> The WSB was a fantastic showcase for Loma, but he was still fighting other amateurs.
> 
> ...


The way it was handled, Loma's fights were as pro as you can get. Loma did a lot of damage to his opponents in WSB, if he had better gloves? Pro rules and WSB is not really a real game changer in the case of Loma's 6-0 reign :lol:

It wasn't about the size of the cut, it was bleeding a lot. Even still...that fight is irrelevant to Loma's actual 6-0 legacy there. So I'm not arguing about what is 'often' the case, all I know that it certainly wasn't the case for Loma's legacy.


----------



## Rooster (Jul 14, 2013)




----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Rooster said:


>


14-9 Loma.

Verdejo will be a monster, he will dominate 130, 135, 140, 147.


----------



## Bladerunner (Oct 22, 2012)

Luf said:


> What's the record for fewest fights to becoming title holder?


That would be three fights and it belongs to Saensak Muangsurin.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Castillo did. Augustus gave him hell. Ancient De La Hoya almost beat him. Zab Judah swept the first 4 rounds. Ancient Cotto gave him a tough fight.
> Lomachenko is so far below those guys? Please.


LOL. Every elite will have fight where they struggle a bit with someone below them. But Castillo did not and floyd was injured. Augustus gave FLoyd a rough fight but he was nowhere close on the score cards. Oscar was 8-4, and Judah was 8-4. Floyd would've beaten Cotto easier if he stick and move instead of toe to toe. Still 8-4 on Cotto as well.


----------



## Royal-T-Bag (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Who did Mayweather beat at 130? Corrales? Do you think Roy Jones beating up Vinnie Paz demonstrated that Roy was the greatest super middle of all time as well?


just fucking stop it! you're so full of shit. Corrales was p4p ranked in the top 10 higher than Mayweather and was the favorite. Corrales was the bigger man and in his prime. Hardly the same as a blown up smaller vinnie paz way past his prime and who was never ranked p4p even in his prime. Hernandez was also a great win, while Manfredy and Chavez were very solid wins as well.

Who has Loma fought at 130? oh that's right nobody cause he hasn't even beaten a shitty pro fighter yet, let alone a p4p ranked favorite. Hate to break it to you but if Loma was matched against prime Diego he would be like 10/1 underdog. Corrales was bodying dudes at 130 and was one of the scariest fighters int he sport.

I saw you mention Salido would be an impressive win for Loma, that would even be int he same universe as a Corrales win. You really are the worst nuthugger I've ever seen. You make puginana, prelude, gander tasco and the rest of he extreme pactards look like unbiased knowledgeable posters.


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Light welter Floyd > Super feather Floyd.
> BTW who is the best fighter Floyd has ever fought? He hasn't fought one other ATG in his prime. GOAT? :lol:


And who was the best fighter that Lomachenko has fought, hmm?

You want us to use the eye test for Lomachenko, yet pick apart Floyd's resume because he "only" beat Corrales, Augustus, Hernandez, Vargas, Chavez, and Manfredy at 130. Well, where is Lomachenko's resume to compare?

Do you not see the inherent fail in your position?


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Floyd beats the shit out of him. Wtf is this


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Answer me this... what ATG has Floyd beat in his prime? What are his best wins? It's not a positive that Floyd is forced to adapt to win fights, he should be able to do it from the start of the fight. There's no pride in allowing Zab Judah to beat you for four rounds, there's no pride in letting Castillo beat you, ancient Cotto and DLH taking rounds, letting ancient Mosley rock to your boots... why is it that Floyd fans see these things as positives? If he was as unparalleled as you say then why do those things happen in the first place?
> Answer me this... From Floyd's best wins, which opponent hasn't been beaten worse by a fighter other than Floyd? The only one is JMM, but we know that bloated version wasn't ever going to be in that fight. Money May has been very careful selecting his opponents, until Canelo. I really think Canelo is going to take that 0.


"In prime ATG" doesn't exist. What an idiot.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Answer me this... what ATG has Floyd beat in his prime? What are his best wins? It's not a positive that Floyd is forced to adapt to win fights, he should be able to do it from the start of the fight. There's no pride in allowing Zab Judah to beat you for four rounds, there's no pride in letting Castillo beat you, ancient Cotto and DLH taking rounds, letting ancient Mosley rock to your boots... why is it that Floyd fans see these things as positives? If he was as unparalleled as you say then why do those things happen in the first place?
> Answer me this... From Floyd's best wins, which opponent hasn't been beaten worse by a fighter other than Floyd? The only one is JMM, but we know that bloated version wasn't ever going to be in that fight. Money May has been very careful selecting his opponents, until Canelo. I really think Canelo is going to take that 0.


this is dumb as hell man.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> "In prime ATG" doesn't exist. What an idiot.


Yes it does, it's what Pac defeated when he beat Marquez and Barrera. I don't even like Pac but his record shits on Mayweather's, not to mention his wins over Hatton, DLH, Cotto and Mosley were more dominant than Mayweather's, and he beat up Margarito who had Floyd running for the hills for years.


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Yes it does, it's what Pac defeated when he beat Marquez and Barrera. I don't even like Pac but his record shits on Mayweather's, not to mention his wins over Hatton, DLH, Cotto and Mosley were more dominant than Mayweather's, and he beat up Margarito who had Floyd running for the hills for years.


Mayweather's record heaps a massive, rotting dump upon Lomachenko's.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> Mayweather's record heaps a massive, rotting dump upon Lomachenko's.


Obviously, Mayweather has won and defended world titles in so many weight divisions, about 800 times. Loma isn't a pro yet. But we're not really talking records. The only record we can truthfully compare is Mayweather 84-6, and Lomachenko 396-1 with the loss avenged twice.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Yes it does, it's what Pac defeated when he beat Marquez and Barrera. I don't even like Pac but his record shits on Mayweather's, not to mention his wins over Hatton, DLH, Cotto and Mosley were more dominant than Mayweather's, and he beat up Margarito who had Floyd running for the hills for years.


You dumbass. Barrera was not in prime when Pac beat him. Marquez was not in ATG status on their first or second fight and NOT in prime on the 3rd or the fourth.

So this is about your love for Pac and jealousy on Floyd? Floyd beat the undefeated Hatton, Fought DLH at DLH's weight and tiny ring, Cotto put a lot of damage on Pac as well before he gassed out. Shane had one punch on Floyd and got schooled for the rest. Style makes fights. Floyd can adjust with any style. Pac can't which is why he fight bunch of handpicked, coming off losses/beatings, and got schooled by JMM while Floyd beat him every round.

You clearly have no clue what you are talking about.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> Mayweather's record heaps a massive, rotting dump upon Lomachenko's.


396-1, 2 golds, 2 different weight divisions, Val Barker trophy VS 84-6, bronze medal and a lollipop after being beaten by the likes of Augie Sanchez. At their respective stages of their career. When Lomachenko has 44 fights on his pro record it will have taken a massive dump on Mayweather's (not that it's a spectacular achievement). Mayweather needed to fight Pac, that win was his only claim to ATG status. Now Canelo is going to beat him and Floyd wouldn't have had 1 prime ATG fighter on his record.


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Obviously, Mayweather has won and defended world titles in so many weight divisions, about 800 times. Loma isn't a pro yet. But we're not really talking records. The only record we can truthfully compare is Mayweather 84-6, and Lomachenko 396-1 with the loss avenged twice.


So everything Mayweather has done in the pro game has no relevance in trying to ascertain who would win a professional fight between the two? Gotcha.

What the hell is the point of this thread again?


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> 396-1, 2 golds, 2 different weight divisions, Val Barker trophy VS 84-6, bronze medal and a lollipop after being beaten by the likes of Augie Sanchez. At their respective stages of their career. When Lomachenko has 44 fights on his pro record it will have taken a massive dump on Mayweather's (not that it's a spectacular achievement). Mayweather needed to fight Pac, that win was his only claim to ATG status. Now Canelo is going to beat him and Floyd wouldn't have had 1 prime ATG fighter on his record.


There is no way to compare the two "at their respective stages of their career", as Floyd turned pro at the age of either 17 or 18. How did Manny Pacquiao do in the amateurs?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> You dumbass. Barrera was not in prime when Pac beat him. Marquez was not in ATG status on their first or second fight and NOT in prime on the 3rd or the fourth.
> 
> So this is about your love for Pac and jealousy on Floyd? Floyd beat the undefeated Hatton, Fought DLH at DLH's weight and tiny ring, Cotto put a lot of damage on Pac as well before he gassed out. Shane had one punch on Floyd and got schooled for the rest. Style makes fights. Floyd can adjust with any style. Pac can't which is why he fight bunch of handpicked, coming off losses/beatings, and got schooled by JMM while Floyd beat him every round.
> 
> You clearly have no clue what you are talking about.


I don't like Pac, and I always picked Mayweather to beat Pac if they fought. The problem is that Mayweather always had a hard time finding his testicles, he's a perfectionist with a lot of self doubt. His record has suffered because of it. You know your record isn't too solid when people reference a win over Corrales as being evidence of an ATG fighter.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> 396-1, 2 golds, 2 different weight divisions, Val Barker trophy VS 84-6, bronze medal and a lollipop after being beaten by the likes of Augie Sanchez. At their respective stages of their career. When Lomachenko has 44 fights on his pro record it will have taken a massive dump on Mayweather's (not that it's a spectacular achievement). Mayweather needed to fight Pac, that win was his only claim to ATG status. Now Canelo is going to beat him and Floyd wouldn't have had 1 prime ATG fighter on his record.


Floyd fought plenty of in prime guys far more than Manny ever did so you are talking out of your ass. Name one fighter that have an ATG In prime win EVER. Shit doesn't exist.


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

Roy Jones and Pernell Whitaker each lost 13 times as amateurs...


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Azumah Nelson vs Lomachenko. Who wins?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> There is no way to compare the two "at their respective stages of their career", as Floyd turned pro at the age of either 17 or 18. How did Manny Pacquiao do in the amateurs?


Try 19, and regardless his sporting age was old, he'd been boxing since he was an infant. Pac turned pro at 12 years old or some shit, and he's not from a country that really has an amateur boxing program. And yet Pac still made far more use of his limited resources and talent compared to Mayweather. Mayweather is a sad case, I'd be a big fan if he fought in some meaningful fights. Canelo is a step in the right direction but it's too little too late.


----------



## Royal-T-Bag (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> 396-1, 2 golds, 2 different weight divisions, Val Barker trophy VS 84-6, bronze medal and a lollipop after being beaten by the likes of Augie Sanchez. At their respective stages of their career. When Lomachenko has 44 fights on his pro record it will have taken a massive dump on Mayweather's (not that it's a spectacular achievement). Mayweather needed to fight Pac, that win was his only claim to ATG status. Now Canelo is going to beat him and Floyd wouldn't have had 1 prime ATG fighter on his record.


I'm no Loma doubter, get that shit off your signature! I claimed dude could carve out a Cotto'esque career which is fucking fantastic and way further than most posters feel he will get. Not believing he's gonna be the goat or on mayweathers level doesn't make me a doubter! Cotto is a future HOF'er! That would make Loma the greatest Euro ever in the 130-147 range and it's a very bold prediction for someone who has yet to have a pro fight. I am no doubter, I think he's the goods. I almost feel like I'm taking it too far in claiming someone that has never had a pro fight can match the career of Cotto but to claim he's the GOAT and able to beat Mayweather at this stage is absolutely nutty.

Think of all the olympic gold medalists and outstanding ams that have never done shit as pros? We really don't know til they pass a few pro tests vs top opposition, ams and pros are night and day in boxing......it's not like hockey/basketball/football etc... where it's essentially the same sport from the ams to the pros. pro boxing is a nasty wake up call for many ams (not that i don't think Loma will be able to make the transition).


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> I don't like Pac, and I always picked Mayweather to beat Pac if they fought. The problem is that Mayweather always had a hard time finding his testicles, he's a perfectionist with a lot of self doubt. His record has suffered because of it. You know your record isn't too solid when people reference a win over Corrales as being evidence of an ATG fighter.


You are wrong. Pac needs Floyd, not the other way around. Floyd's resume is much stronger than Pacs.

As far as Floyd not have the testicles? Floyd fought undefeated Corrales, Hatton, and Now Canelo who is 14 years younger than him. Who is Pac fighting next? Face first brawler in Rios. Canelo would flatten Pac.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Floyd fought plenty of in prime guys far more than Manny ever did so you are talking out of your ass. Name one fighter that have an ATG In prime win EVER. Shit doesn't exist.


tbh, Roberto Duran probably reached atg status from his work at lightweight and was still close enough in his prime. He was 71-1 when he beat SRL


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> tbh, Roberto Duran probably reached atg status from his work at lightweight and was still close enough in his prime. He was 71-1 when he beat SRL


SRL was not an ATG when he fought Roberto Duran Before Duran SRL's best win was Benitez. That is not enought to be an "ATG in Prime" victory for Duran.

The "in prime ATG concept" itself is very contradicting already.

Which boxer can move that fast and string up a bunch of wins to be considered an ATG before he gets out of prime? NON-EXISTENT.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> SRL was not an ATG when he fought Roberto Duran.


no I'm saying Roberto Duran was an atg in his prime, not that Leonard was


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Floyd fought plenty of in prime guys far more than Manny ever did so you are talking out of your ass. Name one fighter that have an ATG In prime win EVER. Shit doesn't exist.


Roy Jones - James Toney. Ali - Frazier. Hagler - Hearns. Among hundreds more. Mayweather has... errr... Corrales? Gatti? Hatton?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> You are wrong. Pac needs Floyd, not the other way around. Floyd's resume is much stronger than Pacs.
> 
> As far as Floyd not have the testicles? Floyd fought undefeated Corrales, Hatton, and Now Canelo who is 14 years younger than him. Who is Pac fighting next? Face first brawler in Rios. Canelo would flatten Pac.


Pac is coming off a brutal KO loss and is facing Rios, who is far more credible than Mayweather fighting the likes of Ortiz and Guerrero.


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Try 19, and regardless his sporting age was old, he'd been boxing since he was an infant. Pac turned pro at 12 years old or some shit, and he's not from a country that really has an amateur boxing program. And yet Pac still made far more use of his limited resources and talent compared to Mayweather. Mayweather is a sad case, I'd be a big fan if he fought in some meaningful fights. Canelo is a step in the right direction but it's too little too late.


This coming from someone who is backing a fighter who is 25 and _still_ not a professional. I guess that ceasing to beat up teenagers in three rounders with headgear would be a step in the right direction for Lomachenko. Maybe he'll be fighting world champions by the time he's 30. Might be too little, too late, though.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Roy Jones - James Toney. Ali - Frazier. Hagler - Hearns. Among hundreds more. Mayweather has... errr... Corrales? Gatti? Hatton?


Bull shit. James TOney was not a ATG already when he fought Roy. Name the fighters that Toney beat that made him an ATG>

Ali was out of prime when he fought Frazier. He have been exile for how many years????
Hearns? you f**king kidding me, he is not even in his prime weight, nor in prime.
Hundreds more my ass.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Royal-T-Bag said:


> I'm no Loma doubter, get that shit off your signature! I claimed dude could carve out a Cotto'esque career which is fucking fantastic and way further than most posters feel he will get. Not believing he's gonna be the goat or on mayweathers level doesn't make me a doubter! Cotto is a future HOF'er! That would make Loma the greatest Euro ever in the 130-147 range and it's a very bold prediction for someone who has yet to have a pro fight. I am no doubter, I think he's the goods. I almost feel like I'm taking it too far in claiming someone that has never had a pro fight can match the career of Cotto but to claim he's the GOAT and able to beat Mayweather at this stage is absolutely nutty.
> 
> Think of all the olympic gold medalists and outstanding ams that have never done shit as pros? We really don't know til they pass a few pro tests vs top opposition, ams and pros are night and day in boxing......it's not like hockey/basketball/football etc... where it's essentially the same sport from the ams to the pros. pro boxing is a nasty wake up call for many ams (not that i don't think Loma will be able to make the transition).


If anybody knows anything about boxing and has been following Lomachenko then they know for sure that he's going to have a greater career than Cotto. Are you saying because he's a 'Euro' that means he's not going to be a successful pro? You're even dumber and more ignorant than I thought you were.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Pac is coming off a brutal KO loss and is facing Rios, who is far more credible than Mayweather fighting the likes of Ortiz and Guerrero.


He is always coming off some KO loss. Just like he did early in his career, then loses to a shot Morales and then KO by a 40 year old. And you think Pac is greater than Floyd? Get real. How many fights did Pac seek the easy way out? Fighting guys coming off losses/brutal beating, weight drained and rematches guys over and over again instead fighting someone on top?

FYI Fighting IN PRIME guys like Corrales and Castillo >>>>>>>>>> Fighting out of prime Barrera and Shot Morales. Not to mention both Corrales and Castillo are a hell of lot stronger than Barrera and Morales.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> This coming from someone who is backing a fighter who is 25 and _still_ not a professional. I guess that ceasing to beat up teenagers in three rounders with headgear would be a step in the right direction for Lomachenko. Maybe he'll be fighting world champions by the time he's 30. Might be too little, too late, though.


:lol: Well he's talking about fighting championship fights from the very beginning, so try again.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Bull shit. James TOney was not a ATG already when he fought Roy. Name the fighters that Toney beat that made him an ATG>
> 
> Ali was out of prime when he fought Frazier. He have been exile for how many years????
> Hearns? you f**king kidding me, he is not even in his prime weight, nor in prime.
> Hundreds more my ass.


Oh now I understand, YDKSAB. Prime ATG fighters can't ever fight other prime ATG fighters, gotcha. Every fight is meaningless, not just every fight in Floyd's career.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> *SRL was not an ATG when he fought Roberto Duran* Before Duran SRL's best win was Benitez. That is not enought to be an "ATG in Prime" victory for Duran.
> 
> The "in prime ATG concept" itself is very contradicting already.
> 
> Which boxer can move that fast and string up a bunch of wins to be considered an ATG before he gets out of prime? NON-EXISTENT.


atsch

In terms of H2H, he was ATG. It's like saying that I think Mosley in his lightweight days. Mosley was ATG level. We're not talking ATG through resumes here, but through ability. The resumes they go onto accumulate with their ATG H2H ability is the icing on the cake, which makes them formally an ATG. 
If Rigo was to retire right now, he won't be ATG, but he is ATG in his ability IMO. If he was in the era 10 years ago, he'd beat Morales, Hamed, Junior Jones, maybe Barrera. This is my opinion, don't go getting erections over this Rigo sidenote, I'm just trying to illustrate a point.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Bull shit. James TOney was not a ATG already when he fought Roy. Name the fighters that Toney beat that made him an ATG>
> 
> Ali was out of prime when he fought Frazier. He have been exile for how many years????
> Hearns? you f**king kidding me, he is not even in his prime weight, nor in prime.
> Hundreds more my ass.


This logic is so fucking shit.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> He is always coming off some KO loss. Just like he did early in his career, then loses to a shot Morales and then KO by a 40 year old. And you think Pac is greater than Floyd? Get real.
> 
> FYI Fighting IN PRIME guys like Corrales and Castillo >>>>>>>>>> Fighting out of prime Barrera and Shot Morales. Not to mention both Corrales and Castillo are a hell of lot stronger than Barrera and Morales.


Pac isn't half the fighter Mayweather is. Mayweather's resume isn't half what Pac's is. That's what makes me sad.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> He is always coming off some KO loss. Just like he did early in his career, then loses to a shot Morales and then KO by a 40 year old. And you think Pac is greater than Floyd? Get real. How many fights did Pac seek the easy way out? Fighting guys coming off losses/brutal beating, weight drained and rematches guys over and over again instead fighting someone on top?
> 
> FYI Fighting IN PRIME guys like Corrales and Castillo >>>>>>>>>> Fighting out of prime Barrera and Shot Morales. Not to mention both Corrales and Castillo are a hell of lot stronger than Barrera and Morales.


Fighting IN PRIME Corrales and Castillo < 03' Barrera.


----------



## Royal-T-Bag (Jun 5, 2013)

seriously has there been a more delusional nuthugger than dealt with? i'm giving his boy way more props than he deserves by saying I think he can achieve HOF status by the time his careers done and this fool is mad that I'm not claiming him the GOAT hahahaha fucking nutters, this guy might kill himself when Loma suffers his first loss


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> no I'm saying Roberto Duran was an atg in his prime, not that Leonard was


Bc he have a lot pro fights before he fought Leonard? What legends did he beat to justify him already an ATG?


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Fighting IN PRIME Corrales and Castillo < 03' Barrera.


Bullshit. Both of them would knock Barrera's head off.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Pac isn't half the fighter Mayweather is. Mayweather's resume isn't half what Pac's is. That's what makes me sad.


What is sad is that you are very clueless.

Justify how pac's resume is better.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> What is sad is that you are very clueless.
> 
> Justify how pac's resume is better.


Barrera, Morales, Marquez > than Mayweather's entire career x 2


----------



## Royal-T-Bag (Jun 5, 2013)

I used to like Lomachenko until dealt with came along with his delusional nuthuggery. I'm almost completely turned off from being a fan now. Is this how the rest of the Lomatards will act? God help these forums if so, even Pactards were more bearable than this psycho and that's saying something. you can't even give his boy props without getting him mad that you didn't claim he's the GOAT. Dude is a fucking psycho.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Barrera, Morales, Marquez > than Mayweather's entire career x 2


Fighting an out of prime Barrera and Shot Morales whom which beat Pac LMAO, and failing to pass the marquez test 4x = better than What Floyd did? You do not even make any sense.
You clearly DKSAB.

FYI, Floyd pass the Marquez test on the first try and got an A on the exam. In prime elite fighters >>> faded elites.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Royal-T-Bag said:


> I used to like Lomachenko until dealt with came along with his delusional nuthuggery. I'm almost completely turned off from being a fan now. Is this how the rest of the Lomatards will act? God help these forums if so, even Pactards were more bearable than this psycho and that's saying something. you can't even give his boy props without getting him mad that you didn't claim he's the GOAT. Dude is a fucking psycho.


Trust me Royal-D-Bag, nothing on here is getting me mad. I'm really sorry I ruined Lomachenko for you, the flowers and the tissues are in the mail.


----------



## LuckyLuke (Jun 6, 2013)

Royal-T-Bag said:


> I used to like Lomachenko until dealt with came along with his delusional nuthuggery. I'm almost completely turned off from being a fan now. Is this how the rest of the Lomatards will act? God help these forums if so, even Pactards were more bearable than this psycho and that's saying something. you can't even give his boy props without getting him mad that you didn't claim he's the GOAT. Dude is a fucking psycho.


I still like Lomachenko but if Dealt-With thinks current Lomachenko would be featherweight Mayweather he is probably the biggest nuthugger here.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> This coming from someone who is backing a fighter who is 25 and _still_ not a professional. I guess that ceasing to beat up teenagers in three rounders with headgear would be a step in the right direction for Lomachenko. Maybe he'll be fighting world champions by the time he's 30. Might be too little, too late, though.


You should check their ages, they're older than you think. Why did he need to be pro in his early 20's? So he can carve out an amazing career like Adrien Broner?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

LuckyLuke said:


> I still like Lomachenko but if Dealt-With thinks current Lomachenko would be featherweight Mayweather he is probably the biggest nuthugger here.


True there's no way you can beat a guy who beat Corrales, once you beat Corrales with the right style to beat Corrales then you're assured of the GOAT status, beating Baldomir, Ortiz and Guerrero later on is just icing on the cake.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Bc he have a lot pro fights before he fought Leonard? What legends did he beat to justify him already an ATG?


he was considered by many the great lightweight of all time while he was still at lightweight. And he beat Carlos Palomino, Esteban De Jesus, Ken Buchanan, Edwin Viruet, Hiroshi Kobayashi, Ray Lampkin Idk what you're trying to achieve right now. I understand what your point is. Most atgs aren't considered atgs until their careers are over.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

LuckyLuke said:


> I still like Lomachenko but if Dealt-With thinks current Lomachenko would be featherweight Mayweather he is probably the biggest nuthugger here.


Why don't you believe it? i.e a version of Lomachenko who is well adjusted to 12 rounds...Lomachenko would have wished the amateurs were in pro-style, because he's even better suited to pros than amateurs.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

Lads, it's *super*-featherweight Mayweather you're going on about. :good

Anyway, it's a bit ridiculous, at least to me, to perpetuate that current Lomachenko would beat a primed Floyd Mayweather. It's absolutely preposterous to be honest, for obvious reasons.


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Pac isn't half the fighter Mayweather is. Mayweather's resume isn't half what Pac's is. That's what makes me sad.


Your inclusion of Pac in order to discredit Floyd's resume is backing you into a corner.

A) Pac has no amateur accomplishments to speak of, which seems to undermine the importance of a distinguished amateur career.
B) He's defeated fighters who had a much better amateur career than himself. 
C) You now readily state that Floyd is a better fighter, yet you have Lomachenko beating Mayweather.

... So how would Pac vs. Lomachenko play out? How brutally would Manny be ko'd, and in which round?


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> True there's no way you can beat a guy who beat Corrales, once you beat Corrales with the right style to beat Corrales then you're assured of the GOAT status, beating Baldomir, Ortiz and Guerrero later on is just icing on the cake.


You are clearly a jackass. You act like those fighters isn't accomplished whatsoever but yet you think beating Pac's victory over out of prime barrera and shot morales as great. 
Makes a lot of sense buddy


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> You are clearly a jackass. You act like those fighters isn't accomplished whatsoever but yet you think beating Pac's victory over out of prime barrera and shot morales as great.
> Makes a lot of sense buddy


Oh so now Baldomir, Ortiz and Guerrero are comparable wins to Barrera and Morales. You are clearly a dumbass.


----------



## stevebhoy87 (Jun 4, 2013)

O59 said:


> Lads, it's *super*-featherweight Mayweather you're going on about. :good
> 
> Anyway, it's a bit ridiculous, at least to me, to perpetuate that current Lomachenko would beat a primed Floyd Mayweather. It's absolutely preposterous to be honest, for obvious reasons.


This, in time it could be a reasonable discussion, Lomachenko has the level of talent that he could get around that level, but we need to see him in the pros, how he adapts, his stamina, chin etc. I do believe he will be a star and top level pro, but even if that happens its no guarantee that he will be better than Floyd at 130lbs, who was one of the best fighters I've seen in the last 30 years.


----------



## DirtyDan (May 25, 2013)

I enjoy the hype Loma and GGG are getting. Makes it even better to gloat when they lose.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> Your inclusion of Pac in order to discredit Floyd's resume is backing you into a corner.
> 
> A) Pac has no amateur accomplishments to speak of, which seems to undermine the importance of a distinguished amateur career.
> B) He's defeated fighters who had a much better amateur career than himself.
> ...


I'm not saying a successful amateur guarantees pro success, I'm saying Lomachenko's amateur career and the way he did it guarantees pro success. What he's done is unparalleled, even by Rigo.
Styles make fights, Pac would be a tougher fight than Mayweather, Mayweather would beat Pac if he wasn't scared for his welfare.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Who wins? Salvador Sanchez vs Lomachenko


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Who wins? Salvador Sanchez vs Lomachenko


Sanchez struggled with a green Nelson and was forced to make adjustments over 15 rounds, so I'd have to go with Lomachenko here. He's never been pushed past three rounds, afterall.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

stevebhoy87 said:


> This, in time it could be a reasonable discussion, Lomachenko has the level of talent that he could get around that level, but we need to see him in the pros, how he adapts, his stamina, chin etc. I do believe he will be a star and top level pro, but even if that happens its no guarantee that he will be better than Floyd at 130lbs, who was one of the best fighters I've seen in the last 30 years.


Yup I completely roll with this.

Essentially, that's the conclusion we're all making from this. I think rather than having this all-or-nothing attitude on Loma i.e he's better than Mayweather and that's that, we need to just enjoy his career.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Oh so now Baldomir, Ortiz and Guerrero are comparable wins to Barrera and Morales. You are clearly a dumbass.


Lets give every boxer full credit who holds a win over faded champs.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> *I'm not saying a successful amateur guarantees pro success, I'm saying Lomachenko's amateur career and the way he did it guarantees pro success. What he's done is unparalleled, even by Rigo.*
> Styles make fights, Pac would be a tougher fight than Mayweather, Mayweather would beat Pac if he wasn't scared for his welfare.


And this is what we know time will confirm to us all anyways.

I'm gonna leave the May-Loma discussion for now..I will rave about it when we see Loma completely own someone in his debut :lol:


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> Sanchez struggled with a green Nelson and was forced to make adjustments over 15 rounds, so I'd have to go with Lomachenko here. He's never been pushed past three rounds, afterall.


:lol:


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> Who wins? Salvador Sanchez vs Lomachenko


Sanchez was fucking troubled by Ford and Cowdell. :-( Are they really any better than Lomachenko? Obviously not. Vasyl beats him over twelve or fifteen in dominant fashion.


----------



## rjjfan (May 17, 2013)

Lomachenko vs Sugar Ray Robinson, anyone?


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

O59 said:


> Sanchez was fucking troubled by Ford and Cowdell. :-( Are they really any better than Lomachenko? Obviously not. Vasyl beats him over twelve or fifteen in dominant fashion.


I agree, those guys aren't as skilled as Selimov


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

rjjfan said:


> Lomachenko vs Sugar Ray Robinson, anyone?


I don't want to hear this sort of BS question either. I really don't want Lomachenko to be assasinated as a result of comments attacking away at Mayweather's career for example. You can't use Loma like that.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Personally I think Loma made any future boxing useless.
We've found perfection, unlike Ali, Moore, Ezzard, Duran, Robinson, Langford, Greb he doesn't know weaknesses.
He's the whole package in one, if he retires today he will already be the goat, he can only lose and we as fans will never win again.

If Sugar Ray Robinson is like some random strong character in the Game of Thrones series, Lomachenko is some sort of enormous dragon from the Malazan tales of the fallen series.
That's how good he is.

But... there might be hope.
Somebody has to beat him to save boxing.

There's one man who might do the job.
Not just any man but a yeti, and not just any yeti: Sugar Nikolai Valuev.










He's the only hope we have.


----------



## AnthonyW (Jun 2, 2012)

Lomachenko is class, and I expect him to do very well in the pro's, but really, if you're holding as close to an unbiased stance as possible, there is only one answer...and that is Mayweather.

The difference between the very highest level in amateurs is not that far off from the very highest level in the pro's, depending on the style of the boxer (along with a number of other factors). But we have to base the prediction solely on what we have seen of both boxers in the pro's, which is kind of irrelevant given Lomachenko hasn't fought professionally yet. If the matchup was Loma v Mayweather in the amateurs, I'd reverse my prediction given the basis that I have seen both in the amateurs, and can see what they both achieved whilst there (also factoring in styles, etc).

Anyone who predicts that Lomachenko beats Mayweather at 130lbs (professionally) _is_ not being unbiased and is overrating Loma given we have not seen him at 130lbs, nor as a pro.


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> Sanchez struggled with a green Nelson and was forced to make adjustments over 15 rounds, so I'd have to go with Lomachenko here. He's never been pushed past three rounds, afterall.


Lomachenko's grueling split decision win over gimpy hunchback fighter "Albert Selimov" makes me think Loma beats Sanchez rather comfortably.

Incidentally, Loma outboxes and clowns Pernell Whitaker at lightweight.

No, more, Albert Selimov from the WSB clowns Pernell and wins an easy decision 120-108. Easy work for Albert. easy.


----------



## AnthonyW (Jun 2, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> I'm not saying a successful amateur guarantees pro success, I'm saying Lomachenko's amateur career and the way he did it *guarantees* pro success. What he's done is unparalleled, even by Rigo.
> Styles make fights, Pac would be a tougher fight than Mayweather, Mayweather would beat Pac if he wasn't scared for his welfare.


Nothing is ever guaranteed in boxing.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

conradically said:


> Lomachenko's grueling split decision win over gimpy hunchback fighter "Albert Selimov" makes me think Loma beats Sanchez rather comfortably.
> 
> Incidentally, Loma outboxes and clowns Pernell Whitaker at lightweight.
> 
> No, more, Albert Selimov from the WSB clowns Pernell and wins an easy decision 120-108. Easy work for Albert. easy.


Their WSB bout really wasn't a grueling fight at all for Vasyl, to be honest. I had Lomachenko dominating that fight, something like 4-1. I know IntentionalButt had it 5-0 for Vasyl, which I felt was a bit too wide. Clearly out-boxed him and landed the better shots for the majority of the fight. Scoring it for Selimov is a bit ridiculous.

He wasn't necessarily highly impressive, but he _did_ win it clearly.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

AnthonyW said:


> Nothing is ever guaranteed in boxing.


Absolutely. People can say what they want about the likes of Mark Breland not having the same amount of amateur contests and that he never was as good, etc. But he was expected to go on to be a professional sensation. Future dominant world champion, P4P #1 , etc. Despite the fact that he actually had a solid career, it's overshadowed somewhat by the disappointment amongst boxing fans for him not reaching the insane pedestal he was expected to reach.

It's not too dissimilar to what's going on now, really. Not saying Lomachenko is going to fizzle out and get beaten by apparent lesser fighters, and I do think he's going to be spectacular, but the hype he's receiving now is not representative of all as to what might actually happen.

Will be a champion in ten fights? Yeah, I reckon he could do it. Could he become an ATG? Perhaps. He's already one of the most accomplished amateur fighters of all time, clearly; and amateur greatness is often indicative of professional greatness in the case of Robinson, Leonard, Whitaker, Ali, Lewis, etc. And various others. ATG status is something highly difficult to reach and I wouldn't feel comfortable labeling _any_ fighter a future great until he's there, regardless of Gold Medals and brilliant amateur records.


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

Abraham said:


> Nobody underestimates the amateurs. Amateurs like Rigo and Lomachenko aren't common, by any means. One can even call them anomalies. Not everyone who fought in the Olympics and WSB are on their level. That's all the WSB is, really, a crop of very good amateurs, not a crop of elite level pros.


Nobody underestimates amateurs?

Go read a Donaire-Rigo thread prior to the fight itself. _Consensus_ was a Donaire win because Rigo's amateur experience wasn't enough to help him.

Then he bossed the fight.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> Nobody underestimates amateurs?
> 
> Go read a Donaire-Rigo thread prior to the fight itself. _Consensus_ was a Donaire win because Rigo's amateur experience wasn't enough to help him.
> 
> Then he bossed the fight.


Same deal with Andre Ward before the Kessler fight, I remember people were saying it was like a kid found his dads weight set (Ward) and is now facing a man (Kessler). You'd think that the only American gold medallist in many years who had been undefeated for a long time as an amateur would get some more respect than that, I remember the talk was that he'd fought no one as a pro prior to Kessler, was rocked by a journeyman, his gold medal means nothing etc.


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Same deal with Andre Ward before the Kessler fight, I remember people were saying it was like a kid found his dads weight set (Ward) and is now facing a man (Kessler). You'd think that the only American gold medallist in many years who had been undefeated for a long time as an amateur would get some more respect than that, I remember the talk was that he'd fought no one as a pro prior to Kessler, was rocked by a journeyman, his gold medal means nothing etc.


Ward also keeps saying that the pros is a completely different ball game and how not every good amateur will be successful :deal


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

For the record I was one of the few that picked Rigo to beat Donaire easily, but not because of his amateur accomplishments, but from what I saw from him as a pro and in 12 rounders..

When it comes to Loma, he hasn't done a thing as a pro, so the hype is unwarranted..


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Abraham said:


> Who'd win? I realize that some of you are going to find this question too ridiculous to even answer, but this Lomachenko hype is at extremely high levels. He is obviously advanced for the stage of his career he is in, but how do you think he'd do against 130lb FMJ, the one who fought Diego Corrales?


Lomachenko is definitely a good fighter with an impressive amateur record and accomplishments. Personally i feel that he spent a little too long in the amateur level and is wasting his prime. It is very tough to judge Floyd and him when they took different career paths. Floyd appears to be more athletically gifted and as he progress into the pros his defense kept getting better whilst Lomachenko is more str8 up and down with an high volume great punch selection style. I can see Lomachenko prime for prime give Floyd a very tough fight but at their best i'll go with Floyd due to him seem to be able to do more and better defense. When all fails, Floyd's defense will always bail him out.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> Nobody underestimates amateurs?
> 
> Go read a Donaire-Rigo thread prior to the fight itself. _Consensus_ was a Donaire win because Rigo's amateur experience wasn't enough to help him.
> 
> Then he bossed the fight.


Anyone underestimates amateurs are fools. Top amateurs are better than most low to mid level pros.


----------



## mrtony80 (Jun 8, 2013)

Featherweight Floyd would initially have some trouble with Vasyl's tricky footwork, but after figuring him out...domination. KO.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> For the record I was one of the few that picked Rigo to beat Donaire easily, but not because of his amateur accomplishments, but from what I saw from him as a pro and in 12 rounders..
> 
> When it comes to Loma, he hasn't done a thing as a pro, so the hype is unwarranted..


yeah I didn't pick Rigondeaux to beat Donaire until after I saw enough of him in the pros at an elite level


----------



## JDK (Jun 3, 2013)

Assuming what Loma will be able to accomplish in the next few years is like assuming what Floyd could've accomplished had he stayed in the amateurs for as long as Loma has.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

JDK said:


> Assuming what Loma will be able to accomplish in the next few years is like assuming what Floyd could've accomplished had he stayed in the amateurs for as long as Loma has.


Even though Mayweather was 84-6 in the amateurs, being beaten by guys like Augie Sanchez even though he was wearing gloves before he could walk? I don't think it's the same thing at all, especially considering Mayweather fought with a more 'amateur' style than Lomachenko did.


----------



## JDK (Jun 3, 2013)

How you do see Floyd compete through the ams from 18-25 years of age? How do you see Loma's career had he turned pro. at 18 and not have gotten the chance for the multiple gold medals?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

JDK said:


> How you do see Floyd compete through the ams from 18-25 years of age? How do you see Loma's career had he turned pro. at 18 and not have gotten the chance for the multiple gold medals?


Floyd was 19 when he was at the olympics and Lomachenko was 20 when he won his first gold. Floyd would've been a good amateur but I'd be leaning towards him not winning a gold, his style has always essentially been the same and he would've had to have seen off another wave of top prospects, which he couldn't do the first time round. Even if he had gotten the nod against Todorov there was no guarantee he would've won the gold medal bout (which Todorov lost), and Floyd was lucky to get the nod in his previous bout against the Cuban anyway. I think Floyd would've wasted his time fighting in the amateurs because he takes time to adapt to opponents, which you can't do when you only have 3/4 rounds. Judah would've beaten him over 4 rounds in their bout.
If Lomachenko turned pro after his first olympics he would've been a long serving champion at this point and likely at the top of the p4p list. He was forced to move up to 60kg to win his second gold in the amateurs so who knows how he would differ now. I think getting that 2nd gold was the best thing for him to do in terms of history and growth, as he's still only 25. As long as he moves reasonably quickly that is, if he fights the opponents Broner has fought over the same time frame then he'd be screwing himself by not turning pro earlier.


----------



## AnthonyW (Jun 2, 2012)

@Dealt_with you are basing your analysis and prediction of this bout on assumptions, yet if I am remembering correctly, in one thread in particular (Tyson Gay PED thread) I'm sure I've seen you accusing posters of making a lot of assumptions, whereas you're sticking to "facts" in that particular thread, always trying to back your argument up with a wide knowledge and even scientific studies.

Question, what's the difference here? You have no proof of how Loma will do as a pro over 12 rounds no matter how talented he is and his achievements as an amateur. You're assuming he will take the pro's by storm and be the next P4P #1 /ATG without him having stepped in a pro ring. He may just do that, but again it's assumption. If I turn around and claim Bolt is on some sort of PED just because Gay, Powell etc failed a test. That's me assuming, and I'd be wrong until proven otherwise.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

AnthonyW said:


> @Dealt_with you are basing your analysis and prediction of this bout on assumptions, yet if I am remembering correctly, in one thread in particular (Tyson Gay PED thread) I'm sure I've seen you accusing posters of making a lot of assumptions, whereas you're sticking to "facts" in that particular thread, always trying to back your argument up with a wide knowledge and even scientific studies.
> 
> Question, what's the difference here? You have no proof of how Loma will do as a pro over 12 rounds no matter how talented he is and his achievements as an amateur. You're assuming he will take the pro's by storm and be the next P4P #1 /ATG without him having stepped in a pro ring. He may just do that, but again it's assumption. If I turn around and claim Bolt is on some sort of PED just because Gay, Powell etc failed a test. That's me assuming, and I'd be wrong until proven otherwise.


I'm trolling a bit, but I'm just trying to emphasise Lomachenko's talent and potential. I don't feel like Lomachenko really has anything to improve in his boxing game, as I've said he's the most complete fighter I've seen. Everything he has shown is applicable to the pro game, as he fights in a pro manner. He still needs to show and prove in the pro game but I have zero doubt he will, you might see that as me assuming something but boxing skills are boxing skills, and Lomachenko has it all. The facts are that he won two gold medals while beating everyone he has come up against in over 400 fights. On that form, and the fact that he fights in a pro style already, means that what I'm saying isn't just a leap of faith. I've seen well over 50 fights of his, I've seen him fight in every style and beat every style. He is a boxing prodigy, as a longtime fan of the sport I've never seen anything like him. Maybe something will go wrong in the pro game, who knows? Based on what I know for sure at this point though that would be extremely unlikely. It would be more blind faith/an assumption to believe that he isn't destined to be p4p as a pro.


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> Nobody underestimates amateurs?
> 
> Go read a Donaire-Rigo thread prior to the fight itself. _Consensus_ was a Donaire win because Rigo's amateur experience wasn't enough to help him.
> 
> Then he bossed the fight.


Not me. I picked Rigondeaux to beat Donaire over in ESB. Same user name. Proofs over there.

If he can survive a pro lose, he'll probably have a Maidana type career.
Worldbeater? Hell no. Staph it.

I also remember dealt_with gearing up for this Loma nuthuggery around the the time the Donaire Rigondeaux fight was happening.....
after the fight, he went off! "Rigondeaux beat Donaire! Loma can beat Floyd! Its all so clear to me now!" :lol:

He's an idiot.
Leave him be. 
Loma gets his ass beat inside his first 10 pro bouts, probably first five.

If he can handle a pro lose, he'll probably go on to have a Maidana-type career.
Maybe a little better.
Worldbeater? I don't think so. Ive said it before, I'll say it again. Cuban AMs aint Euro AMs.

dealth_With gonna cry when Lomachenko gets beat? Definitely.

Im not even hating on Loma, Im excited for him, just like Rigondeaux.
but 
Rigondeaux is a master boxer. Its clear when you watch him.
Lomachenko is not a master boxer even if he has so many victories.
Which says more to my point above. Extensive win percentage in the Cuban AMS? 400 like Rigondeaux? = Master boxer.
In the Euro Ams..like Loma? = Energetic puncher.

Hatin on Loma? Nope.
Loma beats Floyd cause Loma got 400 am victories in Europe? :lol::lol::lol:

dealt_With has boosted this guy enough, he should be banned from such trollbaiting threads as this until Loma has atleast proved he can go 8 rounds. lol

staph it ..just staph it


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

browsing said:


> He's an idiot.
> Leave him be.
> Loma gets his ass beat inside his first 10 pro bouts, probably first five.


:lol: And I'm the idiot?


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Floyd was 19 when he was at the olympics and Lomachenko was 20 when he won his first gold. Floyd would've been a good amateur but I'd be leaning towards him not winning a gold, his style has always essentially been the same and he would've had to have seen off another wave of top prospects, which he couldn't do the first time round. Even if he had gotten the nod against Todorov there was no guarantee he would've won the gold medal bout (which Todorov lost), and Floyd was lucky to get the nod in his previous bout against the Cuban anyway. I think Floyd would've wasted his time fighting in the amateurs because he takes time to adapt to opponents, which you can't do when you only have 3/4 rounds. Judah would've beaten him over 4 rounds in their bout.
> If Lomachenko turned pro after his first olympics he would've been a long serving champion at this point and likely at the top of the p4p list. He was forced to move up to 60kg to win his second gold in the amateurs so who knows how he would differ now. I think getting that 2nd gold was the best thing for him to do in terms of history and growth, as he's still only 25. As long as he moves reasonably quickly that is, if he fights the opponents Broner has fought over the same time frame then he'd be screwing himself by not turning pro earlier.


"His style has always essentially been the same"

That's as false as it can be and shows that you have not watched Floyd throughout his career. He was MUCH more aggressive in the amateurs and early in his 130lbs days he was considered a boxer puncher. He didn't take the "adapting" approach till he went up to 147.


----------



## AnthonyW (Jun 2, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> I'm trolling a bit, but I'm just trying to emphasise Lomachenko's talent and potential. I don't feel like Lomachenko really has anything to improve in his boxing game, as I've said he's the most complete fighter I've seen. Everything he has shown is applicable to the pro game, as he fights in a pro manner. He still needs to show and prove in the pro game but I have zero doubt he will, you might see that as me assuming something but boxing skills are boxing skills, and Lomachenko has it all. The facts are that he won two gold medals while beating everyone he has come up against in over 400 fights. On that form, and the fact that he fights in a pro style already, means that what I'm saying isn't just a leap of faith. I've seen well over 50 fights of his, I've seen him fight in every style and beat every style. He is a boxing prodigy, as a longtime fan of the sport I've never seen anything like him. Maybe something will go wrong in the pro game, who knows? Based on what I know for sure at this point though that would be extremely unlikely. It would be more blind faith/an assumption to believe that he isn't destined to be p4p as a pro.


:good

Yeah I get that. I wouldn't necessarily throw him favourite against a current world champion, but I wouldn't be entirely shocked if he was to do it, he is unbelievably talented. I hope he does live up to his current potential, exactly what boxing needs.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

@dealt with,

Also you say that you think Floyd wouldn't get gold why? Bc he lost in a bout with the eventual Gold medalist in most observers thought Floyd should've won?


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> :lol: And I'm the idiot?


ofcourse you are.



browsing said:


> Not me. I picked Rigondeaux to beat Donaire over in ESB. Same user name. Proofs over there.
> 
> If he can survive a pro lose, he'll probably have a Maidana type career.
> Worldbeater? Hell no. Staph it.
> ...


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> "His style has always essentially been the same"
> 
> That's as false as it can be and shows that you have not watched Floyd throughout his career. He was MUCH more aggressive in the amateurs and early in his 130lbs days he was considered a boxer puncher. He didn't take the "adapting" approach till he went up to 147.


Obviously he had to be more aggressive but if you've seen his amateur bouts you'll notice it takes him time to start landing his punches. Even in the first few rounds against Corrales he was missing a lot. After round 1 "Did I win the round?" - Floyd.
If you watch his amateur fights you can see he moves exactly the same, punches the same, leads with his right the same.. he's the same fighter he's always been. At those olympics he would've been boxing for 10+ years during his most plastic years so obviously nothing much is going to change after that.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> @dealt with,
> 
> Also you say that you think Floyd wouldn't get gold why? Bc he lost in a bout with the eventual Gold medalist in most observers thought Floyd should've won?


Because Floyd arguably got beaten by Aragon in the previous bout, the Todorov fight wasn't the robbery that it was made out to be, Todorov lost the gold medal bout, he never won any international tournaments, and Mayweather was 84-6 as an amateur and lost to the likes of Augie Sanchez. He was undoubtedly a good amateur and a good fighter but he wasn't a world beater as an amateur. You would've expected him to follow the career trajectory of the other boxing members of his family based on his amateur record.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Because Floyd arguably got beaten by Aragon in the previous bout, the Todorov fight wasn't the robbery that it was made out to be, Todorov lost the gold medal bout, he never won any international tournaments, and Mayweather was 84-6 as an amateur and lost to the likes of Augie Sanchez. He was undoubtedly a good amateur and a good fighter but he wasn't a world beater as an amateur. You would've expected him to follow the career trajectory of the other boxing members of his family based on his amateur record.


So why are you trying to hype up Lomachenko an "establish" amateur while bashing an ex "establish" amateur again? You wanna talk down on Floyd's resume but he move on and fought pro champions unlike Lomachenko who is content in fighting more up and coming young amateurs. You should think about that. But then again you also think Pac got a better resume so that itself shows that you are clearly just have no point.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> So why are you trying to hype up Lomachenko an "establish" amateur while bashing an ex "establish" amateur again? You wanna talk down on Floyd's resume but he move on and fought pro champions unlike Lomachenko who is content in fighting more up and coming young amateurs. You should think about that. But then again you also think Pac got a better resume so that itself shows that you are clearly just have no point.


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Because Floyd arguably got beaten by Aragon in the previous bout, the Todorov fight wasn't the robbery that it was made out to be, Todorov lost the gold medal bout, he never won any international tournaments, and Mayweather was 84-6 as an amateur and lost to the likes of Augie Sanchez. He was undoubtedly a good amateur and a good fighter but he wasn't a world beater as an amateur. You would've expected him to follow the career trajectory of the other boxing members of his family based on his amateur record.


Do you think Todorov beats Floyd in a 12-round fight in the pros?

Of course not. Why?

Here's what you're missing. It's true, Floyd isn't the greatest 3-round fighter with big gloves and and headgear in history.

But we're not talking about three round fights with big gloves and headgear, are we?

In a 3 round fight, Floyd squeaks out a win over Guerrero, maybe loses to Zab, Oscar, Hatton, Mosley.

But once Floyd starts going, once his timing is on -- which takes a few rounds to get calibrated -- he starts lining up the right hand, the left hooks, the counters.

Floyd isn't an ATG in rounds 1-3. But that's not pro boxing. Indeed, it's practically irrelevant. When you add in 4-12 he's very, very hard to beat.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

conradically said:


> Do you think Todorov beats Floyd in a 12-round fight in the pros?
> 
> Of course not. Why?
> 
> ...


If someone is so dominant and so skilled they shouldn't need rounds to get their timing in. Roy Jones didn't have that problem, Pernell Whitaker didn't have that problem. Floyd must be the only fighter who gets credit for losing rounds. If Floyd isn't good enough to be at his best within three rounds then that explains why his amateur career wasn't anything special. That's not a positive, that just means he wasn't good enough. Floyd has gotten away with it so far in the pro game against Judah because Judah is a 4 round fighter, he almost didn't get away with it against Oscar who is known for fading in later rounds. If Canelo doesn't fade Floyd can't afford to give away early rounds. Hopkins has often done the same thing, and that's cost him against Taylor and Pascal, fighters he is far above in terms of talent. Giving away early rounds is never a positive, that's a weakness. If Floyd intends to start fighting stiffer competition now he can't afford to do that or his precious zero is going to go. Part of the reason I'm picking Canelo.


----------



## LuckyLuke (Jun 6, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Because Floyd arguably got beaten by Aragon in the previous bout, the Todorov fight wasn't the robbery that it was made out to be, Todorov lost the gold medal bout, he never won any international tournaments, and Mayweather was 84-6 as an amateur and lost to the likes of Augie Sanchez. He was undoubtedly a good amateur and a good fighter but he wasn't a world beater as an amateur. You would've expected him to follow the career trajectory of the other boxing members of his family based on his amateur record.


So what?
Flody clearly is a much better fighter today then he was at 19 or 18.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

LuckyLuke said:


> So what?
> Flody clearly is a much better fighter today then he was at 19 or 18.


Is he? He's been picking and choosing for a long time. He successfully managed to evade Margarito, Williams and Pacquiao. Nothing in recent years suggests he's an improved fighter, fighting the likes of Ortiz and Guerrero is pathetic. Let's see what he's made of against Canelo. I think he took the fight because of Canelo's alleged stamina problems. I think he's in trouble.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> If someone is so dominant and so skilled they shouldn't need rounds to get their timing in. Roy Jones didn't have that problem, Pernell Whitaker didn't have that problem. Floyd must be the only fighter who gets credit for losing rounds. If Floyd isn't good enough to be at his best within three rounds then that explains why his amateur career wasn't anything special. That's not a positive, that just means he wasn't good enough. Floyd has gotten away with it so far in the pro game against Judah because Judah is a 4 round fighter, he almost didn't get away with it against Oscar who is known for fading in later rounds. If Canelo doesn't fade Floyd can't afford to give away early rounds. Hopkins has often done the same thing, and that's cost him against Taylor and Pascal, fighters he is far above in terms of talent. Giving away early rounds is never a positive, that's a weakness. If Floyd intends to start fighting stiffer competition now he can't afford to do that or his precious zero is going to go. Part of the reason I'm picking Canelo.


Jesus, could you be more biased? One can just as easily say that if Lomachenko is so dominant and skilled, he wouldn't have had the close fight in London with Toledo, and wouldn't have looked less than impressive against Selimov in their wsb fight. You're just twisting shit against Floyd to make your points seem valid. Floyd doesn't _need_ rounds to adjust, he has just been in a few fights where his opponent has done alright at the beginning. It's not like he was getting beat up in these rounds he lost.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> Jesus, could you be more biased? One can just as easily say that if Lomachenko is so dominant and skilled, he wouldn't have had the close fight in London with Toledo, and wouldn't have looked less than impressive against Selimov in their wsb fight. You're just twisting shit against Floyd to make your points seem valid. Floyd doesn't _need_ rounds to adjust, he has just been in a few fights where his opponent has done alright at the beginning. It's not like he was getting beat up in these rounds he lost.


Judah was landing left hands whenever he threw, and he knocked Floyd down. Old ass Mosley rocked Mayweather to his boots in those early rounds.

Why shouldn't Lomachenko have a close fight against a 5'11 southpaw who is Cuba's best boxer in a weight class that isn't natural to Lomachenko? Lomachenko still won, like every fight he's been in. He won the first 4 rounds against Selimov clearly, the only reason the judges had it close was because it was Selimov's home fight and his team needed that victory to beat the Ukraine.

Talk about biased, when do you see Lomachenko giving rounds away? Mayweather does it against poor opponents. Oh but he doesn't need rounds to adjust, he just gets rocked and dropped on purpose :rolleyes


----------



## BUMPY (Jul 26, 2012)

Lomachenko is still an amateur :lol:


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Judah was landing left hands whenever he threw, and he knocked Floyd down. Old ass Mosley rocked Mayweather to his boots in those early rounds.
> 
> Why shouldn't Lomachenko have a close fight against a 5'11 southpaw who is Cuba's best boxer in a weight class that isn't natural to Lomachenko? Lomachenko still won, like every fight he's been in. He won the first 4 rounds against Selimov clearly, the only reason the judges had it close was because it was Selimov's home fight and his team needed that victory to beat the Ukraine.
> 
> Talk about biased, when do you see Lomachenko giving rounds away? Mayweather does it against poor opponents. Oh but he doesn't need rounds to adjust, he just gets rocked and dropped on purpose :rolleyes


How the fuck was Judah a "poor opponent"? And Mosley landed two good shots. Incredible. A fighter landed a good shot! Your boy Rigo got dropped by guys he otherwise dominated. Mayweather took that shot well, and by the end of the round, Mosley was the one high tailing it. I understand you're trying to support your favorite fighter in Lomachenko, but fuck, dude. Your discrediting Mayweather is getting out of hand. You once said anyone who doens't recognize Loma's skill and potential dksab, yet you call FMJ's skillset overrated...:rolleyes


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> How the fuck was Judah a "poor opponent"? And Mosley landed two good shots. Incredible. A fighter landed a good shot! Your boy Rigo got dropped by guys he otherwise dominated. Mayweather took that shot well, and by the end of the round, Mosley was the one high tailing it. I understand you're trying to support your favorite fighter in Lomachenko, but fuck, dude. Your discrediting Mayweather is getting out of hand. You once said anyone who doens't recognize Loma's skill and potential dksab, yet you call FMJ's skillset overrated...:rolleyes


Judah wasn't a poor opponent for Floyd? A guy who just barely managed to make it out of the ring alive in a loss to Baldomir in his previous fight? You just claimed that Floyd doesn't need to rounds to adjust, he lets his opponents win rounds. You're fucking delusional mate, get Mayweather's testes out of your mouth.
Rigo has been dropped twice, a balance knockdown from a jab against Cordoba, and another balance knockdown when he was squared up after a clinch against Donaire. When has Mayweather ever fought an opponent as legitimate as Donaire? Rigo is shitting on Floyd's career in his 12th fight.


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

haha


stop getting trolled yall

let dealt_With go, 

hes delusional, its clear.

"LOma beats Mayweather, cause Donaire got beat by Rigondeaux" 


hes a clown


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

browsing said:


> haha
> 
> stop getting trolled yall
> 
> ...


When have I ever made that connection? You stupid as hell bruh


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> If someone is so dominant and so skilled they shouldn't need rounds to get their timing in. Roy Jones didn't have that problem, Pernell Whitaker didn't have that problem. Floyd must be the only fighter who gets credit for losing rounds. If Floyd isn't good enough to be at his best within three rounds then that explains why his amateur career wasn't anything special. That's not a positive, that just means he wasn't good enough. Floyd has gotten away with it so far in the pro game against Judah because Judah is a 4 round fighter, he almost didn't get away with it against Oscar who is known for fading in later rounds. If Canelo doesn't fade Floyd can't afford to give away early rounds. Hopkins has often done the same thing, and that's cost him against Taylor and Pascal, fighters he is far above in terms of talent. Giving away early rounds is never a positive, that's a weakness. If Floyd intends to start fighting stiffer competition now he can't afford to do that or his precious zero is going to go. Part of the reason I'm picking Canelo.


So then we should evaluate the ATGs based on on the first 3 rounds. I'm following your logic. Because, as you say, if a fighter can't be at his absolute best within the first three rounds, then he isn't good enough. Lets go down the line and just scrub away the last 9-12 rounds of every fight in history, because those rounds are irrelevant. In fact, lets toss out pro fights altogether, because they necessarily include a lot of extraneous rounds.

Yes, you're talking nonsense.

Floyd's slow warm up stage is what makes him extraordinary. He is fundamentally a _complex_ boxer and this complexity needs to be tuned ona per-fight basis, because his style depends on the style of his opponents. More basic fighters don't need a tuning stage, because they do the same thing, round after round. Adaptation fundamentally requires time, and if a fighter can't adapt, learn on the fly, he's the lesser fighter, not the greater one.


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> When have I ever made that connection? You stupid as hell bruh


No. You're the one who is stupid as hell and an idiot.At the base of all your shenanigans is the reassurance that "Rigondeaux did it, Loma can too!"Thats whats behind your entire argument.Yall need to stop being trolled by this idiot dealt_With and wait for Lomachenko to get rocked.I love how people post his fight against Valentino as a showcase of his uber skills. "Loma is top shelf. Watch this!"dealt_with "See that..he beats Mayweather."lol nutthugging delusional idiot.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

conradically said:


> So then we should evaluate the ATGs based on on the first 3 rounds. I'm following your logic. Because, as you say, if a fighter can't be at his absolute best within the first three rounds, then he isn't good enough. Lets go down the line and just scrub away the last 9-12 rounds of every fight in history, because those rounds are irrelevant. In fact, lets toss out pro fights altogether, because they necessarily include a lot of extraneous rounds.
> 
> Yes, you're talking nonsense.
> 
> Floyd's slow warm up stage is what makes him extraordinary. He is fundamentally a _complex_ boxer and this complexity needs to be tuned ona per-fight basis, because his style depends on the style of his opponents. More basic fighters don't need a tuning stage, because they do the same thing, round after round. Adaptation fundamentally requires time, and if a fighter can't adapt, learn on the fly, he's the lesser fighter, not the greater one.


No, it's very simple. If Floyd was as complete and as dominant as people like to make out he would not need rounds to warm up and get going, especially against the likes of Judah. I'm not saying only the first three rounds count, I'm saying EVERY round counts. And yet this apparent master gives away rounds. He's not that complex, he does nothing James Toney didn't do. And James Toney was always ready to go from the start. When Jones fought Toney he didn't need rounds to switch on, when Rigo fought Donaire he didn't need rounds to switch on. If Floyd was fighting an evenly matched opponent and he has a few tough rounds, then adapts and takes over, that deserves credit. Floyd has never fought a prime ATG fighter, his best victories are Corrales and Hatton ffs. He shouldn't need to be adapting against the likes of Judah, he shouldn't be fighting Baldomir, Ortiz, Guerrero full stop.
Floyd fans actually believe that losing early rounds is a sign of his boxing brilliance? Fucking unbelievable. Broner is very smart to be emulating Floyd, talk trash and avoid the best fights, make money from the dumbass fans who subscribe to the hype :lol:


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> No, it's very simple. If Floyd was as complete and as dominant as people like to make out he would not need rounds to warm up and get going, especially against the likes of Judah. I'm not saying only the first three rounds count, I'm saying EVERY round counts. And yet this apparent master gives away rounds. He's not that complex, he does nothing James Toney didn't do. And James Toney was always ready to go from the start. When Jones fought Toney he didn't need rounds to switch on, when Rigo fought Donaire he didn't need rounds to switch on. If Floyd was fighting an evenly matched opponent and he has a few tough rounds, then adapts and takes over, that deserves credit. Floyd has never fought a prime ATG fighter, his best victories are Corrales and Hatton ffs. He shouldn't need to be adapting against the likes of Judah, he shouldn't be fighting Baldomir, Ortiz, Guerrero full stop.
> Floyd fans actually believe that losing early rounds is a sign of his boxing brilliance? Fucking unbelievable. Broner is very smart to be emulating Floyd, talk trash and avoid the best fights, make money from the dumbass fans who subscribe to the hype :lol:


If Usain Bolt was as complete and dominating as everyone says he is, he would not need the first 30 meters to warm up.

Why is he losing to Tyson Gay in the first 30 meters if he's so good?

absurdities, keep them coming, I love it!


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> If someone is so dominant and so skilled they shouldn't need rounds to get their timing in. Roy Jones didn't have that problem, Pernell Whitaker didn't have that problem. Floyd must be the only fighter who gets credit for losing rounds. If Floyd isn't good enough to be at his best within three rounds then that explains why his amateur career wasn't anything special. That's not a positive, that just means he wasn't good enough. Floyd has gotten away with it so far in the pro game against Judah because Judah is a 4 round fighter, he almost didn't get away with it against Oscar who is known for fading in later rounds. If Canelo doesn't fade Floyd can't afford to give away early rounds. Hopkins has often done the same thing, and that's cost him against Taylor and Pascal, fighters he is far above in terms of talent. Giving away early rounds is never a positive, that's a weakness. If Floyd intends to start fighting stiffer competition now he can't afford to do that or his precious zero is going to go. Part of the reason I'm picking Canelo.


LOL thats comical. Jones jr and whitaker got much bigger problems in the ring. Floyd sometimes need A few rounds to adjust is a downfall? You're trolling hard.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Is he? He's been picking and choosing for a long time. He successfully managed to evade Margarito, Williams and Pacquiao. Nothing in recent years suggests he's an improved fighter, fighting the likes of Ortiz and Guerrero is pathetic. Let's see what he's made of against Canelo. I think he took the fight because of Canelo's alleged stamina problems. I think he's in trouble.


Evade Margo to fight Oscar LOL (a better opponent) then Floyd beats Margo's daddy so you really have no clue there. Williams? when was he EVER in the picture? And how the hell can you pin Pac for falling through when it was him who ducked Floyd. Seriously, you are a Floyd hater just admit it.

What's funny is that you want to say that Floyd didn't improve after amateurs, when your boy Loma is still fighting amateur bouts against teenagers after two Olympics. I'm sure it does wonders for his skillset.:good


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

conradically said:


> If Usain Bolt was as complete and dominating as everyone says he is, he would not need the first 30 meters to warm up.
> 
> Why is he losing to Tyson Gay in the first 30 meters if he's so good?
> 
> absurdities, keep them coming, I love it!


What an absolutely ludicrous analogy. Hang you head in shame you dunce.


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> What an absolutely ludicrous analogy. Hang you head in shame you dunce.


Actually, the analogy mirrors perfectly the logical structure of your argument, which says that a fighter can be evaluated on his instantaneous performance, i.e. in round 1. This implies that change in performance over time is not relevant to evaluating a fighter. And this is exactly equivalent to saying Tyson Gay is better than Usain Bolt because he comes out of the blocks faster.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

@Dealt_with

Tiliang will never stop. He tenaciously defends things that quite clearly bullshit. I mean look at my sig..


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

conradically said:


> Do you think Todorov beats Floyd in a 12-round fight in the pros?
> 
> Of course not. Why?
> 
> ...


this is dead on


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

conradically said:


> Actually, the analogy mirrors perfectly the logical structure of your argument, which says that a fighter can be evaluated on his instantaneous performance, i.e. in round 1. This implies that change in performance over time is not relevant to evaluating a fighter. And this is exactly equivalent to saying Tyson Gay is better than Usain Bolt because he comes out of the blocks faster.


No the analogy is ridiculous. You're talking about something that happens within 200ms, not 3,6,9 or 12 minutes. There's a biomechanical explanation for Bolt's relatively slow starts - the length of his levers. There is no biomechanical and/or physiological reason why Floyd has to give away rounds. As I said, hang your head in shame for saying something so stupid.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> @Dealt_with
> 
> Tiliang will never stop. He tenaciously defends things that quite clearly bullshit. I mean look at my sig..


I didn't even see that. Tbh I should've stopped engaging him after he said there's no such thing as a prime ATG, and that Barrera and co. were no better than Baldomir and co.


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> No the analogy is ridiculous. You're talking about something that happens within 200ms, not 3,6,9 or 12 minutes. There's a biomechanical explanation for Bolt's relatively slow starts - the length of his levers. There is no biomechanical and/or physiological reason why Floyd has to give away rounds. As I said, hang your head in shame for saying something so stupid.


there's no biomechanical or physiological basis of adaptation, on-the-fly learning, timing, etc.? How about stamina? Is that physiological? How about energy conservation?

At any rate, everything is "physiological" in athletics so your argument is a complete non-starter. Par for the course.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> I didn't even see that. Tbh I should've stopped engaging him after he said there's no such thing as a prime ATG, and that Barrera and co. were no better than Baldomir and co.


There is no such thing as In prime ATGs ya dumbass.


----------



## EvianMcGirt (Jun 9, 2013)

:lol:

Jesus Christ how is this thread still going?!?


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

EvianMcGirt said:


> :lol:
> 
> Jesus Christ how is this thread still going?!?


It's a Vasyl Lomachenko thread. Nuff' said.


----------



## LittleRed (Jun 4, 2013)

Bladerunner said:


> With this massive amount of hype surrounding Lomachenko , if he doesnt achieve ATG status hes a bust plain and simple, the guy hasnt even turned pro and we get guys hyping him up like hes the best thing since sliced bread and talking as if hes the best fighter in the world, he better live up to expectations otherwise there will be a lot of people here looking like dumbasses.


Fuck sliced bread! Loma is the truth. Best amateur athlete in sports history turns pro- there can't be enough hype.


----------



## Brauer (Jun 24, 2013)

Come on guys, dude hasn't even debuted yet. I'm really high on Loma, but come on. Let's at least wait a bit shall we?


----------



## PabstBlueRibbon (Jun 6, 2013)

lol.


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> Castillo did. Augustus gave him hell. Ancient De La Hoya almost beat him. Zab Judah swept the first 4 rounds. Ancient Cotto gave him a tough fight.
> Lomachenko is so far below those guys? Please.


you are fucking stupid


----------



## Oneshot (Jun 6, 2013)

I missed the Euro crazy on this site


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Luf said:


> none of those were at 130.


:lol: AWful thread. I like Abe's paedo threads better.


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

O59 said:


> Their WSB bout really wasn't a grueling fight at all for Vasyl, to be honest. I had Lomachenko dominating that fight, something like 4-1. I know IntentionalButt had it 5-0 for Vasyl, which I felt was a bit too wide. Clearly out-boxed him and landed the better shots for the majority of the fight. Scoring it for Selimov is a bit ridiculous.
> 
> He wasn't necessarily highly impressive, but he _did_ win it clearly.


just watched it. It was about as grueling as WSB gets. Close fight, trading body shots, uppercuts. Dare I call it a war?

The gimpy and rather fragile looking Selimov was generally the stalker in this one. I do not think this bodes well for Loma's pro career against the likes of a serious pressure fighter like Mares. Of course that fight will never happen, now that Loma has signed with Top Rank.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

conradically said:


> just watched it. It was about as grueling as WSB gets. Close fight, trading body shots, uppercuts. Dare I call it a war?
> 
> The gimpy and rather fragile looking Selimov was generally the stalker in this one. I do not think this bodes well for Loma's pro career against the likes of a serious pressure fighter like Mares. Of course that fight will never happen, now that Loma has signed with Top Rank.


To be fair to Loma, Selimov is the only man to have beaten him, this was still a clear win for Loma although the rounds were pretty damn close. Mares will prove to be quite a tough task for Loma.
I can't help but notice a big size difference, Selimov has a really long reach, his body is huge. He didn't land clean enough.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

conradically said:


> just watched it. It was about as grueling as WSB gets. Close fight, trading body shots, uppercuts. Dare I call it a war?
> 
> The gimpy and rather fragile looking Selimov was generally the stalker in this one. I do not think this bodes well for Loma's pro career against the likes of a serious pressure fighter like Mares. Of course that fight will never happen, now that Loma has signed with Top Rank.


Selimov is a big strong guy, he's won a world championship, when he was green and Gamboa was a gold medallist he gave him a tough fight, Selimov hadn't lost a WSB fight up to that point, he was Russia's national champ and guy in that division. Look at some more of his fights if you don't think he's a very good fighter.
Lomachenko and Selimov both landed little in the contest, that's what happens when you put two defensively strong southpaws together. Do you think Lomachenko hasn't fought other pressure fighters in over 400 fights?


----------



## Oneshot (Jun 6, 2013)

Another GGG.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

conradically said:


> just watched it. It was about as grueling as WSB gets. Close fight, trading body shots, uppercuts. Dare I call it a war?
> 
> The gimpy and rather fragile looking Selimov was generally the stalker in this one. I do not think this bodes well for Loma's pro career against the likes of a serious pressure fighter like Mares. Of course that fight will never happen, now that Loma has signed with Top Rank.


what you don't realize is Selimov is more skilled than Mayweather and is a better pressure fighter than Mares


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> what you don't realize is Selimov is more skilled than Mayweather and is a better pressure fighter than Mares


Oh I realize that. But the thing is, Selimov was stopped -- stopped on cuts, with headgear and giant gloves -- by Britain's Sam Maxwell in the olympic qualifying event in 2012.

OK. But the thing is about that. The thing is, British amateur pugilist Sam Maxwell is far more skilled than the limited Mayweather and probably beats prime 130 Mayweather in an 8-4/7-5 type close-but-clear decision.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

conradically said:


> Oh I realize that. But the thing is, Selimov was stopped -- stopped on cuts, with headgear and giant gloves -- by Britain's Sam Maxwell in the olympic qualifying event in 2012.
> 
> OK. But the thing is about that. The thing is, British amateur pugilist Sam Maxwell is far more skilled than the limited Mayweather and probably beats prime 130 Mayweather in an 8-4/7-5 type close-but-clear decision.


Southpaw vs Orthodox, head clashes happen. Selimov couldn't continue.. so what? It was unfortunate for Selimov as he would've been a medal favourite. Lomachenko just beat Maxwell two times in the WSB as well.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

conradically said:


> Oh I realize that. But the thing is, Selimov was stopped -- stopped on cuts, with headgear and giant gloves -- by Britain's Sam Maxwell in the olympic qualifying event in 2012.
> 
> OK. But the thing is about that. The thing is, British amateur pugilist Sam Maxwell is far more skilled than the limited Mayweather and probably beats prime 130 Mayweather in an 8-4/7-5 type close-but-clear decision.


I haven't followed the whole discussion but Muhammad Ali has also been stopped by cuts in the amateurs.
It doesn't really mean that much.


----------



## FelixTrinidad (Jun 3, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> what you don't realize is Selimov is more skilled than Mayweather and is a better pressure fighter than Mares


Selimov is more skilled than Floyd but not by a noticable margin. I will put Selimov slightly above Floyd and equal to Mares in terms of pressure.
The thing is Floyd had slightly better defense but overall Selimov and Mayweather are interchangeable in terms of skill set.


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

FelixTrinidad said:


> Selimov is more skilled than Floyd but not by a noticable margin. I will put Selimov slightly above Floyd and equal to Mares in terms of pressure.
> The thing is Floyd had slightly better defense but overall Selimov and Mayweather are interchangeable in terms of skill set.


:lol:

Doesn't really matter though cause Floyd = Selimov ( - defensive set, but) Lomachenko + Selimov = Loma UD so therefore Floyd + Loma = Loma UD.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

FelixTrinidad said:


> Selimov is more skilled than Floyd but not by a noticable margin. I will put Selimov slightly above Floyd and equal to Mares in terms of pressure.
> The thing is Floyd had slightly better defense but overall Selimov and Mayweather are interchangeable in terms of skill set.


speaking the truth once again Felix


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Luf said:


> Fukin stupid thread.
> 
> We don't know how good loma is going to be.
> 
> It would be like doing a Rico v Donaire thread 3 years ago. This shit can't be assumed, it should be proven in the ring.


Great skills are great skills, and Lomachenko has plenty of it.
People talk about his lack of experience....Jesus, the guy is 25 and already is 2 time Olympic and 2 World Champion. I would say that this guy is mentaly stronger, more preparated than most of the pro fighters in the game today...

He´ll struggle because the fight is going to have 12 rounds ? Meh, anyone can adapt to that with a good training.....


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Vic said:


> Great skills are great skills, and Lomachenko has plenty of it.
> People talk about his lack of experience....Jesus, the guy is 25 and already is 2 time Olympic and 2 World Champion. I would say that this guy is mentaly stronger, more preparated than most of the pro fighters in the game today...
> 
> He´ll struggle because the fight is going to have 12 rounds ? Meh, anyone can adapt to that with a good training.....


Yup. Loma apparently is already sparring 15 rounders against middleweights. The only way he won't be as good as we think is if he gasses somewhat like Oscar. But even if he's as gassed as Oscar post 9 rounds, the first 9 rounds are going to be impressive.


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Yeah, I mean, people overstate some things like the 12 round experience.....really, try to think about it! Is it really a big issue ? 
The guy knows how to fight, just like Rigondeaux......they know how to punch, they have great defensive skills, you can see it, they are used, very used I should say, with competition, competitiveness is part of them just like their heart and their brain.

Put Lomachenko today to fight against someone like Chris John and I would put my money on Loma....:deal


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Only I was impressed with the coldness Rigondeaux showed against Donaire ? 
Pure mental strenght (only experienced guys have that). Donaire on the other hand looked very unstable...


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)




----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Yeah, but Tillman was not a great amateur......he won 1 gold medal but it´s diferent when you have someone like Rigondeaux and Lomachenko, both so victorious.
Wasn´t Tillman a bit problematic outside of the ring ? He could have been better as a fighter...


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Vic said:


> Only I was impressed with the coldness Rigondeaux showed against Donaire ?
> Pure mental strenght (only experienced guys have that). Donaire on the other hand looked very unstable...


Yup, I think I mentioned earlier that it's Rigo's belief in his amateur background that gives him confidence and calmness over anyone. Mentally he's an experienced veteran. It's nice to see that Loma's mentality is the same. 
Lomachenko is as experienced of a *boxer* that you can get for his age.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!


oh man I'm glad you're back to see this sh*t


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

Nobody fucks with a 130lb Mayweather in a H2H sense.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> oh man I'm glad you're back to see this sh*t


What up pimp. I got banned for being a G, while this faggotry persists.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> What up pimp. I got banned for being a G, while this faggotry persists.


What up man and yeah I know how that is :lol:

We got people dissing Mayweather's resume over a fighter who's 0-0 :blood


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Obviously the thread title is just to get a reaction........but Lomachenko is just as talented as my guy Rigo....


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Vic said:


> Obviously the thread title is just to get a reaction........but Lomachenko is just as talented as my guy Rigo....


he's good, but I'd rather we wait before we start making claims that he'd win a 10-2 decision of a man who many view as the GOAT at 130 :hatton


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> he's good, but I'd rather we wait before we start making claims that he'd win a 10-2 decision of a man who many view as the GOAT at 130 :hatton


Of course. I didn´t read the thread tbh, but if people are seriously discussing that he would beat Floyd, well, that´s not smart...
But he´s better than good imo, bball. 2 gold medals, 2 world championships, only 25 years old ? And his skills look great.....so, I understand the high expectation....

Like myself, you picked Rigo against Donaire as well. In 1 year or something, Lomachenko will have a win like the one against Donaire, I believe.....I´m just glad that he is turing pro.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Vic said:


> Of course. I didn´t read the thread tbh, but if people are seriously discussing that he would beat Floyd, well, that´s not smart...
> But he´s better than good imo, bball. 2 gold medals, 2 world championships, only 25 years old ? And his skills look great.....so, I understand the high expectation....
> 
> Like myself, you picked Rigo against Donaire as well. In 1 year or something, Lomachenko will have a win like the one against Donaire, I believe.....I´m just glad that he is turing pro.


Yeah I agree with you and I mostly agree with everybody who talk about how talented he is and how much potential he has. But I was just trying to put this back in check



> :lol: Much stiffer competition, good one. Lomachenko 396-1, 2 golds, 2 worlds, 2 different weight classes at the age of 24. Mayweather, 84-6, a bronze medal. Oh America





> It's not a positive that Floyd is forced to adapt to win fights, he should be able to do it from the start of the fight. There's no pride in allowing Zab Judah to beat you for four rounds, there's no pride in letting Castillo beat you, ancient Cotto and DLH taking rounds, letting ancient Mosley rock to your boots... why is it that Floyd fans see these things as positives? If he was as unparalleled as you say then why do those things happen in the first place?





> I don't think it's smart to ever hate on a fighter because of their fans.. I'll cool it with the hype once Loma is more appreciated. I'm just being honest here and stating my opinion, if people disagree or come up with valid points to dispute what I'm saying then I'll say okay.. I'm not a blind fan. I truly think Lomachenko is the most complete all round boxer I've ever seen, I'm a big fan of defence and I've never seen anyone combine it with offence in the way Lomachenko does, apart from maybe a prime Mike Tyson. Lomachenko isn't just that though, he can be slick defensively ala Whitaker, he can be flashy and explosive like Jones or Gamboa, he can run circles around his opponents like Pac, he can bang the body like JCC, Bute, Rigo etc. he can literally do it all. You can't even say what style he is, you talk adaptable and Lomachenko is the definition.
> People see the amateur and pro ranks as completely different sports and as a long time fan of the amateur game I know for sure that's untrue, particularly in recent years. That's why I'm a bit vocal, people just don't know. The same shit happened with Rigo, everybody was claiming that he's just an amateur blah blah. Boxing skills are boxing skills whether amateur or professional. There's a reason why the Whitaker's, Ward's and Ali's won gold medals.


I'll leave the poster anonymous, but it's not hard to tell who it is :yep


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

:lol:


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Sam Maxwell confirmed recently that Lomachenko is a big puncher. 
Look how undersized Loma looked compared to Maxwell. Why does Loma look small compared to his opponents in WSB and 2012 olympics? I guess some of them are 135+lbers, Ramirez for example debuted at 140! Yet these guys are saying he hits hard.


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

dyna said:


> I haven't followed the whole discussion but Muhammad Ali has also been stopped by cuts in the amateurs.
> It doesn't really mean that much.


teenaged, bambi-legged Cassius Clay with no headgear and small gloves? I'll take your word that it happened...

Selimov is like 30, fighting with headgear and giant pillows for gloves. It's not really comparable.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

SJS20 said:


> Nobody fucks with a 130lb Mayweather in a H2H sense.


Because he beat Corrales? I understand why some people think I'm insane but I also understand boxing better than most and I've seen more Lomachenko than most. People saying nobody beats Floyd at 130 are not being objective, he was there for a couple of fights, Corrales was tailor made for him. Corrales was a good fighter sure but to say a victory over him in any manner indicates you're an ATG at that weight? That's seriously stupid. Roy Jones at super middle.. that's understandable because of the dominant Toney victory. But this Floyd stuff at super featherweight is the equivalent of saying that Roy H2H is unbeatable at super middle because of the manner of his victory against Vinny Paz. It's pure speculation, and that's the issue people have with what I'm saying about Loma. It's alright for people to say outlandish things about Floyd not based on reality but when it comes to Lomachenko I'm just being a nuthugger? People really are stupid.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> oh man I'm glad you're back to see this sh*t


Yeah, now you have a fat white guy who pretends he's black here to suck Floyd's other testicle, and you can both show how loyal you are to your man together. All this time and he still hasn't beaten anyone (Corrales is his best win? :lol, I'm looking forward to what you guys have to say after Canelo beats him :hey


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Vic said:


> Great skills are great skills, and Lomachenko has plenty of it.
> People talk about his lack of experience....Jesus, the guy is 25 and already is 2 time Olympic and 2 World Champion. I would say that this guy is mentaly stronger, more preparated than most of the pro fighters in the game today...
> 
> He´ll struggle because the fight is going to have 12 rounds ? Meh, anyone can adapt to that with a good training.....


maybe he is but to pit someone with no pro experience against arguably the goat at that weight is stupid for me. I'm not saying he won't end up that good, I'm saying why make the assumption, just let him learn.


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Luf said:


> maybe he is but to pit someone with no pro experience against arguably the goat at that weight is stupid for me. I'm not saying he won't end up that good, I'm saying why make the assumption, just let him learn.


I was not talking about Floyd vs Lomachenko though.......just making an observation on this controversy that people talked a lot about Rigondeaux and now Lomachenko.....


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Yeah, now you have a fat white guy who pretends he's black here to suck Floyd's other testicle, and you can both show how loyal you are to your man together.* All this time and he still hasn't beaten anyone* (Corrales is his best win? :lol, I'm looking forward to what you guys have to say after Canelo beats him :hey


Lomachenko has literally beaten nobody :rofl


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Lomachenko has literally beaten nobody :rofl


Do you expect Lomachenko to have 44 fights and not fight an elite fighter in their prime? Floyd's opposition is a joke, people criticised Roy's resume but he had Toney and Hopkins, and he knocked out his less than stellar opposition. Floyd has Corrales, Hatton? 12 round snoozefests against the likes of Baldomir and Guerrero? :lol: 
44 fights deep and we still have no idea how good he is. Floyd is everything that is wrong with the pro game, all hype and a refusal to fight the best. Canelo whoops him :deal


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Do you expect Lomachenko to have 44 fights and not fight an elite fighter in their prime? Floyd's opposition is a joke, people criticised Roy's resume but he had Toney and Hopkins, and he knocked out his less than stellar opposition. Floyd has Corrales, Hatton? 12 round snoozefests against the likes of Baldomir and Guerrero? :lol:
> 44 fights deep and we still have no idea how good he is. Floyd is everything that is wrong with the pro game, all hype and a refusal to fight the best. Canelo whoops him :deal


ok, I'm being trolled now


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> ok, I'm being trolled now


That logic and truth is hard to deal with isn't it?


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> That logic and truth is hard to deal with isn't it?


yes the logic that a guy with over 20 title fights that range over 17 years has beaten no elite fighters is asinine.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Yeah i remember when I used to rape this dealt with retardon ESB

Nobody knew who he was over there because the Mods on ESB didnt tolerate/encourage so much faggotry


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> yes the logic that a guy with over 20 title fights that range over 17 years has beaten no elite fighters is asinine.


Yeah and Broner is an ATG because he's a 3 weight division champ. Sven Ottke - 21 title defences, no blueprint and ATG at super middle. How about Michalczewski? 48-0 and 23 title defences, so many elite fighters on there. How about all the beasts Calzaghe defeated when he defended his title 21 times? I know you can't be that stupid.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Yeah i remember when I used to rape this dealt with retardon ESB
> 
> Nobody knew who he was over there because the Mods on ESB didnt tolerate/encourage so much faggotry


:lol: The only thing you're raping are the cheeseburgers and tanning lotion you fat white boy.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Yeah and Broner is an ATG because he's a 3 weight division champ. Sven Ottke - 21 title defences, no blueprint and ATG at super middle. How about Michalczewski? 48-0 and 23 title defences, so many elite fighters on there. How about all the beasts Calzaghe defeated when he defended his title 21 times? I know you can't be that stupid.


:lol: has any of those guys beaten Genaro Hernandez, Castillo 2x, Corrales, Mosley, Oscar, Judah, Hatton, Chavez, Carlos Hernandez, Cotto, Marquez etc.

Lomachenko is a good fighter. He'll go on to have a good career, but I doubt he'll even beat Mikey Garcia


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Yeah and Broner is an ATG because he's a 3 weight division champ. Sven Ottke - 21 title defences, no blueprint and ATG at super middle. How about Michalczewski? 48-0 and 23 title defences, so many elite fighters on there. How about all the beasts Calzaghe defeated when he defended his title 21 times? I know you can't be that stupid.


Hernandez
Vargas
Corrales
Famoso
Chavez
Castillo
Gatti
Mitchell
Judah
Baldomir
De La Hoys
Hatton
Marquez
Mosley
Ortiz 
Cotto
Guerrero

Thats 17 world champions defeated through 5 divisions

Corralss and Castillo were arguably the greatest lightweights of their generation

Corrales would walk lomenchenko down and massacre is anus.

Castillo id be just plain afraid for his little eurobum life

Seriously shut up clown and learn boxing.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> :lol: The only thing you're raping are the cheeseburgers and tanning lotion you fat white boy.


Fat lol? I guarantee im in better shape than you Frodo


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> :lol: has any of those guys beaten Genaro Hernandez, Castillo 2x, Corrales, Mosley, Oscar, Judah, Hatton, Chavez, Carlos Hernandez, Cotto, Marquez etc.
> 
> Lomachenko is a good fighter. He'll go on to have a good career, but I doubt he'll even beat Mikey Garcia


Calzaghe beat Jones and Hopkins, he's clearly greater :lol:
Nobody can answer me what Floyd's best win is, because his resume is embarrassing. He's the US Calzaghe, fans love those 0's. Shit at least Cazaghe has prime Kessler > anything on Floyd's resume.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Hernandez
> Vargas
> Corrales
> Famoso
> ...


Best fighter he beat in their prime? Floyd peaked at Corrales/Castillo (even though Castillo beat him the first time round), he's clearly up there with SRR :lol:
It's you who needs to learn boxing, it might help if you stop fantasising about black testicles and accept that you're a fat white slob. Once you accept yourself maybe you can start being honest about the world around you.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Calzaghe beat Jones and Hopkins, he's clearly greater :lol:
> Nobody can answer me what Floyd's best win is, because his resume is embarrassing. He's the US Calzaghe, fans love those 0's. Shit at least Cazaghe has prime Kessler > anything on Floyd's resume.


:rofl are you serious with that shit? Corrales and Castillo were both in their prime and better than fricken Kessler. And people have told you Floyd's best win multiple times.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Calzaghe beat Jones and Hopkins, he's clearly greater :lol:
> Nobody can answer me what Floyd's best win is, because his resume is embarrassing. He's the US Calzaghe, fans love those 0's. Shit at least Cazaghe has prime Kessler > anything on Floyd's resume.


Bwahahahahahahahaha! Somebodies daddies nutsack got too close to the microwave


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Fat lol? I guarantee im in better shape than you Frodo


We've seen the pictures of your tuck shop lady arms in that dim photo (trying to disguise the fact you're white and fat). You're fooling nobody fatty :lol:


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Hernandez
> Vargas
> Corrales
> Famoso
> ...


with a straight face. Can anybody look at this and tell me Lomachenko survives 12 rounds with Castillo


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> :rofl are you serious with that shit? Corrales and Castillo were both in their prime and better than fricken Kessler. And people have told you Floyd's best win multiple times.


What, Corrales? That's absolutely pathetic when you're discussing a fighter in an all time sense if that's your best victory.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> with a straight face. Can anybody look at this and tell me Lomachenko survives 12 rounds with Castillo


He went life and death in that retarded ass wbc or whatever the fuck with some eurobum

Prime Castillo ends him, maybe literally


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> What, Corrales? That's absolutely pathetic when you're discussing a fighter in an all time sense if that's your best victory.


The Klitshko brothers don't have as good as a resume or better wins than Mayweather, but they're still atgs. Rocky Marciano is an atg, but he doesn't have a great win over a prime atg. 
This is really irrelevant when discussing Floyd vs a 0-0 fighter :lol:


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> What, Corrales? That's absolutely pathetic when you're discussing a fighter in an all time sense if that's your best victory.


Corrales and or Castillo. Both were 1-2 best lightweights of their era depending on where you rank them

Corrales was a multi-weight champ. Castillo maybe the best lightweight of the last 15 years depending on where you rank Marquez

Whats wrong with these victories eurofag?


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> He went life and death in that retarded ass wbc or whatever the fuck with some eurobum
> 
> Prime Castillo ends him, maybe literally


aw you got to give the greatest boxer of all time more credit than that :rofl


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> The Klitshko brothers don't have as good as a resume or better wins than Mayweather, but they're still atgs. Rocky Marciano is an atg, but he doesn't have a great win over a prime atg.
> This is really irrelevant when discussing Floyd vs a 0-0 fighter :lol:


Lennox Lewis
Julio Cesar Chavez
Marco Antonio Barrera

Ect ect

Damn we better stop hurtin this boy


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> with a straight face. Can anybody look at this and tell me Lomachenko survives 12 rounds with Castillo


:lol:
Posts a fight at an unimportant stage of the tournament, starting at the time his opponent landed his only punch of the fight, and his opponent started his pro career at 140. Poor attempt. How about I post video of Mosley and Corley rocking Floyd? Judah knocking Floyd down and winning the first four rounds until he faded (Mayweather adapted, sure thing), ancient Cotto and DLH bashing Floyd, Floyd running for his life against Baldomir? Since you want to post irrelevant things why don't we post the footage of Floyd getting bashed in sparring against Spadafora? Floyd was the one talking about beating up Corrales in sparring before their fight, sparring obviously matters to Floyd.
With a straight face. Can anybody tell me that Mayweather is up there with the Sugar Ray's? The facts are on my side, the hugging of the nuts are on your side. Just be objective man, admit that Mayweather has had a pathetic career based on his apparent talent.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Corrales and or Castillo. Both were 1-2 best lightweights of their era depending on where you rank them
> 
> Corrales was a multi-weight champ. Castillo maybe the best lightweight of the last 15 years depending on where you rank Marquez
> 
> Whats wrong with these victories eurofag?


They're fine victories when you're on your way up, but when you have to hang your hat on those victories at the end of your career as being your defining fights then you're not the ATG you and your fans proclaim you to be.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> They're fine victories when you're on your way up, but when you have to hang your hat on those victories at the end of your career as being your defining fights then you're not the ATG you and your fans proclaim you to be.


Mayweather will hang his hat on longevity, being 15 years in the game. Being in the top 5 p4p since 99 and at 36 considered the best in the world.

And please tell be Bilbo who in the last 20 years has had better 3 victories Hernandez, Corrales, and Castillo before they were 24

Kessler? Bwhahahahaha


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Lennox Lewis
> Julio Cesar Chavez
> Marco Antonio Barrera
> 
> ...


:yep Floyd had a better record than Lomachenko when he beat Felipe Garcia



Dealt_with said:


> :lol:
> Posts a fight at an unimportant stage of the tournament, starting at the time his opponent landed his only punch of the fight, and his opponent started his pro career at 140. Poor attempt. How about I post video of Mosley and Corley rocking Floyd? Judah knocking Floyd down and winning the first four rounds until he faded (Mayweather adapted, sure thing), ancient Cotto and DLH bashing Floyd, Floyd running for his life against Baldomir? Since you want to post irrelevant things why don't we post the footage of Floyd getting bashed in sparring against Spadafora? Floyd was the one talking about beating up Corrales in sparring before their fight, sparring obviously matters to Floyd.
> With a straight face. Can anybody tell me that Mayweather is up there with the Sugar Ray's? The facts are on my side, the hugging of the nuts are on your side. Just be objective man, admit that Mayweather has had a pathetic career based on his apparent talent.


What you don't see is Ramirez was pressuring the hell out of Lomachenko, tagging him to the body repeatedly and wearing him down. Under amateur rules Lomachenko won. Under pro rules, Ramirez won that and if it was a 12 round fight, Lomachenko would have been knocked the fuck out.

But you want to diss Castillo who's a tougher and more intelligent fighter. Floyd had 2 tough fights with him, but Castillo would eat Lomachenko alive.

and no Floyd isn't up there with SRL or SRR. SRR is number 1 all time and SRL is in the top 12 imo. It doesn't take that type of talent to beat Lomachenko.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Mayweather will hang his hat on longevity, being 15 years in the game. Being in the top 5 p4p since 99 and at 36 considered the best in the world.
> 
> And please tell be Bilbo who in the last 20 years has had better 3 victories Hernandez, Corrales, and Castillo before they were 24
> 
> Kessler? Bwhahahahaha


He's considered best in the world by people who are wrestling fans. So Floyd's best work was before he was 24 years old, gotcha. His career after that doesn't matter, I see. It's not hard to have longevity when you've had 5 fights in the last 6 years, against faded names, fighters you made join Michiganwarrior at maccas to make weight for the fight, and never has-beens.
Any objective boxing fan should have Ward, Rigo and JMM above Floyd, he's done shit in recent years. That's why Canelo could be too much for him, Floyd better hope Canelo does have stamina issues.


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> :lol:
> Posts a fight at an unimportant stage of the tournament, starting at the time his opponent landed his only punch of the fight, and his opponent started his pro career at 140. Poor attempt. How about I post video of Mosley and Corley rocking Floyd? Judah knocking Floyd down and winning the first four rounds until he faded (Mayweather adapted, sure thing), ancient Cotto and DLH bashing Floyd, Floyd running for his life against Baldomir? Since you want to post irrelevant things why don't we post the footage of Floyd getting bashed in sparring against Spadafora? Floyd was the one talking about beating up Corrales in sparring before their fight, sparring obviously matters to Floyd.
> With a straight face. Can anybody tell me that Mayweather is up there with the Sugar Ray's? The facts are on my side, the hugging of the nuts are on your side. Just be objective man, admit that Mayweather has had a pathetic career based on his apparent talent.


If you want to say that Floyd is overrated based upon his resume, you can:t then back a fighter with no professional resume to compare. Or if you want, list Lomachenko;s best 44 amateur wins and compare it to Floyd;s career. You;d still look very foolish, but at least you;d have some basis for this shit thread.

Anyway, I;m not contributing to his bullshit anymore.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

This should not have gotten to 17 pages.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> :yep Floyd had a better record than Lomachenko when he beat Felipe Garcia
> 
> What you don't see is Ramirez was pressuring the hell out of Lomachenko, tagging him to the body repeatedly and wearing him down. Under amateur rules Lomachenko won. Under pro rules, Ramirez won that and if it was a 12 round fight, Lomachenko would have been knocked the fuck out.
> 
> ...


Castillo hadn't even fought anyone when he first beat Floyd unofficially, and he went on to get knocked out by Corrales and Hatton so let's not pretend he was something he wasn't. And you have no idea how Ramirez will turn out, or how much better Castillo is than him.
How do you have Ramirez beating Lomachenko in that fight under pro rules when Lomachenko dropped him with a right hook in the first round? Lomachenko clearly never got out of first gear and still won the fight comfortably, while Ramirez was fighting as if his life depended on it. And you conclude from that that he was going to knock Lomachenko out? :lol:
Find something else to discredit Lomachenko, because an early round tournament fight that he clearly won without breaking a sweat isn't good for your credibility.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> If you want to say that Floyd is overrated based upon his resume, you can:t then back a fighter with no professional resume to compare. Or if you want, list Lomachenko;s best 44 amateur wins and compare it to Floyd;s career. You;d still look very foolish, but at least you;d have some basis for this shit thread.
> 
> Anyway, I;m not contributing to his bullshit anymore.


I'm saying talent for talent, skill for skill, Lomachenko is superior. He'll have the better professional record (not hard) and when all's said and done Lomachenko will be looked back as the favourite against Mayweather at any weight. Wait and see.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> I'm saying talent for talent, skill for skill, Lomachenko is superior. He'll have the better professional record (not hard) and when all's said and done Lomachenko will be looked back as the favourite against Mayweather at any weight. Wait and see.


Bwahahahahaha. Tell you what ***. Arent you saying Canelo beats Floyd. Lifetime ban bet Floyd wins


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Bwahahahahaha. Tell you what ***. Arent you saying Canelo beats Floyd. Lifetime ban bet Floyd wins


I'm not doing that you tard, I favour Canelo (60/40) but it's not like it's Lomachenko versing Mayweather at 130, I'd take that lifetime bet in a second.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Castillo hadn't even fought anyone when he first beat Floyd unofficially, and he went on to get knocked out by Corrales and Hatton so let's not pretend he was something he wasn't. And you have no idea how Ramirez will turn out, or how much better Castillo is than him.
> How do you have Ramirez beating Lomachenko in that fight under pro rules when Lomachenko dropped him with a right hook in the first round? Lomachenko clearly never got out of first gear and still won the fight comfortably, while Ramirez was fighting as if his life depended on it. And you conclude from that that he was going to knock Lomachenko out? :lol:
> Find something else to discredit Lomachenko, because an early round tournament fight that he clearly won without breaking a sweat isn't good for your credibility.


Yeah Floyd fought Castillo before he got his best wins. He was in his prime of course :lol: And Castillo was shot when he fought Hatton and Corrales is a HOF himself. Castillo beat Corrales, Casamayor, Julio Diaz, Juan Lazcano and Stevie Johnston


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Castillo hadn't even fought anyone when he first beat Floyd unofficially, and he went on to get knocked out by Corrales and Hatton so let's not pretend he was something he wasn't. And you have no idea how Ramirez will turn out, or how much better Castillo is than him.
> How do you have Ramirez beating Lomachenko in that fight under pro rules when Lomachenko dropped him with a right hook in the first round? Lomachenko clearly never got out of first gear and still won the fight comfortably, while Ramirez was fighting as if his life depended on it. And you conclude from that that he was going to knock Lomachenko out? :lol:
> Find something else to discredit Lomachenko, because an early round tournament fight that he clearly won without breaking a sweat isn't good for your credibility.


Castillo beat Stevie Johnston, Jorge Paez and Cesar bezan before he fought Floyd and would go on to lascano, casamayor, julio diaz before splitting 2 fights with Corrales

Please dont discuss anyones boxing knowledge or credibility when you mention a loss to Hatton way past prime

Clearly a *** who started followin boxing in 2007


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> I'm not doing that you tard, I favour Canelo (60/40) but it's not like it's Lomachenko versing Mayweather at 130, I'd take that lifetime bet in a second.


Exactly cowardly euro


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Castillo beat Stevie Johnston, Jorge Paez and Cesar bezan before he fought Floyd and would go on to lascano, casamayor, julio diaz before splitting 2 fights with Corrales
> 
> Please dont discuss anyones boxing knowledge or credibility when you mention a loss to Hatton way past prime
> 
> Clearly a *** who started followin boxing in 2007


well you put it better than I could :deal


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> I'm saying talent for talent, skill for skill, Lomachenko is superior. He'll have the better professional record (not hard) and when all's said and done Lomachenko will be looked back as the favourite against Mayweather at any weight. Wait and see.


So then the resumes really don;t matter here? Or is it only Floyd;s rsume up for discussion? List the amateur opponents that were better than people like Corrales and Hernandez. You have 397 fights to choose from.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> So then the resumes really don;t matter here? Or is it only Floyd;s rsume up for discussion? List the amateur opponents that were better than people like Corrales and Hernandez. You have 397 fights to choose from.


Have a look at how the pro careers of Verdejo, Ramirez and Valdez develop. Not to mention the Cubans and Russians he beat over the years, if they turn/turned pro.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Castillo beat Stevie Johnston, Jorge Paez and Cesar bezan before he fought Floyd and would go on to lascano, casamayor, julio diaz before splitting 2 fights with Corrales
> 
> Please dont discuss anyones boxing knowledge or credibility when you mention a loss to Hatton way past prime
> 
> Clearly a *** who started followin boxing in 2007


What prime fighters worth a damn did Floyd beat? Just answer me that very simple question fat boy. Oh Castillo was really really good, the equivalent of Ray Leonard and Tommy Hearns, Floyd was just injured leave him alone. Floyd is so good at adapting to opponents who are kicking his ass that shouldn't be kicking his ass :lol:


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Have a look at how the pro careers of Verdejo, Ramirez and Valdez develop. Not to mention the Cubans and Russians he beat over the years, if they turn/turned pro.


In their wildest dreams, each of these fighters would enjoy only a fraction of the success of Floyd;s best 130lb opposition.
And if any of them reached the level of Corrales, you;d be right here bumping this thread and proclaiming the greatness of Lomachenko;s opposition.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> In their wildest dreams, each of these fighters would enjoy only a fraction of the success of Floyd;s best 130lb opposition.
> And if any of them reached the level of Corrales, you;d be right here bumping this thread and proclaiming the greatness of Lomachenko;s opposition.


I think Verdejo will have a career at least as good as Corrales. And we know that unlike Floyd, Lomachenko wants to fight the best. Rigo, Gamboa, Garcia, Mares, Donaire etc. are all fights that could potentially be made in the future. Lomachenko will fight better opposition than Floyd, win or lose.


----------



## Blanco (Aug 29, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> This should not have gotten to 17 pages.


If you had your settings on 40 posts per page you'll only be on the 7th page.:yep


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> :yep *Floyd had a better record than Lomachenko when he beat Felipe Garcia *
> 
> What you don't see is Ramirez was pressuring the hell out of Lomachenko, tagging him to the body repeatedly and wearing him down. Under amateur rules Lomachenko won. Under pro rules, Ramirez won that and if it was a 12 round fight, Lomachenko would have been knocked the fuck out.
> 
> ...


I disagree brah. Loma's semi-pro 6-0 record (those 30 rounds) shits on Mayweather's first 30 round tin-can bonanza (up to Garcia), and in fact shits on Mayweather's resume up to the Genaro fight.

This was a highly competitive fight. I didn't see any wearing down going on. 
Ramirez is 5'10, 140lbs at a YOUNG age. When he finishes he'll be 154, walks around at a much higher weight, fighting a little'un like Lomachenko. It's kinda like Soto Karass fighting Rosado. Karass btw > Rosado. Nevertheless, under pro rules, Loma would have approached the fight differently. I didn't see Loma switching up or changing gears, and it was enough to land more cleanly which really is a focal point of amateur scoring. Otherwise watch the Maxwell-Loma fight in WSB. That size difference looks like Pac-Marg, Loma was just going at it with a variety of punches around different areas so had more freedom there. What you gotta realise is that Ramirez was doing well in terms of aggression, but it looks better than it actually was.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

As for Selimov. Selimov is an elite amateur guys! Stop bashing Selimov. 
The ONLY reason why he didn't win gold at Olympics is because Lomachenko beat him in the second round 14-7. Even the commentators were saying that this is the real gold medal match.

Selimov has 1xWorld Gold, 1xWorld Bronze (lost to Pedraza but Selimov will be a better pro than Pedraza), 2xEuro Golds.
Styles make fights and Selimov on the amateur stage is the rival. 
Selimov will be at least is as good as Victor Ortiz level IMO.
Loma still beat Selimov clearly in their 5 rounder. Selimov will ALWAYS make it competitive.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I disagree brah. Loma's semi-pro 6-0 record (those 30 rounds) shits on Mayweather's first 30 round tin-can bonanza (up to Garcia), and in fact shits on Mayweather's resume up to the Genaro fight.
> 
> This was a highly competitive fight. I didn't see any wearing down going on.
> Ramirez is 5'10, 140lbs at a YOUNG age. When he finishes he'll be 154, walks around at a much higher weight, fighting a little'un like Lomachenko. It's kinda like Soto Karass fighting Rosado. Karass btw > Rosado. Nevertheless, under pro rules, Loma would have approached the fight differently. I didn't see Loma switching up or changing gears, and it was enough to land more cleanly which really is a focal point of amateur scoring. Otherwise watch the Maxwell-Loma fight in WSB. That size difference looks like Pac-Marg, Loma was just going at it with a variety of punches around different areas so had more freedom there. What you gotta realise is that Ramirez was doing well in terms of aggression, but it looks better than it actually was.


Baahahahahahaha another kid with a disability


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Baahahahahahaha another kid with a disability


I guess what's making you disagree is that you think Mayweather's win over Felipe Garcia is greater than Loma's win over Domenico Valentino at WSB - because that's the point I'm making.

And I'm also making the point that Loma still beat a 140lber and under pro rules, he'll actually perform better against him.

I highly doubt you know anything much about Loma. Ya Dig! Blat!!!


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I disagree brah. Loma's semi-pro 6-0 record (those 30 rounds) shits on Mayweather's first 30 round tin-can bonanza (up to Garcia), and in fact shits on Mayweather's resume up to the Genaro fight.
> 
> This was a highly competitive fight. I didn't see any wearing down going on.
> Ramirez is 5'10, 140lbs at a YOUNG age. When he finishes he'll be 154, walks around at a much higher weight, fighting a little'un like Lomachenko. It's kinda like Soto Karass fighting Rosado. Karass btw > Rosado. Nevertheless, under pro rules, Loma would have approached the fight differently. I didn't see Loma switching up or changing gears, and it was enough to land more cleanly which really is a focal point of amateur scoring. Otherwise watch the Maxwell-Loma fight in WSB. That size difference looks like Pac-Marg, Loma was just going at it with a variety of punches around different areas so had more freedom there. What you gotta realise is that Ramirez was doing well in terms of aggression, but it looks better than it actually was.


yeah I didn't really mean what I said about Felipe Garcia. That was just my way to responding to extreme retardation :lol:

And Floyd moved up and fought Castillo who's a big lightweight in his first fight. I used the fight with Ramirez just to give an example that Lomachenko wouldn't just blast through Castillo. At least not the current version of him.

When Lomachenko starts fighting elite guys, then we can start making some of these claims. I know me and you mostly agree on most of this stuff though


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> yeah I didn't really mean what I said about Felipe Garcia. That was just my way to responding to extreme retardation :lol:
> 
> And Floyd moved up and fought Castillo who's a big lightweight in his first fight. I used the fight with Ramirez just to give an example that Lomachenko wouldn't just blast through Castillo. At least not the current version of him.
> 
> When Lomachenko starts fighting elite guys, then we can start making some of these claims. I know me and you mostly agree on most of this stuff though


Yeah we do mostly agree. I think it'll take more than a few 12 rounders of experience for Loma to beat Castillo, but I'm sure he'd be able to _eventually_. Castillo is tough as nails.
To be able to say that today in the new generation is actually truly exciting...a guy who I think will be able to eventually beat the likes of a Castillo.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Yeah we do mostly agree. I think it'll take more than a few 12 rounders of experience for Loma to beat Castillo. Castillo is tough as nails.


yeah Castillo wasn't like your typical pressure fighter you have nowadays. :yep


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Castillo was great, would be tough against anyone in history....


----------



## Brnxhands (Jun 11, 2013)

how can this even be a discussion is beyond me


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> yeah Castillo wasn't like your typical pressure fighter you have nowadays. :yep


Thanks, good analysis.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Brnxhands said:


> how can this even be a discussion is beyond me


Well it actually started as a troll thread from Abraham. I hold the position that it would take around 5+ professional 12 rounders for Loma to possibly be able to beat a 130lb Mayweather. I genuinely think this is possible looking at his skillset.

But sure, everything is pretty premature right now.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I guess what's making you disagree is that you think Mayweather's win over Felipe Garcia is greater than Loma's win over Domenico Valentino at WSB - because that's the point I'm making.
> 
> And I'm also making the point that Loma still beat a 140lber and under pro rules, he'll actually perform better against him.
> 
> I highly doubt you know anything much about Loma. Ya Dig! Blat!!!


Who? Sorry i follow real professional man boxing.

Dont give a fuck about head gear and pillow glove championships

So i dont know who the fuck that guy is, but i do know that a prime Castillo would bend Lomanchenko over and make him his bitch


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Who? Sorry i follow real professional man boxing.
> 
> Dont give a fuck about head gear and pillow glove championships
> 
> So i dont know who the fuck that guy is, but i do know that a prime Castillo would bend Lomanchenko over and make him his bitch


:verysad atsch


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

There people were cussing the shit out of Loma saying he couldn't beat someone like Corrales, and that amateurs is a pile of shit - i.e MichiganWarrior talk.

Just found out Corrales himself was an accomplished amateur, who didn't win a medal however at the Olympics...because the beast that he fought was just too slick. (Marco Rudolph)...

...Loma shits on Corrales as an amateur, and looks more skillful than Corrales.


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> There people were cussing the shit out of Loma saying he couldn't beat someone like Corrales, and that amateurs is a pile of shit - i.e MichiganWarrior talk.
> 
> Just found out Corrales himself was an accomplished amateur, who didn't win a medal however at the Olympics...because the beast that he fought was just too slick. (Marco Rudolph)...
> 
> ...Loma shits on Corrales as an amateur, and looks more skillful than Corrales.


Actually, Corrales loss to Marco Rudolph in the amateurs perfectly illustrates the point that many have (apparently in vain) been trying to make.

Did Marco Rudolph go pro? Yes, he did.

He was 13-1 and in his last fight lost to Artur Grigorian via 6th round TKO. The _very same_ Artur Grigorian who Marco Rudolph _defeated_ in the 1991 Amateur World Championships in Sydney Australia. (Grigorian also had a win over Shane Mosely in the amateurs. Rudolph had a win over Oscar De La Hoya!)

What about Grigorian?

He did pretty well in the pros until he ran in to Acelino Freitas in 2004 who defeated him by wide UD.

In his very next fight, guess who Freitas faced. You won't believe it. Can you guess?

Diego Corrales. And Corrales won via 10th round TKO.

To recap, Rudolph beat Grigorian and Corrales in the amateurs. In the pros, Grigorian KO'd Rudolph. Freitas beat Grigorian and then Corrales stopped Freitas.

Who was the best amateur? Rudolph. Marco Rudolph: conqueror of Grigorian, Corrales, De La Hoya. But he was the worst pro.

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Human:6427


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

conradically said:


> Actually, Corrales loss to Marco Rudolph in the amateurs perfectly illustrates the point that many have (apparently in vain) been trying to make.
> 
> Did Marco Rudolph go pro? Yes, he did.
> 
> ...


:lol: check mate


----------



## Royal-T-Bag (Jun 5, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> There people were cussing the shit out of Loma saying he couldn't beat someone like Corrales, and that amateurs is a pile of shit - i.e MichiganWarrior talk.
> 
> Just found out Corrales himself was an accomplished amateur, who didn't win a medal however at the Olympics...because the beast that he fought was just too slick. (Marco Rudolph)...
> 
> ...Loma shits on Corrales as an amateur, and looks more skillful than Corrales.


yeah but it doesn't work that way there's numerous examples of dudes being mediocre ams who've gone on to be HOF quality fighters and also numerous examples of Olympic champs who have gone on to accomplish nothing as pros. If 130lbs Corrales vs Lomachenko was made tomorrow Corrales would be a 10-1 favorite. And at this point it's fucking ludicrous to call Lomachenko a better fighter than Corrales who was a p4p dude. As much as some of you want to believe ams are so important they do not count for shit in the end. Mark Breland ain't in the HOF and he actually won a title as a pro. If Lomachenko retired tomorrow no one would remember him because ams don't count in the end. They're training grounds that's it. People don't remember the best amateur and junior players of all time in any sport unless they go on to dominate the pro ranks, boxing is no exception. And unlike other sports where the ams and pros are basically the same game just at a higher level, pro boxing and am boxing are night and day with many rule changes, a change in the most successful winning strategies to employ, less protection, rougher fighting with slacker refereeing and fights becoming 3 times as long.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

What people can't seem to comprehend is that anything can happen in the amateurs, lesser fighters can sneak away with wins over far superior fighters (Ogogo vs Khytrov for example). Everybody knows that Khytrov would bash Ogogo in the pro game, because he has a more pro style and he's the bigger, stronger guy, woth the greater amateur career on a whole.
When you look at an amateur career you need to look at it as a whole, and how they fought. Lomachenko fought every style and beat every style, predominantly in a pro style. He likes to fight on the inside with body punches, hooks and uppercuts while slipping and parrying shots. He's not a lanky southpaw just trying to score points on the outside. He is a master boxer plain and simple, who beat everyone he came across in 400 fights. He didn't even leave room for any anomalies that are almost guaranteed in the amateurs when a lesser fighter beats a better fighter.
His amateur record in itself isn't going to determine his pro success (even though it's unparalleled and an indication of just how special a talent he is) but it's in the manner he's done it. @conradically and @bballchump11 are looking at it from a very superficial point of view and now with a strawman argument. I've presented nothing but facts (Mayweather's greatest win is Corrales, Lomachenko's amateur career with his style is unparalleled) but these guys have been so conditioned to believe the hype/drink the Kool aid on Mayweather that it really upsets them that anyone can suggest an 'amateur' could beat a guy who has been 'pro' for so long. Look at Mayweather in the last 6 years, 5 fights that have nothing to do with determining who the best is. Mayweather isn't even in the sport, he's in the business. When you see someone on TV all the time it distorts your perception of them, you think they're greater than they are. Looking at the facts, looking at the styles; it's not as crazy as you might think to say that Lomachenko is a superior boxer to Mayweather. I'm certain that after a couple of years everybody will share the same view as me (if they don't have a bias towards fighters of a certain race).
Talking boxing, Lomachenko has more potential, a greater desire to fight the best opposition.. those things can't be disputed. I predict he'll continue his form in the pro game. Which means he'll be better than Mayweather at any weight and when all's said and done he'll be looked back as the superior fighter. In 3-4 years time this will be seen as a generic thread/question, right now it's a troll thread filled with people who either don't understand boxing or don't know enough about Lomachenko. Wait and see.. as I keep saying.


----------



## Mexi-Box (Jun 4, 2013)

We'll see how Lomanchenko does, but I'm with you with your analysis on Mayweather. The guy is hyped to be something he's not. His resume is shit, Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez shit all over Floyd's resume. I mean for being considered an ATG, p4p number one, he sure has a shit resume.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

El Mexi-Box said:


> We'll see how Lomanchenko does, but I'm with you with your analysis on Mayweather. The guy is hyped to be something he's not. His resume is shit, Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez shit all over Floyd's resume. I mean for being considered an ATG, p4p number one, he sure has a shit resume.


Agreed 100%. I like Mayweather as a fighter. But I have no idea how good he actually is, and it's hard to support a guy when he's never had any intention of proving he's the best. He'll tell you he's the best and that he loves money, but being honest the guy's resume is pathetic. Canelo is a surprising step up for Mayweather, I think it might show how good he is (or isn't). I'd expect his fans to say "He's obviously past it/not prime/not what he used to be....... but then you look back and what is there? Corrales? Hatton? For an alleged ATG that is very poor/sad.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> What people can't seem to comprehend is that anything can happen in the amateurs, lesser fighters can sneak away with wins over far superior fighters (Ogogo vs Khytrov for example). Everybody knows that Khytrov would bash Ogogo in the pro game, because he has a more pro style and he's the bigger, stronger guy, woth the greater amateur career on a whole.
> When you look at an amateur career you need to look at it as a whole, and how they fought. Lomachenko fought every style and beat every style, predominantly in a pro style. He likes to fight on the inside with body punches, hooks and uppercuts while slipping and parrying shots. He's not a lanky southpaw just trying to score points on the outside. He is a master boxer plain and simple, who beat everyone he came across in 400 fights. He didn't even leave room for any anomalies that are almost guaranteed in the amateurs when a lesser fighter beats a better fighter.
> His amateur record in itself isn't going to determine his pro success (even though it's unparalleled and an indication of just how special a talent he is) but it's in the manner he's done it.
> @*conradically* and @*bballchump11* are looking at it from a very superficial point of view and now with a strawman argument. I've presented nothing but facts (Mayweather's greatest win is Corrales, Lomachenko's amateur career with his style is unparalleled) but these guys have been so conditioned to believe the hype/drink the Kool aid on Mayweather that it really upsets them that anyone can suggest an 'amateur' could beat a guy who has been 'pro' for so long. Look at Mayweather in the last 6 years, 5 fights that have nothing to do with determining who the best is. Mayweather isn't even in the sport, he's in the business. When you see someone on TV all the time it distorts your perception of them, you think they're greater than they are. Looking at the facts, looking at the styles; it's not as crazy as you might think to say that Lomachenko is a superior boxer to Mayweather. I'm certain that after a couple of years everybody will share the same view as me (if they don't have a bias towards fighters of a certain race).
> Talking boxing, Lomachenko has more potential, a greater desire to fight the best opposition.. those things can't be disputed. I predict he'll continue his form in the pro game. Which means he'll be better than Mayweather at any weight and when all's said and done he'll be looked back as the superior fighter. In 3-4 years time this will be seen as a generic thread/question, right now it's a troll thread filled with people who either don't understand boxing or don't know enough about Lomachenko. Wait and see.. as I keep saying.


see you keep trying to shit on Floyd's resume in order to hype up a guy isn't even a pro yet. You want to use just the eye test. Floyd beats Lomachenko's ass just comparing the both of their styles. You talk all the shit you want about Floyd in the past 5 years, but it's all irrelevant. This is 130 pounds. We're talking about a top 3 atg at the weight class and many people's number 1.






Floyd would time Lomachenko with right hands when he tries to come forward and Floyd would dig to his body and knock his ass out as the fight wears on. Floyd is taller, longer, faster, more elusive, more accurate and better stamina than Lomachenko.

I want to add that he has more power and a better chin at 130, but I'm not going to make that claim since we haven't seen enough of him. Knowing you, you'll say he has the best chin in boxing history based on fucking nothing and then say he'd take Alexis Arguello's best punches


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> see you keep trying to shit on Floyd's resume in order to hype up a guy isn't even a pro yet. You want to use just the eye test. Floyd beats Lomachenko's ass just comparing the both of their styles. You talk all the shit you want about Floyd in the past 5 years, but it's all irrelevant. This is 130 pounds. We're talking about a top 3 atg at the weight class and many people's number 1.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Are you kidding me? Castillo, Cotto have shown that Floyd doesn't do so well when the pressure is on, when the fight is on the inside. Corley and Judah have shown that Floyd can be caught more easily by southpaws. 
Lomachenko is far more skilled than those guys, he is a southpaw who likes to pressure his opponents and work on the inside. The only time I can remember Floyd doing nice body work was against Sharmba.. do you want to compare Lomachenko to Sharmba now?
On the eye test Lomachenko is faster, busier, more elusive, better on the inside and more accurate than Floyd. Compare the two videos I posted earlier vs Valentino and Corrales respectively. And that's apparently Floyd's best victory/performance. 
In terms of stamina we have no idea but Lomachenko has never shown any signs of fatigue when fighting, and he has a far busier style than Floyd. Just another example of you assuming and talking out of your ass.
Let's talk purely about 130 pounds... what did he achieve there? Manfredy, Hernandez, Corrales? With a struggle against Augustus in between? He's an ATG at 130 because of that? :lol:
You're making just as many or more assumptions about Floyd than I am about Lomachenko, the difference is that Lomachenko is going to prove what I say while Mayweather can't turn back time to prove anything :lol:
Mayweather wasted his potential and has a shit resume.. don't be mad, find acceptance and enjoy the Lomachenko show :cheers


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Are you kidding me? Castillo, Cotto have shown that Floyd doesn't do so well when the pressure is on, when the fight is on the inside. Corley and Judah have shown that Floyd can be caught more easily by southpaws.
> Lomachenko is far more skilled than those guys, he is a southpaw who likes to pressure his opponents and work on the inside. The only time I can remember Floyd doing nice body work was against Sharmba.. do you want to compare Lomachenko to Sharmba now?
> On the eye test Lomachenko is faster, busier, more elusive, better on the inside and more accurate than Floyd. Compare the two videos I posted earlier vs Valentino and Corrales respectively. And that's apparently Floyd's best victory/performance.
> In terms of stamina we have no idea but Lomachenko has never shown any signs of fatigue when fighting, and he has a far busier style than Floyd. Just another example of you assuming and talking out of your ass.
> ...


Floyd moved up in weight against both of those guys. Every single opponent of Floyd tries to apply pressure on him. You'll need an extra 10 pounds and solid chin to do it also. Also hope that Floyd is injured.

and Floyd beat Hatton's ass in the inside. I bet he'd beat the shit out of Lomachenko in the inside also. Floyd does good body work in plenty of his fights. Especially at 130 :lol: See maybe you should actually some of Floyd's fights before you start talking like you know what the fuck you're talking about. 
Who the hell is Valentino to Corrales? Valentino would get knocked the hell out by Corrales. This is pro boxing. And how dare you accuse me of assuming when you're whole argument is assumption. Me saying Floyd is faster than Lomachenko isn't an assumption. It's an observation.

Why are you even bothering arguing when you're just looking at boxrec to try in discredit Floyd.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Floyd moved up in weight against both of those guys. Every single opponent of Floyd tries to apply pressure on him. You'll need an extra 10 pounds and solid chin to do it also. Also hope that Floyd is injured.
> 
> and Floyd beat Hatton's ass in the inside. I bet he'd beat the shit out of Lomachenko in the inside also. Floyd does good body work in plenty of his fights. Especially at 130 :lol: See maybe you should actually some of Floyd's fights before you start talking like you know what the fuck you're talking about.
> Who the hell is Valentino to Corrales? Valentino would get knocked the hell out by Corrales. This is pro boxing. And how dare you accuse me of assuming when you're whole argument is assumption. Me saying Floyd is faster than Lomachenko isn't an assumption. It's an observation.
> ...


Please, Floyd's inside work consists of elbow to the face, wait for the ref to step in and fire. I've seen all of Floyd's fights. Floyd isn't faster than Lomachenko, that's an observation. Play those two videos at the same time and tell me what you see. Ooohhh pro boxing, that elite 'sport' where Broner is a 3 weight 'champion' :lol:
And as I said, your assumptions will forever remain assumptions thanks to Floyd's reluctance to test himself. Enjoy the Lomachenko show :hey


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Please, Floyd's inside work consists of elbow to the face, wait for the ref to step in and fire. I've seen all of Floyd's fights. Floyd isn't faster than Lomachenko, that's an observation. Play those two videos at the same time and tell me what you see. Ooohhh pro boxing, that elite 'sport' where Broner is a 3 weight 'champion' :lol:
> And as I said, your assumptions will forever remain assumptions thanks to Floyd's reluctance to test himself. Enjoy the Lomachenko show :hey


You can watch Floyd work on the inside against Genrao Hernandez, Carlos Hernandez, Jesus Chavez, Emanuel Augustus, Carlos Genera and that's just at 130. Floyd wasn't afraid to test himself when he fought a veteran and HOF Genaro for the lineal title when he was just 21 years old and 2 years as a pro. I know you don't know about that fight, because I've noticed you keep forgetting about it


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> You can watch Floyd work on the inside against Genrao Hernandez, Carlos Hernandez, Jesus Chavez, Emanuel Augustus, Carlos Genera and that's just at 130. Floyd wasn't afraid to test himself when he fought a veteran and HOF Genaro for the lineal title when he was just 21 years old and 2 years as a pro. I know you don't know about that fight, because I've noticed you keep forgetting about it


Mayweather's run at 130 was good, and Mayweather was on the right track at that point. But ATG at 130 based on that run? Not a chance in hell. His biological age at that point is irrelevant because his training age was high (training since he was a young kid in a boxing family). Sadly that's when his career peaked, and it's been good/okay/poor since then but he's never really tested himself since then. He doesn't have any other elite, prime greats on his record. Maybe that's not completely his fault but it doesn't change the fact. And because of that fact he's more in the vein of Calzaghe rather than SRR. He'll still be looked back as a great but there'll be a lot of 'what-ifs', especially if Canelo beats him.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Well it actually started as a troll thread from Abraham. I hold the position that it would take around 5+ professional 12 rounders for Loma to possibly be able to beat a 130lb Mayweather. I genuinely think this is possible looking at his skillset.
> 
> But sure, everything is pretty premature right now.


How the hell is this a troll thread? I wasn't trolling. It was a legit question. And what can Loma gain in 5 fights that would put him on the level of 130lb Mayweather with his 25 pro fights? Neither you, dealt_with, or anyone who voted for Vasyl has explained exactly _how_ Loma would stand a chance.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

This thread alone makes me glad that these two are highly unlikely to meet in the future. A potential fight between these two would cause more shit than Manny-Floyd did.


----------



## SimplyTuck (Jun 4, 2013)

Mayweather schools him.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> How the hell is this a troll thread? I wasn't trolling. It was a legit question. And what can Loma gain in 5 fights that would put him on the level of 130lb Mayweather with his 25 pro fights? Neither you, dealt_with, or anyone who voted for Vasyl has explained exactly _how_ Loma would stand a chance.


I've explained exactly how Lomachenko would beat him but as per usual.. Abraham: "Just answer the question answer the question". Abraham "Oh I just read it, never mind".


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> This thread alone makes me glad that these two are highly unlikely to meet in the future. A potential fight between these two would cause more shit than Manny-Floyd did.


Forum would totally break down, it wouldn´t even matter who wins.
Forum dead.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

conradically said:


> Actually, Corrales loss to Marco Rudolph in the amateurs perfectly illustrates the point that many have (apparently in vain) been trying to make.
> 
> Did Marco Rudolph go pro? Yes, he did.
> 
> ...


You have created somewhat of a smokescreen here.

'. The _very same_ Artur Grigorian who Marco Rudolph _defeated_ in the 1991 Amateur World Championships in Sydney Australia. ' 
- lol you're trying not to allow this to be spun in the other way where I can say, oh shit...Rudolph was fighting for WBC international title fairly quickly, and Grigorian who himself as a top amateur came to beat him. 
I haven't seen him fight personally, he could have been past prime, had a shit chin, mentally past prime, had less of a pro style etc. a variety of factors which I believe do not apply to Loma who is the guy I'm defending here. Either way, we're talking about top amateurs, you guys are bashing people like Selimov, but here is an example of an amateur that turns out to be a good titleholder, and Selimov looks the case too....Loma has a victory over him over 5 rounds of pro-style boxing.

Grigorian had a 'pretty decent' run which happened to consist of 17 title defenses (which also happens to be a pro record), ADD to the fact that he had a very big amateur career (361-23), and fought Freitas when he had almost 40 pro fights and was around 36-37 years old...pretty shopworn, ADD to the fact that Grigorian had shoulder injuries during training. Not as glorious as you think.

Styles make fights too, and Corrales the former amateur, is a monster. Corrales was more suited to pro's - the butt of your problem is that you're using amateurs to negate amateurs.

None of these amateurs were as great as Loma, and (I haven't seen them but only know their records), it turns out that Loma did all of that with a pro style. Understand that Loma is essentially a pro kid trying to be an amateur. Now he gets to unwind from fighting like an amateur.

Anyone can have any point, but it doesn't mean it's not a digression from the main topic.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> What people can't seem to comprehend is that anything can happen in the amateurs, lesser fighters can sneak away with wins over far superior fighters (Ogogo vs Khytrov for example). Everybody knows that Khytrov would bash Ogogo in the pro game, because he has a more pro style and he's the bigger, stronger guy, woth the greater amateur career on a whole.
> When you look at an amateur career you need to look at it as a whole, and how they fought. Lomachenko fought every style and beat every style, predominantly in a pro style. He likes to fight on the inside with body punches, hooks and uppercuts while slipping and parrying shots. He's not a lanky southpaw just trying to score points on the outside. He is a master boxer plain and simple, who beat everyone he came across in 400 fights. He didn't even leave room for any anomalies that are almost guaranteed in the amateurs when a lesser fighter beats a better fighter.
> His amateur record in itself isn't going to determine his pro success (even though it's unparalleled and an indication of just how special a talent he is) but it's in the manner he's done it.
> @conradically and @bballchump11 are looking at it from a very superficial point of view and now with a strawman argument. I've presented nothing but facts (Mayweather's greatest win is Corrales, Lomachenko's amateur career with his style is unparalleled) but these guys have been so conditioned to believe the hype/drink the Kool aid on Mayweather that it really upsets them that anyone can suggest an 'amateur' could beat a guy who has been 'pro' for so long. Look at Mayweather in the last 6 years, 5 fights that have nothing to do with determining who the best is. Mayweather isn't even in the sport, he's in the business. When you see someone on TV all the time it distorts your perception of them, you think they're greater than they are. Looking at the facts, looking at the styles; it's not as crazy as you might think to say that Lomachenko is a superior boxer to Mayweather. I'm certain that after a couple of years everybody will share the same view as me (if they don't have a bias towards fighters of a certain race).
> Talking boxing, Lomachenko has more potential, a greater desire to fight the best opposition.. those things can't be disputed. I predict he'll continue his form in the pro game. Which means he'll be better than Mayweather at any weight and when all's said and done he'll be looked back as the superior fighter. In 3-4 years time this will be seen as a generic thread/question, right now it's a troll thread filled with people who either don't understand boxing or don't know enough about Lomachenko. Wait and see.. as I keep saying.


:deal:deal:deal:deal

Exactly this.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Are you kidding me? Castillo, Cotto have shown that Floyd doesn't do so well when the pressure is on, when the fight is on the inside. Corley and Judah have shown that Floyd can be caught more easily by southpaws.
> Lomachenko is far more skilled than those guys, he is a southpaw who likes to pressure his opponents and work on the inside. The only time I can remember Floyd doing nice body work was against Sharmba.. do you want to compare Lomachenko to Sharmba now?
> On the eye test Lomachenko is faster, busier, more elusive, better on the inside and more accurate than Floyd. Compare the two videos I posted earlier vs Valentino and Corrales respectively. And that's apparently Floyd's best victory/performance.
> In terms of stamina we have no idea but Lomachenko has never shown any signs of fatigue when fighting, and he has a far busier style than Floyd. Just another example of you assuming and talking out of your ass.
> ...


Dealt_with's on fire today!


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> How the hell is this a troll thread? I wasn't trolling. It was a legit question. And what can Loma gain in 5 fights that would put him on the level of 130lb Mayweather with his 25 pro fights? Neither you, dealt_with, or anyone who voted for Vasyl has explained exactly _how_ Loma would stand a chance.


Dude, your whole demeanor is pretty trollish without you even realising lol I honestly don't mean any offense by that.

But when times get tough, all you gotta do is sit back and enjoy the Lomachenko shoooooooowwww!


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Notice this bitch wont take a ban bet.

Mayweather is 36 years old fighting younger, stronger, bigger man with pretty good boxing skill. 

Yet this hoe wont take a ban bet, yet Mayweather hasnt fought anyone and we dont know how good he is.


Bitchass wont put his mouth wherehis nuts are lol


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

conradically said:


> Actually, Corrales loss to Marco Rudolph in the amateurs perfectly illustrates the point that many have (apparently in vain) been trying to make.
> 
> Did Marco Rudolph go pro? Yes, he did.
> 
> ...


Well said. Ams dont mean shit.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Notice this bitch wont take a ban bet.
> 
> Mayweather is 36 years old fighting younger, stronger, bigger man with pretty good boxing skill.
> 
> ...


Would you take a ban bet for something which you believe is as open as 60:40?
Erislandy Lara would pose more competition IMO. I actually just tweeted it about 5-10 mins ago.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

El Mexi-Box said:


> We'll see how Lomanchenko does, but I'm with you with your analysis on Mayweather. The guy is hyped to be something he's not. His resume is shit, Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez shit all over Floyd's resume. I mean for being considered an ATG, p4p number one, he sure has a shit resume.


Then put your money where your mouth is. Lifetime avatar bet Mayweather vs Canelo


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Would you take a ban bet for something which you believe is as open as 60:40?
> Erislandy Lara would pose more competition IMO. I actually just tweeted it about 5-10 mins ago.


Lara doesnt pose more problems than Canelo.

Lara is overrated as fuck on this forum

I'm 100% on every Mayweather fight. What happens when you follow a pro legend.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Btw i love how this dealt with ****** keeps saying Floyd struggled with Augustus, dumbass obviously never seen that fight


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Lara doesnt pose more problems than Canelo.
> 
> Lara is overrated as fuck on this forum
> 
> I'm 100% on every Mayweather fight. What happens when you follow a pro legend.


I used to underrate Lara myself tbh. 
I'm 100% on Mayweather beating Canelo. Betting all my vCash on it.


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> You have created somewhat of a smokescreen here.
> 
> '. The _very same_ Artur Grigorian who Marco Rudolph _defeated_ in the 1991 Amateur World Championships in Sydney Australia. '
> - lol you're trying not to allow this to be spun in the other way where I can say, oh shit...Rudolph was fighting for WBC international title fairly quickly, and Grigorian who himself as a top amateur came to beat him.
> ...


I didn't bring up Marco Rudolph. That was you. You brought up Marco. Don't blame me for this digression. Too slick for Diego, you said -- perhaps in jest.

But you have to appreciate the irony that in the pros it was Diego Corrales who stopped the guy who beat the guy who TKO-sixed Marco Rudolph and sent him in to retirement.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Lara doesnt pose more problems than Canelo.
> 
> Lara is overrated as fuck on this forum
> 
> I'm 100% on every Mayweather fight. What happens when you follow a pro legend.


Of course you're 100% on every Mayweather fight. You'll follow him blindly off a cliff, you're in love with him. I'd never back any fighter 100% in any fight, because boxing is a sport where one punch can change the course of a fight. I wouldn't expect you to understand the first thing about the sport though.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Of course you're 100% on every Mayweather fight. You'll follow him blindly off a cliff, you're in love with him. I'd never back any fighter 100% in any fight, because boxing is a sport where one punch can change the course of a fight. I wouldn't expect you to understand the first thing about the sport though.


Ive been following and supporting Floyd 15 years, 43-0.

I know thats hard for you to understand sinxe youve only followed boxing for 3 years


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

A 0 fight prospect Vs an ATG?

Fuck off

Fuck off everyone.


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

In twelve round fights, Lomachenko's opponents will have a chance to at least cope with his physical superiority and make adjustments to him. In an amateur fight, they have already lost after the first couple of rounds and can only hope to score a rare amateur KO; strategy is no longer part of the equation.

Had Mayweather/Castillo 1 been a five-round amateur fight, we'd never even know how great Castillo was...


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Ive been following and supporting *Floyd 15 years, 43-0*.
> 
> I know thats hard for you to understand sinxe youve only followed boxing for 3 years


:lol: Oh the irony of this comment :lol: :rofl


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

Lunny said:


> A 0 fight prospect Vs an ATG?
> 
> Fuck off
> 
> Fuck off everyone.


this


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

I don't think the Lomadoubters realise how hard this guy punches..

Loma really is a 130lber. Some of the guys from WSB will probably be starting at 135lbs. His power will be even greater in 126lbs, I wouldn't put it past him to stop someone like Salido once he's adjusted. 
He's going to have the small powerful gloves. 
*In WSB with the padded gloves*




 *3:38 against the guy who came second in the whole tournament and is visibly a strong guy.*




 *15:14 - Literally knocked Suarez off his feet with this knockdown.*




 - *19:30 - You KNOW this fight would have ended as a TKO if it went the full distance.
Maxwell was saved by the bell too, it was a standing 8 count, but if this was earlier in the round, I'm pretty damn sure this could have been stopped.
Maxwell commented that he's a big puncher too. *




 - *This fight would have been stopped if it went to a round 8 for example. TKO. It's such a master class. more dominant than the performance against Maxwell.*
2 of his other fights were against Selimov and Maxwell again. He did not drop them, however we know what Maxwell had to say about his power. 
He's not dropping bums. He's dropping top amateurs with not very good gloves guys. 
Bashenov, Selimov and Valentino had good records from WSB, it's clear they will be good pros. They're not a Zhou Shimming. 
So just imagine Loma as he is now - the best prospect since Roy Jones Jr + Punching power.

"There were people who thought I'd done myself proud just by being in the ring with Lomachenko, but I've gone 10 rounds with him and definitely proved a lot to a lot of people.
There is no doubt Lomachenko is the best amateur boxer in the world and he proved that again in there tonight. But I wasn't a million miles away and that will give me a lot of confidence." - Sam Maxwell. lol when you get a good amateur saying that, it's pretty clear Loma is a monster :lol:


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

How long before someone posts another Valentino vs Lomachenko video as a proof? :lol:





Lomachenko would get his ass handed to him at 130lb.



LOL - as if on cue..... :yep


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Lunny said:


> A 0 fight prospect Vs an ATG?
> 
> Fuck off
> 
> Fuck off everyone.


OR..

A guy 6-0 in WSB having scored many knockdowns and landed dominant performances over the 30 rounds he fought there, add on 1xprofessional 10 rounder + the 12 rounder with Salido vs Mayweather at the point where he fought Tony Pep (30 rounds against bums, then two fights against Journeymen)..i.e where he was a phenom.

Loma is two fights away.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Btw i love how this dealt with ****** keeps saying Floyd struggled with Augustus, dumbass obviously never seen that fight


Exactly. Augustus had minor success on his way to getting his ass kicked, as did Corley.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Of course you're 100% on every Mayweather fight. You'll follow him blindly off a cliff, you're in love with him. I'd never back any fighter 100% in any fight, because boxing is a sport where one punch can change the course of a fight. I wouldn't expect you to understand the first thing about the sport though.


You have some damn nerve, calling out someone else for this. You're putting Lomachenko on the pedestal while he is still 0-0, and keep saying "just wait and see"...you never know what might happen!


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> You have some damn nerve, calling out someone else for this. You're putting Lomachenko on the pedestal while he is still 0-0, and keep saying "just wait and see"...you never know what might happen!


To be honest mate, he's only 2 fights away in terms of pro-style 'rounds' fought from taking on a 130lb Mayweather who ripped the division apart.


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> To be honest mate, he's only 2 fights away in terms of pro-style 'rounds' fought from taking on a 130lb Mayweather who ripped the division apart.


The difference being that Mayweather already ripped the division apart. We know this. It happened already. It's perfect hindsight.


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> OR..
> 
> A guy 6-0 in WSB having scored many knockdowns and landed dominant performances over the 30 rounds he fought there, add on 1xprofessional 10 rounder + the 12 rounder with Salido vs Mayweather at the point where he fought Tony Pep (30 rounds against bums, then two fights against Journeymen)..i.e where he was a phenom.
> 
> Loma is two fights away.


You're adding on fights he's not even had and rating him on them.

WTF is wrong with you Lomachenko nuthuggers? Go back a few steps.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> To be honest mate, he's only 2 fights away in terms of pro-style 'rounds' fought from taking on a 130lb Mayweather who ripped the division apart.


What you guys don't realize is that there is so many other factor than skill that determines who wins a fight. Experience plays a HUGE part, which is why I think 130lb Mayweather, along with many featherweights, like Hamed, Nelson, and fuck, even Mickey Garcia would brutalize Lomachenko. You called this a troll thread because you know asking who'd win out of 130lb FMJ and Loma is a ridiculous question, yet Dealt_with said it himself...10-2, Loma.


----------



## LittleRed (Jun 4, 2013)

10-2! Mayweather is an ATG! More like 8-4...


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

LittleRed said:


> 10-2! Mayweather is an ATG! More like 8-4...


How great do you _think_ Loma will be?


----------



## LittleRed (Jun 4, 2013)

I have no clue. He's fantastically skilled, a southpaw, and well hyped. I think he's Laszlo Papp, if Papp didn't get fucked over. Barring something terrible I think he will at least surpass Kostya Tszyu's pro accomplishments.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

LittleRed said:


> I have no clue. He's fantastically skilled, a southpaw, *and well hyped*. I think he's Laszlo Papp, if Papp didn't get fucked over. Barring something terrible I think he will at least surpass Kostya Tszyu's pro accomplishments.


Cheers. 
...And well hyped on CHB that's for sure. His last few threads have been receiving like 3k views haha

How I'd love to watch Jose Torres vs Lazlo Papp. Can't find anything but a 30 sec clip.


----------



## Pimp C (Jun 3, 2013)

PBF at 130 would box circles around Lomo. PBF is arguably the GOAT at that weight. Ridiculous to even compare the two. PBF by clinic.:deal


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> What you guys don't realize is that there is so many other factor than skill that determines who wins a fight. Experience plays a HUGE part, which is why I think 130lb Mayweather, along with many featherweights, like Hamed, Nelson, and fuck, even Mickey Garcia would brutalize Lomachenko. You called this a troll thread because you know asking who'd win out of 130lb FMJ and Loma is a ridiculous question, yet Dealt_with said it himself...10-2, Loma.


400 amateur fights, 6 x pro WSB contests, boxing since he could walk.... yeah Lomachenko is inexperienced atsch
You are truly an idiot.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> Exactly. Augustus had minor success on his way to getting his ass kicked, as did Corley.


Again, your reading comprehension completely fails you. When did I ever claim that those guys almost beat Mayweather? I said that they are low level fighters who managed to give Floyd something to think about. I said that to illustrate that Mayweather isn't anywhere near the perfect professional pugilist you clowns are making him about to be. Honestly I have no problem with Mayweather, I've never hated on any fighter other than Tarver when he knocked out my hero Jones back in the day, and I went on to call myself a Tarver fan. I just tell it like it is.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Again, your reading comprehension completely fails you. When did I ever claim that those guys almost beat Mayweather? I said that they are low level fighters who managed to give Floyd something to think about. I said that to illustrate that Mayweather isn't anywhere near the perfect professional pugilist you clowns are making him about to be. Honestly I have no problem with Mayweather, I've never hated on any fighter other than Tarver when he knocked out my hero Jones back in the day, and I went on to call myself a Tarver fan. I just tell it like it is.


Regarding your other post, I'm talking about PROFESSIONAL experience, dummy.

You said Augustus gave Mayweather a tough fight, which he shouldn't have if Floyd is as great as people make him out to be. Since you also think he has never beaten anyone noteworthy, do you also think he should have won 327 out of the 327 rounds he has fought in his career? Have you seen every one of Lomachenko's 400 ammy fights? How do you know he didn't struggle in some of them? How do you know he wasn't given any gift decisions? I have no problem with Lomachenko, but you and a few others elevate him to this level that he hasn't earned earned and doesn't deserve based solely on his amateur exploits. The man is skilled, but these moves trump anything he has in his arsenal.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

@Abraham those moves are immense. Mayweather does practice the JMM one all the time, its a regular thing in his training. Let's not pretend it's a spontaneous thing to indicate this skill is a product of momentary sheer fluid intelligence :lol:


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> I'm not doing that you tard, *I favour Canelo (60/40) *but it's not like it's Lomachenko versing Mayweather at 130, I'd take that lifetime bet in a second.


10:2 Lomachenko, any day all day. easy work. easy. Dead easy.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

conradically said:


> 10:2 Lomachenko, any day all day. easy work. easy. Dead easy.


:lol: I still believe that's how it would go. 
I picked Garcia from the moment that fight was announced btw, don't try to pretend like I don't know what I'm talking about when it comes to boxing.


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> :lol: I still believe that's how it would go.
> I picked Garcia from the moment that fight was announced btw, don't try to pretend like I don't know what I'm talking about when it comes to boxing.


you also said canelo would beat floyd...


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> :lol: I still believe that's how it would go.
> I picked Garcia from the moment that fight was announced btw, don't try to pretend like I don't know what I'm talking about when it comes to boxing.


your 60/40 pick for Canelo is looking downright prescient. You're the next Dwyer. Dwyer in waiting.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Hook! said:


> you also said canelo would beat floyd...


And your point is...? Do you have a 100% success rate when picking fights? It turns out it was 60/40 in Floyd's favour. Floyd's best win of his career, he gets big credit from me.


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> And your point is...? Do you have a 100% success rate when picking fights? It turns out it was 60/40 in Floyd's favour. Floyd's best win of his career, he gets big credit from me.


60-40?! HAHHAHA come on man, you could not possibly give Canelo more than 3 rounds :rofl


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Hook! said:


> 60-40?! HAHHAHA come on man, you could not possibly give Canelo more than 3 rounds :rofl


I had it 8-4 for Floyd, neither fighter really did anything much offensively. I haven't seen Floyd miss that much before, you have to give Canelo credit for his defence. Especially considering how poor Canelo's footwork was. The official cards were spot on apart from the draw.


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> I had it 8-4 for Floyd, neither fighter really did anything much offensively. I haven't seen Floyd miss that much before, you have to give Canelo credit for his defence. Especially considering how poor Canelo's footwork was. The official cards were spot on apart from the draw.


ok mate, ok :rofl


----------



## Jay (May 31, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> I had it 8-4 for Floyd, neither fighter really did anything much offensively. I haven't seen Floyd miss that much before, you have to give Canelo credit for his defence. Especially considering how poor Canelo's footwork was. The official cards were spot on apart from the draw.


Pretty poor, isn't it when you miss with 54% of your shots. I expected more. Canelo showing some good defense there.


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> I had it 8-4 for Floyd, neither fighter really did anything much offensively. I haven't seen Floyd miss that much before, you have to give Canelo credit for his defence. Especially considering how poor Canelo's footwork was. The official cards were spot on apart from the draw.


4 rounds?

For shits and giggles, let's see your scorecard stupid. :lol: #Gingerbread :lol:


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Jay said:


> Pretty poor, isn't it when you miss with 54% of your shots. I expected more. Canelo showing some good defense there.


Let's not pull compubox stats out of our ass, or whatever showtime uses. They also told me that Pac put a beating on Bradley.
There is no way that Floyd landed almost half of his punches, he was hitting gloves while Canelo was hitting arms.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

browsing said:


> 4 rounds?
> 
> For shits and giggles, let's see your scorecard stupid. :lol: #Gingerbread :lol:


Let's see yours.... Actually no need, let me guess, 120-108? :lol: #moneyballsack


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Let's not pull compubox stats out of our ass, or whatever showtime uses. They also told me that Pac put a beating on Bradley.
> There is no way that Floyd landed almost half of his punches, he was hitting gloves while Canelo was hitting arms.


so you agree with C.J. Ross on Pac Bradley. And your scorecard within 2 points of C.J's draw card tonight.

Where were you between the hours 12AM and 2AM?

Prove that you are not C.J. Ross. Prove it.


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Let's not pull compubox stats out of our ass, or whatever showtime uses. They also told me that Pac put a beating on Bradley.
> There is no way that Floyd landed almost half of his punches, he was hitting gloves while Canelo was hitting arms.












Hang yourself @Dealt_with


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> I had it 8-4 for Floyd, neither fighter really did anything much offensively. I haven't seen Floyd miss that much before, you have to give Canelo credit for his defence. Especially considering how poor Canelo's footwork was. The official cards were spot on apart from the draw.


I actually had it 8-4 also


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

browsing said:


> Hang yourself @Dealt_with


Damn man, according to that Canelo landed 73 power punches. I must be blind, because I saw Mayweather looking pretty elusive in there.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

I gave Canelo four rounds.


----------



## EuroHugger (Sep 4, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I don't want to hear this sort of BS question either. I really don't want Lomachenko to be assasinated as a result of comments attacking away at Mayweather's career for example. You can't use Loma like that.


Loma is a piece of shit hype job and I hope your *** hero loses to *** Cruz.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Mayweather is an ATG, and as I've recently just said, officially greater than Alexis Arguello. 
Loma still could beat 130lb Mayweather up to 10 fights into Loma's career though, don't get shit twisted guys.


----------



## EuroHugger (Sep 4, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Mayweather is an ATG, and as I've recently just said, officially greater than Alexis Arguello.
> Loma still could beat 130lb Mayweather up to 10 fights into Loma's career though, don't get shit twisted guys.


I hope some skinheads hate crime you just for the irony.


----------



## Royal-T-Bag (Jun 5, 2013)

EuroHugger said:


> Loma is a piece of shit hype job and I hope your *** hero loses to *** Cruz.


lomachenko losing to cruz would= the most fun I've ever had laughing at someone over a loss, that would be the funniest shit that ever happened in boxing and honestly it would be a 50-50 fight for me until Lomachenko proves he's an elite level pro as Cruz is actually a top 15 in his division type of guy


----------



## Eoghan (Jun 6, 2013)

Barry Jones KOs them both, at the same time, in the first round.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> neither fighter really did anything much offensively.


Get a grip.


----------



## Eoghan (Jun 6, 2013)

Royal-T-Bag said:


> lomachenko losing to cruz would= the most fun I've ever had laughing at someone over a loss, that would be the funniest shit that ever happened in boxing and honestly it would be a 50-50 fight for me until Lomachenko proves he's an elite level pro as Cruz is actually a top 15 in his division type of guy


Oh Jesus, Loma losing to Cruz would be the most embarrassing thing ever to happen in the sport east of the Iron Curtain, given that law they've got in Russia atm. Not saying Cruz is a bad fighter, or that there's anything wrong with being gay, but his followers would disown him


----------



## Royal-T-Bag (Jun 5, 2013)

Eoghan said:


> Oh Jesus, Loma losing to Cruz would be the most embarrassing thing ever to happen in the sport east of the Iron Curtain, given that law they've got in Russia atm. Not saying Cruz is a bad fighter, or that there's anything wrong with being gay, but his followers would disown him


I know man! I'm actually chuckling out loud just thinking about it. Please boxing gods make Lomachenko vs the Gay man whether or not Cruz wins vs Salido (pretty sure Salido's gonna beat him down). Imagine cruz winking and giving kissy faces to Loma from accross the ring then KOing him!


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

O59 said:


> Get a grip.


?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Eoghan said:


> Oh Jesus, Loma losing to Cruz would be the most embarrassing thing ever to happen in the sport east of the Iron Curtain, given that law they've got in Russia atm. Not saying Cruz is a bad fighter, or that there's anything wrong with being gay, but his followers would disown him


You know Lomachenko isn't Russian right?


----------



## Eoghan (Jun 6, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> You know Lomachenko isn't Russian right?


Because Ukraine is a totally different country in which it is completely safe to be gay, right? And once he turns pro, Loma will be huge in Russia, just like the Klitschkos


----------



## chibelle (Jun 5, 2013)

Wow - at least Pactards where rooting for a professional ATG.
Lom has done what again?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Eoghan said:


> Because Ukraine is a totally different country in which it is completely safe to be gay, right? And once he turns pro, Loma will be huge in Russia, just like the Klitschkos


Name one place where being gay is considered totally acceptable? And as far as I know the Klits aren't that huge in Russia, more-so in Germany.
And Ukraine is a totally different place, that actually has a lot of tension with Russia in some parts. It's like calling an American a Mexican


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

chibelle said:


> Wow - at least Pactards where rooting for a professional ATG.
> Lom has done what again?


GOAT olympic fighter, beat everyone he's fought in the amateurs and WSB, over 400 fights. 2 gold medals, 2 world golds and a val barker trophy, all while fighting in a pro style dropping fools with body shots.
If you're a boxing fan you should be a fan of Lomachenko. Even GGG has singled him out as a future superstar in the pro game.


----------



## Sister Sledge (Oct 22, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> Who did Mayweather beat at 130? Corrales? Do you think Roy Jones beating up Vinnie Paz demonstrated that Roy was the greatest super middle of all time as well?


Hernandez, Manfredy, Corrales, Goyo Vargas, Jesus chavez, Carlos Rios, Justin Juuko, Carlos Gerena, Carlos Hernandez. He cleaned out the division, and beat them all easily. He also beat Augustus fairly easily, even though Emanual gave a spirited effort. Hernandez had only lost to ODLH, and that fight was very close until Oscar broke his nose.

There is no way you can fault PBF's competition at 130. It is top notch.


----------



## Sister Sledge (Oct 22, 2012)

This is one of the dumbest troll threads out there. The greatest fighters of our time vs a guy who never had a pro fight. I am already looking forward to Loma getting his ass whooped.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Sister Sledge said:


> Hernandez, Manfredy, Corrales, Goyo Vargas, Jesus chavez, Carlos Rios, Justin Juuko, Carlos Gerena, Carlos Hernandez. He cleaned out the division, and beat them all easily. He also beat Augustus fairly easily, even though Emanual gave a spirited effort. Hernandez had only lost to ODLH, and that fight was very close until Oscar broke his nose.
> 
> There is no way you can fault PBF's competition at 130. It is top notch.


It was good, not great. And not ATG worthy, that's for sure. 
Canelo is his best victory of his career so far.


----------



## Sister Sledge (Oct 22, 2012)

I would think Castillo is his biggest win. Hernandez was a very good win, also, as well at Corrales. His competition at the lower weights is very good. Loma may end up being a very good fighter, but let's let him have a few fights against halfway decent opposition before you elevate him to czar status.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Sister Sledge said:


> This is one of the dumbest troll threads out there. The greatest fighter of our time vs a guy who never had a pro fight. I am already looking forward to Loma getting his ass whooped.


Floyd's had a pro fight? :huh


----------



## Sister Sledge (Oct 22, 2012)

It's funny how people want to rate RJJ and ATG, and his competition was less worthy than PBF's. It really is hateful.


----------



## Sister Sledge (Oct 22, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> Floyd's had a pro fight? :huh


:lol::rofl You crack me up, man.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Sister Sledge said:


> I would think Castillo is his biggest win. Hernandez was a very good win, also, as well at Corrales. His competition at the lower weights is very good. Loma may end up being a very good fighter, but let's let him have a few fights against halfway decent opposition before you elevate him to czar status.


Good wins, not wins that make you an ATG. If you don't have the competition available to have rivalries against other elites you need to constantly fight the best available, which Floyd hasn't done. Roy Jones gets criticised for his garbage cans on his record but he would actually put them away like you're supposed to, and he had the likes of Toney and Hopkins on there.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Sister Sledge said:


> It's funny how people want to rate RJJ and ATG, and his competition was less worthy than PBF's. It really is hateful.


I must be psychic.


----------



## Eoghan (Jun 6, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Name one place where being gay is considered totally acceptable? And as far as I know the Klits aren't that huge in Russia, more-so in Germany.
> And Ukraine is a totally different place, that actually has a lot of tension with Russia in some parts. It's like calling an American a Mexican


Ok, there aren't any places where being gay is accepted by everyone, but it's sure as hell more accepted here than out there, no way would Cruz have come out if he were from there.
Wladimir has got a massive fight in Russia very soon, and Vitali's last fight was in Moscow so they'd be pretty big there, even if they're bigger in Germany. In that part of the world, nothing is black or white, eastern Ukraine is very Russian, and come on, their cultures and social attitudes are similar, like Britain and Ireland.
For the record, I like Vasyl, he's a very talented fighter obviously, he could go very far (I won't proclaim him a HoF before he's joined the pros) but I just think the reaction of some of his fans would be priceless if he were to lose to Cruz


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Eoghan said:


> For the record, I like Vasyl, he's a very talented fighter obviously, he could go very far (I won't proclaim him a HoF before he's joined the pros) but I just think the reaction of some of his fans would be priceless if he were to lose to Cruz


I expect him to be fighting Salido. Salido is a tough guy and will expose Vasyl if he isn't ready to go 12 hard rounds. Cruz wouldn't be much of a threat at all imo. Just how fruity is Cruz? If he's a full on queen then it would be humiliating to lose to him :lol:


----------



## Sister Sledge (Oct 22, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> Good wins, not wins that make you an ATG. If you don't have the competition available to have rivalries against other elites you need to constantly fight the best available, which Floyd hasn't done. Roy Jones gets criticised for his garbage cans on his record but he would actually put them away like you're supposed to, and he had the likes of Toney and Hopkins on there.


First off, when RJJ fought Hopkins, B-Hop was far from an ATG. He was still green. Corrales was undefeated and many people thought he could beat Floyd. Mayweather wipe the floor with him. He wipe the floor with Manfredy, and Hernandez. Every fighter who moves up in weight gets less KO's as they move up. How many KO's did RJJ get at 175? Also, Floyd hasn't been fighting garbage cans like Roy did.


----------



## Kid Cubano (Jun 5, 2013)

What have exactly accomplish lomachenko at the pro level to put him in the same sentence with Floyd mayweather ?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Sister Sledge said:


> First off, when RJJ fought Hopkins, B-Hop was far from an ATG. He was still green. Corrales was undefeated and many people thought he could beat Floyd. Mayweather wipe the floor with him. He wipe the floor with Manfredy, and Hernandez. Every fighter who moves up in weight gets less KO's as they move up. How many KO's did RJJ get at 175? Also, Floyd hasn't been fighting garbage cans like Roy did.


B-Hop wasn't as green as made out to be, Roy always has had the style that beats him. Roy stopped guys like Griffen, Hill and Woods. Floyd has fought garbage cans, just have a look at Baldomir and Guerrero. That in itself isn't necessarily bad but it was the passive way he fought those overmatched opponents. 
Being undefeated doesn't mean much, Glen Kelly was undefeated when Jones clowned him. Corrales is a good win but not the elite, ATG win that it's made out to be. Punchers often get favoured and find extra support when it's not really warranted, especially if they still have a 0.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Kid Cubano said:


> What have exactly accomplish lomachenko at the pro level to put him in the same sentence with Floyd mayweather ?


So prior to the Rigo-Donaire fight, no way you would mention him with the best? But the next day after he beats Donaire he's suddenly morphed into a worthy fighter?


----------



## Kid Cubano (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> So prior to the Rigo-Donaire fight, no way you would mention him with the best? But the next day after he beats Donaire he's suddenly morphed into a worthy fighter?


You are absolutely right. Before beating the #3 p4p Rigo hasn't probed to be among the best professional fighters.
And still, miles away from Floyd mayweather


----------



## FloydPatterson (Jun 4, 2013)

Argenis Mendez beats Loma's ass


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Kid Cubano said:


> You are absolutely right. Before beating the #3 p4p Rigo hasn't probed to be among the best professional fighters.
> And still, miles away from Floyd mayweather


Well YDKSAB then if you couldn't recognise how elite Rigo was/is. And are you saying he's miles away from Floyd now? That is ludicrous.


----------



## Sister Sledge (Oct 22, 2012)

Kelly WAS a bum Guerrero and Baldomar were clearly not bums. Your examples are clearly laughable. Floyd has not been fighting bums. Yes, there are some fights he could habe had, but didn't. This is the case with every ATG. Can't call his opposition bums, though.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> It was good, not great. And not ATG worthy, that's for sure.
> Canelo is his best victory of his career so far.


Castillo and Corrales were better than Canelo.


----------



## Copernicus (Jun 6, 2013)

Ridiculous thread really, in the amateurs obviously Loma though:






Greater amateur than Floyd ever was, in the pro's though how can we know until Lomachenko forges a legacy as a professional himself (left it fuckin late too!)

Obviously we would have to pick Floyd right now, Duhhhhh!


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Troll thread. exposing some esb general level nut nugging


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

O59 said:


> Castillo and Corrales were better than Canelo.


I disagree. Especially when you take the size factor into account.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

This is how you all know that me and Dealt_with are different people lol 

Because I think Mayweather was a HOF as soon as he beat Castillo 2. Impressive as fuck, he looked more impressive than anyone I've seen at 130lbs, and is arguably the greatest super feather of all time...Arguello I think steals it on resume though (Castillo was 135, if he wasn't then May would be greatest 130lber of all time). 

I think Mayweather's competition is better than Roy's competition, however Roy has a marquee win over Toney. 

Nevertheless, Rigo and Mayweather certainly are not wide apart...this is coming from a guy who thinks Mayweather on H2H matchups fairs better than other people think he does.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Copernicus said:


> Ridiculous thread really, in the amateurs obviously Loma though:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That video was depressing.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> Yeah, now you have a fat white guy who pretends he's black here to suck Floyd's other testicle, and you can both show how loyal you are to your man together. All this time and he still hasn't beaten anyone (Corrales is his best win? :lol, I'm looking forward to what you guys have to say after Canelo beats him :hey


Well, @bballchump11, what do you have to say after Canelo's win over Floyd?


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

O59 said:


> Well, @bballchump11, what do you have to say after Canelo's win over Floyd?


:lol: thanks for reminding me about this. I got to say that dealt should take a step back before he gets embarrassed more. I guess NOW, after 17 years, Floyd finally has a HOF resume in his eyes. It is high praise to give to Lomachenko just to say that he'd beat a current world champion on his debut. It's asinine to think he'd beat arguably the best 130 pound fighter ever.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> :lol: thanks for reminding me about this. I got to say that dealt should take a step back before he gets embarrassed more. I guess NOW, after 17 years, Floyd finally has a HOF resume in his eyes. It is high praise to give to Lomachenko just to say that he'd beat a current world champion on his debut. It's asinine to think he'd beat arguably the best 130 pound fighter ever.


It's hilarious reading through this thread because after all the bullshit being thrown around about how Floyd hadn't fought anybody, would lose to Alvarez, etc. And he just whitewashes him with ease. :rofl


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

O59 said:


> It's hilarious reading through this thread because after all the bullshit being thrown around about how Floyd hadn't fought anybody, would lose to Alvarez, etc. And he just whitewashes him with ease. :rofl


:lol: seriously, this is pretty funny. His idea of Floyd gets knocked out by Canelo, when really he should be evaluating the guy who just put on a clinic vs him


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Although Floyd was in his athletic prime in 130lbs and had the power to motherfuck somebody, I think he's a better fighter now than he was then...purely due to the development of his boxing brain. Loma is ridiculously athletic, has power too (more power than Floyd I'm sure)..
A major thing about Loma that you guys should realise is that the pro's is going to help him in more ways than just the fact that he has a pro style..his actual style is what can make him beat someone like Abner Mares or Santa Cruz, in 3rd gear.


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

thehook13 said:


> Troll thread. exposing some esb general level nut nugging


I watched @Dealt_with gearing up on this Loma kick way back on ESB.

It was directly after Rigondeaux beat the brakes off of Donaire that dealt_With went off and started believing that Loma could reproduce the same results as Rigondeaux.

Rigondeaux is clearly a boxing master and a complete technician who understands boxing and seriously performs on another level. It was clear watching this in his AM matches aswell as in his professional bouts. I had Rigondeaux over Donaire with the single caveat of being able to take Donaire's perceived power (I got this post in my archives on ESB)

Lomachenko is clearly not a boxing master and not at all a complete technician. Not in the slightest.

Is he good? Without a doubt. Is he in the same class of fighter as Rigondeaux? No. Not at all. Rigondeaux would beat Lomachenko convincingly, might even knock him out.

But outside of that, the hilarity ensues when this euronuthuggger, in some weird psychological tick, tries to bring down Mayweather in an effort to fool his mind into believing that Lomachenko is on the same level and better.

Its partly a trolling tool on his part to try to wax some of the shine off of Mayweather in the eyes of Mayfans and its also a way for him to up some guy who hasnt had a recorded professional victory against anyone let alone serious professional competition.

Anyhow, #Gingerbread #Moneyteam and all that jazz. :lol:


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Browsing is a troll who doesn't know shit. In the last few posts where I realised his trollism, dim wit and now with the icing on top saying 'Lomachenko is clearly not a boxing master and not at all a complete technician. Not in the slightest.' is just the last hurdle. Browsing's credibility is zero.

'Is he good? Without a doubt.' - You're not being a 'balanced' guy by saying this, its fact that he's better than just 'good'.


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Browsing is a troll who doesn't know shit. In the last few posts where I realised his trollism, dim wit and now with the icing on top saying 'Lomachenko is clearly not a boxing master and not at all a complete technician. Not in the slightest.' is just the last hurdle. Browsing's credibility is zero.
> 
> 'Is he good? Without a doubt.' - You're not being a 'balanced' guy by saying this, its fact that he's better than just 'good'.


Shut up.

You're so transparent its ridiculous, you almost sicken me more than dealt_With.

You just witnessed a classroom the other night in Canelo vs Floyd and you still haven't learned your lesson.

Canelo is a good fighter. Is he a boxing master? No. Is he a technician? No. Is he better than average? Yes. Is Canelo a technician? No.

Same with Lomachenko in comparison.

There are degrees between being a boxing master, being a technician and being a good fighter. Lomachenko is NOT a boxing master in the slightest. Within his style he is effective and energetic and fun to watch. When he comes into the pro-ranks he is going to be like a lighter version of Maidana, and GGG and that's all there is to it.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

browsing said:


> I watched @Dealt_with gearing up on this Loma kick way back on ESB.
> 
> It was directly after Rigondeaux beat the brakes off of Donaire that dealt_With went off and started believing that Loma could reproduce the same results as Rigondeaux.
> 
> ...


I've been saying the same things about Lomachenko since 2008. Maybe you only noticed after the Rigo bout because I made a point to say "Boxing skills are boxing skills, amateur boxing does mean something" and brought up the even superior amateur, Lomachenko. I picked Rigo to beat Donaire as well.
Lomachenko is more complete than any fighter I've seen. If you can't see that then YDKSAB, or you haven't seen enough, if any, of Lomachenko. Lomachenko had the better amateur record than Rigo and he did it with a pro style.
I never tried to bring Mayweather down either you dope, someone else made this thread discussing the hypothetical match up and I gave my opinion. My opinion that Floyd's competition has been weak isn't only held by me. When the Floyd fight against Canelo was announced I was really surprised for that reason, and gave Floyd big credit. When Floyd beat Canelo I came on here to say "great win, Floyd is back at p4p #1 for me".
I believe with every part of me that Lomachenko is more skilled in every way than Mayweather, is more of a competitor than Mayweather and will be viewed as greater than Mayweather when he's done. I don't need to trick myself into believing anything.
Eurohugger? If you've actually looked at my posts you'll see I'm a big fan of the likes of Gamboa (I seem to be one of the last few believers in him), Rigondeaux, Ward and Dirrell. The only other 'Euro' fighter I'm really a fan of is GGG, Kovalev doesn't even interest me that much.
You need to calm your emotional ass down, you've been mentioning me non-stop and you sound really fragile. This was a hypothetical thread, when asked I'll give my opinion. I talk boxing, I'm a fan of boxing, and I don't give a fuck about race. Lomachenko is the best boxer I've seen, period. I'm not trolling in the slightest, the only troll here is you because you can't seem to accept that someone doesn't believe that Floyd is unbeatable with the sun shining out of his ass from a perfect professional career. Everyone can be beaten, Vasyl included. 
You clearly have emotional issues. Stop mentioning my name in every post, I don't care to hear anymore of your crying. Talking to somebody in real life might help :cheers


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

browsing said:


> When he comes into the pro-ranks he is going to be like a lighter version of Maidana, and GGG and that's all there is to it.


Oh, so it is that YDKSAB then.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

I like Loma but he'd be stopped.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

O59 said:


> Well, @bballchump11, what do you have to say after Canelo's win over Floyd?





bballchump11 said:


> :lol: thanks for reminding me about this. I got to say that dealt should take a step back before he gets embarrassed more. I guess NOW, after 17 years, Floyd finally has a HOF resume in his eyes. It is high praise to give to Lomachenko just to say that he'd beat a current world champion on his debut. It's asinine to think he'd beat arguably the best 130 pound fighter ever.





O59 said:


> It's hilarious reading through this thread because after all the bullshit being thrown around about how Floyd hadn't fought anybody, would lose to Alvarez, etc. And he just whitewashes him with ease. :rofl





bballchump11 said:


> :lol: seriously, this is pretty funny. His idea of Floyd gets knocked out by Canelo, when really he should be evaluating the guy who just put on a clinic vs him


I was saying that stuff in the name of competition and hype, I know that you both are smart enough to understand that. The majority of my posts discussing the fight had been along the lines of 50/50 at first, then 60/40 etc. so you know I never believed it would be one sided or anything like that.
Floyd showed that he is still one of the best. But we didn't know until he beat Canelo, because his competition for years has been appalling, and he hasn't looked like the p4p #1 in some recent performances. The Canelo fight just makes his career more disappointing in my view, if Floyd had consistently been interested in fighting the best and had shown more of an interest in competition (fighting Pac, Marg etc.) rather than money and cherry-picking old names then he could've potentially gone down as the GOAT. Canelo was the best win of his career, but it's come so late into his career.
And the win over Canelo doesn't change my opinion on Lomachenko vs Mayweather at 130 in the slightest just so you know.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> I was saying that stuff in the name of competition and hype, I know that you both are smart enough to understand that. The majority of my posts discussing the fight had been along the lines of 50/50 at first, then 60/40 etc. so you know I never believed it would be one sided or anything like that.
> Floyd showed that he is still one of the best. But we didn't know until he beat Canelo, because his competition for years has been appalling, and he hasn't looked like the p4p #1 in some recent performances. The Canelo fight just makes his career more disappointing in my view, if Floyd had consistently been interested in fighting the best and had shown more of an interest in competition (fighting Pac, Marg etc.) rather than money and cherry-picking old names then he could've potentially gone down as the GOAT. Canelo was the best win of his career, but it's come so late into his career.
> And the win over Canelo doesn't change my opinion on Lomachenko vs Mayweather at 130 in the slightest just so you know.


This is the biggest issue I've had in this thread. Don't shit on Floyd's professional resume when discussing a matchup against Lomachenko in a professional fight who literally has no resume.


----------



## Divi253 (Jun 4, 2013)

Canelo is Floyd's best win.. Canelo's best win was Trout.. Trout's best win was Cotto, immediately after Floyd beat him... WTF? Floyd beating Canelo like that makes his career more disappointing, because he didn't fight Margarito? WTF am I reading!?!?!


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Divi253 said:


> Canelo is Floyd's best win.. Canelo's best win was Trout.. Trout's best win was Cotto, immediately after Floyd beat him... WTF? Floyd beating Canelo like that makes his career more disappointing, because he didn't fight Margarito? WTF am I reading!?!?!


:lol:


----------



## FloydPatterson (Jun 4, 2013)

Why is this thread alive?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Divi253 said:


> Canelo is Floyd's best win.. Canelo's best win was Trout.. Trout's best win was Cotto, immediately after Floyd beat him... WTF? Floyd beating Canelo like that makes his career more disappointing, because he didn't fight Margarito? WTF am I reading!?!?!


It's disappointing because Floyd ducked challenges like Margarito and Pac when they were his toughest fights available. Floyd willing to fight the best competition available in Canelo makes it disappointing that he hasn't always been that way inclined. What's hard to understand?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> This is the biggest issue I've had in this thread. Don't shit on Floyd's professional resume when discussing a matchup against Lomachenko in a professional fight who literally has no resume.


When we talk about a hypothetical match up between fighters we bring up strengths and weaknesses. There are some who believe that Floyd has had a flawless pro career against the best opposition available, and that he's unbeatable. All of which is nonsense, which is what I pointed out. Floyd has shown a reluctance to challenge himself and face the best, as he says it's all about the money. He was literally scared for his health when talking about fighting Pac, from his own mouth. Lomachenko wants to jump into deep water straight away and fight for a title immediately. It's not about resume per se, but their approach to the 'sport' of boxing. I don't give a shit about how much any fighter makes, I want to see the best fight the best. That is what Lomachenko wants to do, and that's where Floyd's career has been disappointing for the most part. Comprehende?


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> When we talk about a hypothetical match up between fighters we bring up strengths and weaknesses. There are some who believe that Floyd has had a flawless pro career against the best opposition available, and that he's unbeatable. All of which is nonsense, which is what I pointed out. Floyd has shown a reluctance to challenge himself and face the best, as he says it's all about the money. He was literally scared for his health when talking about fighting Pac, from his own mouth. Lomachenko wants to jump into deep water straight away and fight for a title immediately. It's not about resume per se, but their approach to the 'sport' of boxing. I don't give a shit about how much any fighter makes, I want to see the best fight the best. That is what Lomachenko wants to do, and that's where Floyd's career has been disappointing for the most part. Comprehende?


I see what you're saying. It just has nothing to do with a matchup between the 2 fighters


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> I see what you're saying. It just has nothing to do with a matchup between the 2 fighters


True that. I'm just saying if we want to compare resumes then there are plenty of holes in Floyd's, which we know isn't going to be an issue with Vasyl's. And I do count Olympic competition against the likes of Toledo, Selimov, Verdejo, Ramirez etc. as well as the WSB as part of Lomachenko's boxing CV and experience. Whether it's labelled 'Pro' or 'Amateur' it's about levels, and you know my views on the definitions of pro and amateur when it comes to boxing.


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> True that. I'm just saying if we want to compare resumes then there are plenty of holes in Floyd's, which we know isn't going to be an issue with Vasyl's. And I do count Olympic competition against the likes of Toledo, Selimov, Verdejo, Ramirez etc. as well as the WSB as part of Lomachenko's boxing CV and experience. Whether it's labelled 'Pro' or 'Amateur' it's about levels, and you know my views on the definitions of pro and amateur when it comes to boxing.


Castillo, Corrales, Genaro Hernandez, Miguel Cotto, Oscar De La Hoya, Ricky Hatton, have nothing on ... Albert and Jose and Felix.

Do you understand what Ricky Hatton would do to Albert?

18 year old Jose Ramirez!!! and 19 year old Felix Verdejo! What a resume! Already GOAT. Why bother with anything more?

Where is there to go? You beat Selimov and there just isn't anywhere north of there. You can't top Selimov. Can't be done. It's all anti-climax from here on out.

come on. come _on_.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Mayweather would eat him.


----------



## EngorgedW/Blood (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Who did Mayweather beat at 130? Corrales? Do you think Roy Jones beating up Vinnie Paz demonstrated that Roy was the greatest super middle of all time as well?


I hope this is a joke?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

You think I'm stupid... I think you're stupid. Opinions.


----------



## EngorgedW/Blood (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Castillo did. Augustus gave him hell. Ancient De La Hoya almost beat him. Zab Judah swept the first 4 rounds. Ancient Cotto gave him a tough fight.
> Lomachenko is so far below those guys? Please.


Augustus gave him hell??? Judah swept the first 4 rounds? He won 2 of the first 4.

Lomachenko is far below all of those guys, yes. At the pro level, he's done zero, absolutely nothing. He is a glorified amateur with zero accomplishments as a pro. So yes, technically, he is far below those guys.

He is 0-0 as a pro, so I don't even know what you are defending right now. I hope you are just trolling.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

conradically said:


> Castillo, Corrales, Genaro Hernandez, Miguel Cotto, Oscar De La Hoya, Ricky Hatton, have nothing on ... Albert and Jose and Felix.
> 
> Do you understand what Ricky Hatton would do to Albert?
> 
> ...


Personally I think Toledo is more skilled, better balanced, more talented fighter than anyone you just mentioned.


----------



## EngorgedW/Blood (Jun 5, 2013)

There are some really dumb people as boxing fans. Jesus Christ. I've never seen anything like it in any other sport.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

EngorgedW/Blood said:


> Augustus gave him hell??? Judah swept the first 4 rounds? He won 2 of the first 4.
> 
> Lomachenko is far below all of those guys, yes. At the pro level, he's done zero, absolutely nothing. He is a glorified amateur with zero accomplishments as a pro. So yes, technically, he is far below those guys.
> 
> He is 0-0 as a pro, so I don't even know what you are defending right now. I hope you are just trolling.


He can come in and dominate the pro game immediately, and he knows it too. That's why he wanted a title shot in his first bout. He's been fighting in a pro style for years. Technically, mentally he is far above any fighter in the pro game.
I'm not trolling, just see what happens.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

EngorgedW/Blood said:


> There are some really dumb people as boxing fans. Jesus Christ. I've never seen anything like it in any other sport.


Well if you can't recognise Lomachenko's boxing genius then you're not a boxing fan.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

:rofl Lomachenko will never beat a fighter as good as Castillo even, and note Floyd was injured.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

turbotime said:


> :rofl Lomachenko will never beat a fighter as good as Castillo even, and note Floyd was injured.


What are you basing that on, hope? Tell me about Lomachenko's weaknesses.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> What are you basing that on, hope? Tell me about Lomachenko's weaknesses.


Hope? Lomachenko will look fantastic in a shit lightweight era.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Hope? Lomachenko will look fantastic in a shit lightweight era.


:rofl Okay, you've convinced me Nostradamus.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> :rofl Okay, you've convinced me Nostradamus.


Let me know when Loma wins a title at 154.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Let me know when Loma wins a title at 154.


Nah, it'll be in a shit 154 era :rofl:rofl


----------



## Divi253 (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> It's disappointing because Floyd ducked challenges like Margarito and Pac when they were his toughest fights available. Floyd willing to fight the best competition available in Canelo makes it disappointing that he hasn't always been that way inclined. What's hard to understand?


You including Margarito in your statement.........


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Divi253 said:


> You including Margarito in your statement.........


Margarito was considered a threat at the time, and Floyd was offered a large payday. Money May decided to fight Baldomir instead and take less money. I don't know if you followed boxing at the time but it was a blatant duck by Floyd, of his most threatening opponent at the time. Cotto is another name that Floyd missed when it was relevant, instead he fought the old ass version and still had problems.


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Margarito was considered a threat at the time, and Floyd was offered a large payday. Money May decided to fight Baldomir instead and take less money. I don't know if you followed boxing at the time but it was a blatant duck by Floyd, of his most threatening opponent at the time. Cotto is another name that Floyd missed when it was relevant, instead he fought the old ass version and still had problems.


This shitty argument again? Floyd accepted Margarito as an opponent, but wanted 10 million guaranteed for both for Hatton and Cotto. Arum tried to lowball him and Floyd got more money fighting both on his own. Much more.

Arum has admitted this, yet you still DKSAB. Why is that?


----------



## elterrible (May 20, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> This shitty argument again? Floyd accepted Margarito as an opponent, but wanted 10 million guaranteed for both for Hatton and Cotto. Arum tried to lowball him and Floyd got more money fighting both on his own. Much more.
> 
> Arum has admitted this, yet you still DKSAB. Why is that?


broski he is a troll


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Let me know when Loma wins a title at 154.


154 division is pretty poor. Angulo is seen as a threat when really he should be a sparring partner, coming from a big Angulo fan since ESB days. 
Loma is staring at 126lbs, so technically he's got to go to 147lbs to equal weight classes, but again this doesn't necessarily make a fighter better. I see Loma going up to 140lbs by the end of his career. He looked very small in WSB, fighting guys who are 135-140lbs.

p.s this is a good 126lb era, I rate it far above welterweight. Santa Cruz alone is better than anyone at 140-147 not including the greats, and Santa Cruz is not the top dog.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

browsing said:


> Shut up.
> 
> You're so transparent its ridiculous, you almost sicken me more than dealt_With.
> 
> ...


'
All hail, browsing is the master of boxing with his comments like 'When he comes into the pro-ranks he is going to be like a lighter version of Maidana, and GGG and that's all there is to it.'

Stop talking about Loma man, you actually haven't watched him before.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> This shitty argument again? Floyd accepted Margarito as an opponent, but wanted 10 million guaranteed for both for Hatton and Cotto. Arum tried to lowball him and Floyd got more money fighting both on his own. Much more.
> 
> Arum has admitted this, yet you still DKSAB. Why is that?


Please, that wasn't the only time Mayweather rejected Margarito. Before the Judah fight he also rejected the fight. When presented with the option of 8 mill against Margarito he started talking about his injured hand, making unreasonable demands for the time, and went on to stink out the joint and cry against Baldomir for less money. Arum and Floyd left on fine terms at that point in time, Floyd wanted to opt out so he had more control over he fought (i.e. cherry pick, which Floyd has recently stated he's proud of because it's all about the money baby).
Those are the facts and yet you still can't see how Floyd has been ducking. Why is that?


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

#Moneyteam #Gingerbread

:lol: Stay small Mayhaters. Stay small.


----------



## Kid Cubano (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Well YDKSAB then if you couldn't recognise how elite Rigo was/is. And are you saying he's miles away from Floyd now? That is ludicrous.


It's not about recognizing how good a boxer is. Joan Guzman had exceptional skills that he flushed down the toilet after attending his voracious appetite, Gamboa could've been a HOF before he started listening to thw wrong crow and its hanging now with rappers and no clue what to do with his career.
I'm talking about what you can accomplish at the professional level.For 17 yrs Floyd has been at his top . I don't doubt Rigo and Loma has the skills to accomplish a great career, Rigo you know is my favorite boxer and I foresee Loma as a future p4p but when I talk Floyd only pacquiao, RJJ and DLH come close in this generation.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

browsing said:


> #Moneyteam #Gingerbread
> 
> :lol: Stay small Mayhaters. Stay small.


Hard work dedication! :rofl


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Margarito was considered a threat at the time, and Floyd was offered a large payday.* Money May decided to fight Baldomir instead and take less money*. I don't know if you followed boxing at the time but it was a blatant duck by Floyd, of his most threatening opponent at the time. Cotto is another name that Floyd missed when it was relevant, instead he fought the old ass version and still had problems.


why do people keep spreading this lie?


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

lol Just imagine if in 24 months, we see Loma move up to 135lbs..he will bring Mayweather, who weighed 146lbs when he woke up for the weigh in for Canelo, to 140lbs. 
How ludicrous but one can only dream..
Loma was at 132lbs for Olympics...albeit a bit small..


----------



## Copernicus (Jun 6, 2013)

Lomachenko is arguably the greatest amateur ever, certainly of his generation. He is on a par with these guys:

Laszlo Papp:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laszlo_Papp

Boris Lagutin 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Lagut&#8230;

Jerzy Kulej
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerzy_Kulej

Oleg Saitov
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleg_Saitov

Shamil Sabirov
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamil_Sabi&#8230;

Józef Grudzień
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B3zef_&#8230;

Aleksei Tishchenko (he could, but he said he was old enough)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksei_Tis&#8230;

Marian Kasprzyk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marian_Kasp&#8230;

Gennadiy Shatkov
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gennadiy_Sh&#8230;

Valeri Popenchenko
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valeri_Pope&#8230;

Vyacheslav Lemeshev
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyacheslav_&#8230;

What does that tell you? Damn i wish the likes of these guys had turned pro...


----------



## Pimp C (Jun 3, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> why do people keep spreading this lie?


I agree a blatant lie that can be easily dis-proven. He got 8 million for that fight plus PPV money. It was a career high payday and he got to fight for the linear championship to boot.


----------



## Pimp C (Jun 3, 2013)

Dealt with is one step above troll status.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Pimp C said:


> I agree a blatant lie that can be easily dis-proven. He got 8 million for that fight plus PPV money. It was a career high payday and he got to fight for the linear championship to boot.


yeah man it's so easy to correct, but yet people still spout the lie often :-(
This wasn't the first time I heard this this weekend


----------



## Divi253 (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> why do people keep spreading this lie?


:-( That's why I stopped responding.. @steviebruno just explained the situation to him, and he repeats the same stuff again.. Less money? No, flat out lie. Unreasonable demands, like the ones he got plus more when he left Arum? Then asks if I was following boxing then, :lol:.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Divi253 said:


> :-( That's why I stopped responding.. @steviebruno just explained the situation to him, and he repeats the same stuff again.. Less money? No, flat out lie. Unreasonable demands, like the ones he got plus more when he left Arum? Then asks if I was following boxing then, :lol:.


lol yes man, it gets annoying arguing with somebody and they keep repeating the same lie over and over no matter how many times you correct them


----------



## DrMo (Jun 6, 2012)

Bump


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Heehehehee


----------



## Pimp C (Jun 3, 2013)

PBF would have given him a boxing lesson before knocking him out


----------



## SimplyTuck (Jun 4, 2013)

No superstars coming up, shame really.


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

Originally I agreed wit the 10:2 Loma call. But now after having seen him over 12 rounds against a guy Mayweather would absolutely _Gatti, _I revise my opinion. Loma would beat Mayweather 9:3.


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAAAAA :rofl


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

dumbass. Mayweather would knock his ass out


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> dumbass. Mayweather would knock his ass out


tag those bitches :rofl


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Lomachenko > Floyd at amateurs.
> Lomachenko = Very pro style, so no need to refashion so much like Shiming would need to.
> Lomachenko = 30 rounds in 'pro' format against KINGS of the few-round fights. This is a huge point. And by the way, these aren't bums.
> Lomachenko = 6-0 in pro format, against fighters that provide more education than a TKO2 win against bums.
> ...


:rofl


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Hook! said:


> :rofl


That logic on the surface is pretty sound. Lomachenko does need 12 rounders, he will learn a wealth of things from this fight.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Hook! said:


> tag those bitches :rofl


 @The Undefeated Gaul @Dealt_with yall don't know shit!!!!!


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> That logic on the surface is pretty sound. Lomachenko does need 12 rounders, he will learn a wealth of things from this fight.


is it good logic below the surface?


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

@Dealt_with spent pages saying loma is better than floyd because he adapts quicker then loma failed to adapt enough for 12 whole rounds :rofl


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> That logic on the surface is pretty sound. Lomachenko does need 12 rounders, he will learn a wealth of things from this fight.


looks like a list of reasons why loma is better than floyd to me HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAA


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> @The Undefeated Gaul @Dealt_with yall don't know shit!!!!!


yes hahahaha
fucking idiots


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Hook! said:


> @Dealt_with spent pages saying loma is better than floyd because he adapts quicker then loma failed to adapt enough for 12 whole rounds :rofl


:lol: it took his ass 9 rounds to adapt and adjust. I told those hardheaded stupid assholes that the pros is different. I said the pacing will be different.

"No Loma runs marathons" "He spars 20 rounds" blah blah blah

kiss my black ass


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> :lol: it took his ass 9 rounds to adapt and adjust. I told those hardheaded stupid assholes that the pros is different. I said the pacing will be different.
> 
> "No Loma runs marathons" "He spars 20 rounds" blah blah blah
> 
> kiss my black ass


Who was Floyd fighting in his second fight? :yep How did Floyd adapt against Castillo after how many pro fights?
Loma proved his stamina, Gaul and myself always said pacing was the only issue and we were proved right. Lomachenko showed he was a class above and you just showed it's always been about race for you. Absolutely pathetic you are. I think Lomachenko would win every round against Floyd now tbh, it was ineffective aggression that won it for Salido and we all know how passive Floyd is against fighters who aren't even aggressive or punchers in anyway.


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> :lol: it took his ass 9 rounds to adapt and adjust. I told those hardheaded stupid assholes that the pros is different. I said the pacing will be different.
> 
> "No Loma runs marathons" "He spars 20 rounds" blah blah blah
> 
> kiss my black ass


:rofl:rofl


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> Who was Floyd fighting in his second fight? :yep How did Floyd adapt against Castillo after how many pro fights?
> Loma proved his stamina, Gaul and myself always said pacing was the only issue and we were proved right. Lomachenko showed he was a class above and you just showed it's always been about race for you. Absolutely pathetic you are. I think Lomachenko would win every round against Floyd now tbh, it was ineffective aggression that won it for Salido and we all know how passive Floyd is against fighters who aren't even aggressive or punchers in anyway.


floyd was injured against castillo and still just about won, loma wasn't injured, just clearly beaten :lol:
pacing the only issue?! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA :rofl
not that salido landed to the body nearly at will and that loma was extremely sluggish on the inside?! not that he didn't time his punches correctly at all until the 12th round?


----------



## Hook! (Jun 8, 2012)

i'm going to bed
i hope to wake up to more incredibly stupid lomatard posts :rofl


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

If Floyd fought Lomachenko 12 times, Floyd would knock him out at a 10-2 ratio


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> If Floyd fought Lomachenko 12 times, Floyd would knock him out at a 10-2 ratio


130lbs May would honestly make short work of Salido. Loma won MAYBE 4-5 rounds. Loma is several leagues below Mayweather.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Who was Floyd fighting in his second fight? :yep How did Floyd adapt against Castillo after how many pro fights?
> Loma proved his stamina, Gaul and myself always said pacing was the only issue and we were proved right. Lomachenko showed he was a class above and you just showed it's always been about race for you. Absolutely pathetic you are. I think Lomachenko would win every round against Floyd now tbh, it was ineffective aggression that won it for Salido and we all know how passive Floyd is against fighters who aren't even aggressive or punchers in anyway.


The fact that Lomachenko survived and kept it relatively close says a lot about his talent level. His talent level, while much higher than most entry level pros, was not, however, good enough to be taking on such ambitious challenges so quickly. And you STILL think he'd beat Mayweather. It's sad, really, how fucking delusional your are.


----------



## FloydPatterson (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Who did Mayweather beat at 130? Corrales? Do you think Roy Jones beating up Vinnie Paz demonstrated that Roy was the greatest super middle of all time as well?


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> *Who was Floyd fighting in his second fight*? :yep How did Floyd adapt against Castillo after how many pro fights?
> Loma proved his stamina, Gaul and myself always said pacing was the only issue and we were proved right. Lomachenko showed he was a class above and you just showed it's always been about race for you. Absolutely pathetic you are. I think Lomachenko would win every round against Floyd now tbh, it was ineffective aggression that won it for Salido and we all know how passive Floyd is against fighters who aren't even aggressive or punchers in anyway.


now this is a relevant factor? Before it was completely irrelevant because Lomachenko was already perfect. You dismissed the idea that he would need a "pro coach" like Roach -- how could Roach improve on perfection?

You insisted that Loma would beat prime 130 Mayweather 10:2 on day 1. Not after 10 fights. On day 1.

Now you're walking back your claims but not just saying what you ought to say, namely: "mea culpa: I was wrong".


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> If Floyd fought Lomachenko 12 times, Floyd would knock him out at a 10-2 ratio


:lol: I legit lol'd at that. Floyd wouldn't fight Lomachenko in the first place :yep


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> :lol: Much stiffer competition, good one. Lomachenko 396-1, 2 golds, 2 worlds, 2 different weight classes at the age of 24. Mayweather, 84-6, a bronze medal. Oh America


1-1, losing to a faded Salido. Mikey Garcia and Gamboa fought fresher versions and showed what it takes to be a World Champion at the professional level.



Dealt_with said:


> BTW who is the best fighter Floyd has ever fought?


Hint: he's better than Salido.



Dealt_with said:


> I'm trolling a bit,


Wow, no kidding!



Dealt_with said:


> but I'm just trying to emphasise Lomachenko's talent and potential. I don't feel like Lomachenko really has anything to improve in his boxing game, as I've said he's the most complete fighter I've seen. Everything he has shown is applicable to the pro game, as he fights in a pro manner. He still needs to show and prove in the pro game but I have zero doubt he will, you might see that as me assuming something but boxing skills are boxing skills, and Lomachenko has it all. The facts are that he won two gold medals while beating everyone he has come up against in over 400 fights. On that form, and the fact that he fights in a pro style already, means that what I'm saying isn't just a leap of faith. I've seen well over 50 fights of his, I've seen him fight in every style and beat every style. He is a boxing prodigy, as a longtime fan of the sport I've never seen anything like him. Maybe something will go wrong in the pro game, who knows? Based on what I know for sure at this point though that would be extremely unlikely. It would be more blind faith/an assumption to believe that he isn't destined to be p4p as a pro.


Looks like this time the minority opinion was not vindicated. At all.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

conradically said:


> now this is a relevant factor? Before it was completely irrelevant because Lomachenko was already perfect. You dismissed the idea that he would need a "pro coach" like Roach -- how could Roach improve on perfection?
> 
> You insisted that Loma would beat prime 130 Mayweather 10:2 on day 1. Not after 10 fights. On day 1.
> 
> Now you're walking back your claims but not just saying what you ought to say, namely: "mea culpa: I was wrong".


He is a perfect fighter, there's not one time in the fight where Salido looked superior in anyway. It was Lomachenko's pacing and the subjective scoring/we'll give you points for just moving your arms that is inherent to the pro game. Floyd only throws punches that land and not many of them, he is nothing like Salido who we always said would be Loma's toughest opponent/style in the pro game. I think Lomachenko beats Floyd tomorrow at 147, the way he muscled Salido around gives me greater confidence in Lomachenko's ability to deal with bigger opponents. No one in the history of boxing can outbox Vasyl, certainly not Floyd.


----------



## Leftsmash (Oct 22, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> What people can't seem to comprehend is that anything can happen in the amateurs, lesser fighters can sneak away with wins over far superior fighters (Ogogo vs Khytrov for example). Everybody knows that Khytrov would bash Ogogo in the pro game, because he has a more pro style and he's the bigger, stronger guy, woth the greater amateur career on a whole.
> When you look at an amateur career you need to look at it as a whole, and how they fought. Lomachenko fought every style and beat every style, predominantly in a pro style. He likes to fight on the inside with body punches, hooks and uppercuts while slipping and parrying shots. He's not a lanky southpaw just trying to score points on the outside. He is a master boxer plain and simple, who beat everyone he came across in 400 fights. He didn't even leave room for any anomalies that are almost guaranteed in the amateurs when a lesser fighter beats a better fighter.
> His amateur record in itself isn't going to determine his pro success (even though it's unparalleled and an indication of just how special a talent he is) but it's in the manner he's done it.
> @conradically and @bballchump11 are looking at it from a very superficial point of view and now with a strawman argument. I've presented nothing but facts (Mayweather's greatest win is Corrales, Lomachenko's amateur career with his style is unparalleled) but these guys have been so conditioned to believe the hype/drink the Kool aid on Mayweather that it really upsets them that anyone can suggest an 'amateur' could beat a guy who has been 'pro' for so long. Look at Mayweather in the last 6 years, 5 fights that have nothing to do with determining who the best is. Mayweather isn't even in the sport, he's in the business. When you see someone on TV all the time it distorts your perception of them, you think they're greater than they are. Looking at the facts, looking at the styles; it's not as crazy as you might think to say that Lomachenko is a superior boxer to Mayweather. I'm certain that after a couple of years everybody will share the same view as me (if they don't have a bias towards fighters of a certain race).
> Talking boxing, Lomachenko has more potential, a greater desire to fight the best opposition.. those things can't be disputed. I predict he'll continue his form in the pro game. Which means he'll be better than Mayweather at any weight and when all's said and done he'll be looked back as the superior fighter. In 3-4 years time this will be seen as a generic thread/question, right now it's a troll thread filled with people who either don't understand boxing or don't know enough about Lomachenko. Wait and see.. as I keep saying.


Wow.


----------



## DobyZhee (May 19, 2013)

I have loma winning in the amateurs and floyd winning in the pros

sent from my mom's landline using tapatalk


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Turns out I didn't even vote in this thread. Hmmm which one to pick?


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> He is a perfect fighter, there's not one time in the fight where Salido looked superior in anyway. It was Lomachenko's pacing and the subjective scoring/we'll give you points for just moving your arms that is inherent to the pro game. Floyd only throws punches that land and not many of them, he is nothing like Salido who we always said would be Loma's toughest opponent/style in the pro game. I think Lomachenko beats Floyd tomorrow at 147, the way he muscled Salido around gives me greater confidence in Lomachenko's ability to deal with bigger opponents. No one in the history of boxing can outbox Vasyl, certainly not Floyd.


Is that what perfection looks like? I'm so disappointed. What an anti-climax. I was hoping perfection was better.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> 1-1, losing to a faded Salido. Mikey Garcia and Gamboa fought fresher versions and showed what it takes to be a World Champion at the professional level.
> 
> Hint: he's better than Salido.
> 
> ...


How did Salido look against Garcia and Gamboa at the end of 12 rounds? They weren't holding on for life like Salido against Lomachenko. It was a pacing issue and if he turned it up earlier then he would've stopped Salido without a doubt. You should know that pacing was always going to be an issue, Gaul and myself always said that could be the biggest obstacle being his 2nd fight and his first time going 12. Lomachenko got hit far less than Gamboa and Garcia and he was bullying Salido around in the end. If they fought again tomorrow it's pretty obvious who would win, and give Lomachenko some credit for giving it a go in his second fight. He showed that he has elite skills and is going to be at the top for a long time.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> He is a perfect fighter, there's not one time in the fight where Salido looked superior in anyway.


Well there _was_ that majority of rounds Salido out-landed him in clean effective punches. There were those moments.



Dealt_with said:


> It was Lomachenko's pacing and the subjective scoring/we'll give you points for just moving your arms that is inherent to the pro game.


No, he earned points by hitting Lomachenko in the face, and in the body.



Dealt_with said:


> Floyd only throws punches that land and not many of them, he is nothing like Salido who we always said would be Loma's toughest opponent/style in the pro game. I think Lomachenko beats Floyd tomorrow at 147, the way he muscled Salido around gives me greater confidence in Lomachenko's ability to deal with bigger opponents. No one in the history of boxing can outbox Vasyl, certainly not Floyd.


You make outlandish troll statements like this upon your return, expect a more permanent ban. You had your chance to at least somewhat vindicate your idiotic trolling, of which none of us are fans, and failed miserably. Shut it and move on.


----------



## lurker (May 27, 2013)

If he cant outbox salido, he cant outbox ...


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Well there _was_ that majority of rounds Salido out-landed him in clean effective punches. There were those moments.
> 
> No, he earned points by hitting Lomachenko in the face, and in the body.
> 
> You make outlandish troll statements like this upon your return, expect a more permanent ban. You had your chance to at least somewhat vindicate your idiotic trolling, of which none of us are fans, and failed miserably. Shut it and move on.


So you want to pull rank now, because you're upset about boxing opinions? Quality modding there, almost as impressive as your ability to judge a fight. Salido landed two looping rights for the whole fight and spent the rest of the time hitting arms, what sort of quality stream were you watching?


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> So you want to pull rank now, because you're upset about boxing opinions? Quality modding there, almost as impressive as your ability to judge a fight. Salido landed two looping rights for the whole fight and spent the rest of the time hitting arms, what sort of quality stream were you watching?


I was watching the fight in HD on a big screen, actually.

It has nothing to do with disagreement, it has to do with you making outlandish statements, like claiming Loma would beat Floyd at 147 tomorrow, that are so ridiculous and unpopular and unfounded that they constitute trolling. So I'm simply warning you lest you begin a trolling campaign in defense of Lomachenko.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I was watching the fight in HD on a big screen, actually.
> 
> It has nothing to do with disagreement, it has to do with you making outlandish statements, like claiming Loma would beat Floyd at 147 tomorrow, that are so ridiculous and unpopular and unfounded that they constitute trolling. So I'm simply warning you lest you begin a trolling campaign in defense of Lomachenko.


Loma beating Floyd at 147 isn't ridiculous in the slightest, he's a better boxer and he's shown that he can handle a bigger opponent even if they have a pressure style. Floyd doesn't have a pressure style, he is reluctant to face fast southpaws and he doesn't wing punches from unorthodox angles like Salido - he's a more orthodox boxer so Loma would be in his groove from the start. I have no doubt, that's my opinion the same way you have an opinion. You've always seemed like a reasonable mod, it's not like I'm saying Al Raymi can beat Rigondeaux. Objectivity is needed as a mod, and emotion needs to be left out of it. You're slipping here Bogo. I'll be finished posting soon anyway so you can calm down now.


----------



## gyllespie (Jun 17, 2013)

This is so embarrassing. Why do certain fans jump the gun so hard? Nothing wrong with being a fan but damn. I would've been ok with this thread if, say, Loma strung together 10 straight KOs which is being extremely nice. Floyd should not even be in the same sentence with Lomachoke. At 124-126 Rigo embarrasses Lomachoke with either a KO or a shutout. At 130 Mikey Garcia retires him.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Loma beating Floyd at 147 isn't ridiculous in the slightest, he's a better boxer and he's shown that he can handle a bigger opponent even if they have a pressure style. Floyd doesn't have a pressure style, he is reluctant to face fast southpaws and he doesn't wing punches from unorthodox angles like Salido - he's a more orthodox boxer so Loma would be in his groove from the start. I have no doubt, that's my opinion the same way you have an opinion. You've always seemed like a reasonable mod, it's not like I'm saying Al Raymi can beat Rigondeaux. Objectivity is needed as a mod, and emotion needs to be left out of it. You're slipping here Bogo. I'll be finished posting soon anyway so you can calm down now.


Objectivity is precisely what you lack. Deep down, I don't even think you believe what you're saying. I think anyone on the Mod/Admin team would think what you're saying right now is delusional and border-line trolling. Your arguments are hollow, just as hollow as they were when you guaranteed Lomachenko already had the ability to be an ATG pro. Heed my warning and base your positions in reality or don't, your fate is in your hands.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Well there _was_ that majority of rounds Salido out-landed him in clean effective punches. There were those moments.
> 
> No, he earned points by hitting Lomachenko in the face, and in the body.
> 
> You make outlandish troll statements like this upon your return, expect a more permanent ban. You had your chance to at least somewhat vindicate your idiotic trolling, of which none of us are fans, and failed miserably. Shut it and move on.


That's not trollish. He's not forcing it down your throat and pestering you until you say 'Ok sorry Dealt, Loma would beat Floyd'. We have reasonings behind things, you're just going to cry like a baby that's not our problem. Lomachenko didn't win tonight officially, but have you noticed that the Lomatards were never oblivious as to why it's possible he may not win? And even if we're wrong, we're entitled to be wrong, we are just having our own opinion.


----------



## conradically (Jul 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> *Loma beating Floyd at 147 isn't ridiculous in the slightest*, he's a better boxer and he's shown that he can handle a bigger opponent even if they have a pressure style. Floyd doesn't have a pressure style, he is reluctant to face fast southpaws and he doesn't wing punches from unorthodox angles like Salido - he's a more orthodox boxer so Loma would be in his groove from the start. I have no doubt, that's my opinion the same way you have an opinion. You've always seemed like a reasonable mod, it's not like I'm saying Al Raymi can beat Rigondeaux. Objectivity is needed as a mod, and emotion needs to be left out of it. You're slipping here Bogo. I'll be finished posting soon anyway so you can calm down now.


I think what we're seeing here is psychotic break with reality.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

conradically said:


> I think what we're seeing here is psychotic break with reality.


The dude needs help. A large dose of Potassium Cyanide should do it.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Objectivity is precisely what you lack. Deep down, I don't even think you believe what you're saying. I think anyone on the Mod/Admin team would think what you're saying right now is delusional and border-line trolling. Your arguments are hollow, just as hollow as they were when you guaranteed Lomachenko already had the ability to be an ATG pro. Heed my warning and base your positions in reality or don't, your fate is in your hands.


Talking about reality in a subjective sport. I had Lomachenko winning, in his second bout against the worst opponent/style possible for a second bout and first time going 12. Do you not remember picking Lomachenko? Did you not see that it was a split decision, with Loma celebrating after the fight and Salido looking a defeated fighter? He was a split hair away from doing something that had never been done before in pro history, and you claim he doesn't already have the ability to be an ATG? He lost because of pacing, that's it. Salido did nothing and had nothing. Objectivity is precisely what you lack. I'm telling you, I believe in Lomachenko even more than I did previously. This was a good experience for him going 12, he showed that he has the chin and skills to deal with any fighter, even if they weigh 147lbs and have the worst style possible. Get a grip dude.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> That's not trollish. He's not forcing it down your throat and pestering you until you say 'Ok sorry Dealt, Loma would beat Floyd'. We have reasonings behind things, you're just going to cry like a baby that's not our problem.


It is your problem if we think it's outlandish and baseless enough to be trolling. It's getting there. That statement about Floyd definitely was.



The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Lomachenko didn't win tonight officially,


Or at all, under professional boxing rules.



The Undefeated Gaul said:


> but have you noticed that the Lomatards were never oblivious as to why it's possible he may not win? And even if we're wrong, we're entitled to be wrong, we are just having our own opinion.


You're oblivious to the fact he didn't actually win after it actually happened, which is worse :lol:

You're not entitled to be so wrong that you're trolling. So for your sake, make sure you aren't.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Talking about reality in a subjective sport. I had Lomachenko winning, in his second bout against the worst opponent/style possible for a second bout and first time going 12. Do you not remember picking Lomachenko? Did you not see that it was a split decision, with Loma celebrating after the fight and Salido looking a defeated fighter? He was a split hair away from doing something that had never been done before in pro history, and you claim he doesn't already have the ability to be an ATG? He lost because of pacing, that's it. Salido did nothing and had nothing. Objectivity is precisely what you lack. I'm telling you, I believe in Lomachenko even more than I did previously. This was a good experience for him going 12, he showed that he has the chin and skills to deal with any fighter, even if they weigh 147lbs and have the worst style possible. Get a grip dude.


Your score is terrible, it has nothing to do with your or my expectations going in. He lost. Arguing Lomachenko won 7 rounds is so baseless that it goes beyond subjective and into stubborn delusion. Not every subjective opinion merits the same respect, and trolling is when that subjective opinion becomes so baseless that it destroys the quality of discussion.

You can't hide behind "he lost because of pacing". Even if that were the case, clearly his abilities at the professional level were not what you had vehemently described over and over. To assume his "troubles with pacing" were his only problems and will correct immediately is laughable and just more of your biased bullshit that nobody but Gaul is buying.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> It is your problem if we think it's outlandish and baseless enough to be trolling. It's getting there. That statement about Floyd definitely was.
> 
> Or at all, under professional boxing rules.
> 
> ...


You don't even know what trolling is. You're not trolling if you have given good intelligent reasoning behind your position that you couldn't even answer to.
Trolling is when you're forcing your opinion on others. There's a moderator on this forum who believes JMM-Pac 3 was scored 9-3. Is that trolling? It's a very unpopular view.

I acknowledge he didn't win officially, but you're being more of a troll, you're almost forcing your opinion with me and warning me about banning me because I have it a win for Lomachenko, a conceivable view at least for first time viewing of the fight.

Just give it a break, jheez!


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Loma beating Floyd at 147 isn't ridiculous in the slightest, he's a better boxer and he's shown that he can handle a bigger opponent even if they have a pressure style. Floyd doesn't have a pressure style, he is reluctant to face fast southpaws and he doesn't wing punches from unorthodox angles like Salido - he's a more orthodox boxer so Loma would be in his groove from the start. I have no doubt, that's my opinion the same way you have an opinion. You've always seemed like a reasonable mod, it's not like I'm saying Al Raymi can beat Rigondeaux. Objectivity is needed as a mod, and emotion needs to be left out of it. You're slipping here Bogo. I'll be finished posting soon anyway so you can calm down now.


:lol:rofl I'm literally laughing out loud. I'm on the phone while laughing at this dumb shit :lol: :rofl


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> You don't even know what trolling is. You're not trolling if you have given good intelligent reasoning behind your position that you couldn't even answer to.
> Trolling is when you're forcing your opinion on others. There's a moderator on this forum who believes JMM-Pac 3 was scored 9-3. Is that trolling? It's a very unpopular view.
> 
> I acknowledge he didn't win officially, but you're being more of a troll, you're almost forcing your opinion with me and warning me about banning me because I have it a win for Lomachenko, a conceivable view at least for first time viewing of the fight.
> ...


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


>


Wowwww, Lomachenko took 2 shots but reset himself like a boss and showed that he has a good chin against a 147lber.

A strategic problem of not wanting to get into an exchange at close range, something that Loma would have bested him in anyway. That's just a strategic error on the part of Lomachenko camp, oooh no! atsch


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


>


that boss mofo


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Your score is terrible, it has nothing to do with your or my expectations going in. He lost. *Arguing Lomachenko won 7 rounds is so baseless that it goes beyond subjective and into stubborn delusion*. Not every subjective opinion merits the same respect, and trolling is when that subjective opinion becomes so baseless that it destroys the quality of discussion.
> 
> You can't hide behind "he lost because of pacing". Even if that were the case, clearly his abilities at the professional level were not what you had vehemently described over and over. To assume his "troubles with pacing" were his only problems and will correct immediately is laughable and just more of your biased bullshit that nobody but Gaul is buying.


That is an opinion. You saw it one way, other scorers saw it another way and we aren't the only ones who saw it that way on first view. 
I explained to you what trolling is, it's not what you said it is. 
Pacing played a HUGE part in this. I think there were other factors too which Loma can fix.

Logical fallacies classes please.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> That is an opinion. You saw it one way, other scorers saw it another way and we aren't the only ones who saw it that way on first view.
> I explained to you what trolling is, it's not what you said it is.
> Pacing played a HUGE part in this. I think there were other factors too which Loma can fix.
> 
> Logical fallacies classes please.


Trolling is whatever the fuck we feel it is.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Trolling is whatever the fuck we feel it is.


You don't represent the whole body of moderators anyways.


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

i cant keep up with this Lomatard ownage. so many threads :lol:


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> You don't represent the whole body of moderators anyways.


No, but I know them, and I know none of them are fans of yours. So as I said before, you're close to the line; for your sake, base your positions in reality and don't try and "come back harder" with respect to hyping Lomachenko because it's not looked kindly upon.


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

watching the fight as we speak.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> No, but I know them, and I know none of them are fans of yours. So as I said before, you're close to the line; for your sake, base your positions in reality and don't try and "come back harder" with respect to hyping Lomachenko because it's not looked kindly upon.


Whenever I based my positions on Loma, I based it 'under certain premises' otherwise you would hear me say it's impossible for me to say that Loma is an ATG etc. 
Logical fallacy. I'm not necessarily coming back to 'hype' him, but discuss him with intelligent reasoning.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Lomachenko against a faded former champ:










Mayweather against a Hall of Famer:


----------



## Reppin501 (May 16, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Trolling is whatever the fuck we feel it is.


Boom!


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

conradically said:


> Is that what perfection looks like? I'm so disappointed. What an anti-climax. I was hoping perfection was better.


What do we even aim for now? Where do we go from here?


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Lomachenko against a faded former champ:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Bogo laying down the motherfucking law :deal


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> watching the fight as we speak.


what'd you think :hey


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> what'd you think :hey


lmao. definitely didn't feel like i was looking @ a future ATG. decent fighter, but i feel pressure fighters will always be a problem for him. seems mentally weak also.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> lmao. definitely didn't feel like i was looking @ a future ATG. decent fighter, but i feel pressure fighters will always be a problem for him. *seems mentally weak also.*


How so? I thought Loma looked confused at times and not quite able to adapt to what Salido was doing but if he'd been mentally weak I think he would have been bitching to the ref at every given opportunity trying to get points deducted (which probably would have been successful). He didn't complain at all. I didn't see him as being mentally weak in the slightest. I wish there were more fighters taking on challenges of this magnitude.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Lomachenko against a faded former champ:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Corrales s a hall of famer but that's not indicative of his ability IMO


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Corrales s a hall of famer but that's not indicative of his ability IMO


He's there for being exciting, but also there for being very good.


----------



## Johnstown (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Corrales s a hall of famer but that's not indicative of his ability IMO


true....his being in some super exciting facts...and dying tragically...is what got him into the hall of fame...kind of like Gatti.


----------



## shaunster101 (Jun 3, 2012)

~Cellzki~ said:


> seems mentally weak also.


Not sure how you got that from that fight to be honest.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

bump.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Johnstown said:


> true....his being in some super exciting facts...and dying tragically...is what got him into the hall of fame...kind of like Gatti.


But Gatti never beat anyone on the level of Castillo or Casamayor.


----------



## LuckyLuke (Jun 6, 2013)

Kurushi said:


> How so? I thought Loma looked confused at times and not quite able to adapt to what Salido was doing but if he'd been mentally weak I think he would have been bitching to the ref at every given opportunity trying to get points deducted (which probably would have been successful). He didn't complain at all. I didn't see him as being mentally weak in the slightest. I wish there were more fighters taking on challenges of this magnitude.


Also his post fight interview. This guy is not mentally weak. Also came on strong later.

It was just crazy to fight Salido in your second pro fight.
First thing he has to do is get rid of his trainer and get a proper pro boxing trainer with experience in the pro game.


----------



## LuckyLuke (Jun 6, 2013)

Also: Do you people think Mayweather would have beaten Salido in his second pro fight?


----------



## shaunster101 (Jun 3, 2012)

LuckyLuke said:


> Also: Do you people think Mayweather would have beaten Salido in his second pro fight?


Don't know, but I imagine he'd have struggled with the same aspects that Vasyl did on Saturday.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

LuckyLuke said:


> Also his post fight interview. This guy is not mentally weak. Also came on strong later.
> 
> It was just crazy to fight Salido in your second pro fight.
> First thing he has to do is get rid of his trainer and get a proper pro boxing trainer with experience in the pro game.


He was mentally weak. Why is nobody realising this?

He was submissive to Salido for basically the entire fight. He let Salido dictate everything, the distance, the pace and the action of the fight. He threw fuck all for 10 rounds because he was mentally weak, he literally could not will himself enough to let his hands go and never landed more than 2 successive punches on Salido until the last round. Why? Because although he was cocky beforehand in the ring he had no confidence in himself. In spite or running marathons and sparring 20 rounds he was obviously too preoccupied with the thought of pacing himself and/or gassing. That is mental weakness.

Also whenever Salido hurt Loma he did nothing. People who are mentally strong will respond. Loma sat like a duck, bouncing around. He came on strong later because Salido gassed from his weight issues and having done all the work. Past prime Salido with weight issues threw 645 to Loma's 441. Take into account Loma threw a lot of pitty patter jabs and Salido throws virtually none. Of course you can come on strong when you haven't been doing anything.

I believe Loma's faults are too far ingrained for him to ever be a GREAT fighter. What you see now is what your going to get, besides maybe learning to pace better. Dude is 25 and has been taught by his Dad since he was 4. He is neither going to switch coaches nor is he going to change a style he's been using for over 2 decades. Loma should run while he can because if he starts making too much noise at 126 then Rigo will hunt him down and end his career.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

LuckyLuke said:


> Also: Do you people think Mayweather would have beaten Salido in his second pro fight?


Does a 25 year old Floyd Mayweather with 397 amateur fights and 8 pro fights beat Salido? Yes, yes he does.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> lmao. definitely didn't feel like i was looking @ a future ATG. decent fighter, but i feel pressure fighters will always be a problem for him. seems mentally weak also.


yeah I hear people bring up Gradovich (The Mexican Russian) for his next fight and I'm not convinced that's a good idea either. Billy Dib was pretty quick and skilled and he just got overwhelmed by him



MadcapMaxie said:


> He was mentally weak. Why is nobody realising this?
> 
> He was submissive to Salido for basically the entire fight. He let Salido dictate everything, the distance, the pace and the action of the fight. He threw fuck all for 10 rounds because he was mentally weak, he literally could not will himself enough to let his hands go and never landed more than 2 successive punches on Salido until the last round. Why? Because although he was cocky beforehand in the ring he had no confidence in himself. In spite or running marathons and sparring 20 rounds he was obviously too preoccupied with the thought of pacing himself and/or gassing. That is mental weakness.
> 
> ...


yeah I don't think he's a headcase or fragile, but he was definitely wasn't strong enough mentally to win against Salido. He looked like a dear in headlights for most of the fight and clinched at every opportunity because he was too unsure of himself. 
One poster one esb put it nicely "One fighter clinched because he was hurt. Another fighter clinched because he didn't know what the fuck to do".

I think with more experience, this will be no issue at all. But if he tries to take one another champion next and losses, I think it'll severely hamper his career


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> yeah I hear people bring up Gradovich (The Mexican Russian) for his next fight and I'm not convinced that's a good idea either. Billy Dib was pretty quick and skilled and he just got overwhelmed by him
> 
> yeah I don't think he's a headcase or fragile, but he was definitely wasn't strong enough mentally to win against Salido. He looked like a dear in headlights for most of the fight and clinched at every opportunity because he was too unsure of himself.
> One poster one esb put it nicely "One fighter clinched because he was hurt. Another fighter clinched because he didn't know what the fuck to do".
> ...


One thing nobody has really mentioned is that Salido feinted Loma a lot which kept him busy covering up or moving instead of punching. Then Salido constantly went to the body because Loma wouldn't counter and would be dirty on the inside. It really was a intelligent plan and he played it out perfectly. Shutting down Loma's offense and roughing him up at every opportunity. Not bad for a guy who is used as the divisions punching bag for up and comers.

If he goes against Gradovich next, that could set him back a good 3-4 years if he losses.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> One thing nobody has really mentioned is that Salido feinted Loma a lot which kept him busy covering up or moving instead of punching. Then Salido constantly went to the body because Loma wouldn't counter and would be dirty on the inside. It really was a intelligent plan and he played it out perfectly. Shutting down Loma's offense and roughing him up at every opportunity. Not bad for a guy who is used as the divisions punching bag for up and comers.
> 
> If he goes against Gradovich next, that could set him back a good 3-4 years if he losses.


yeah good observation. I was noticing that from the opening bell as well. People thought Salido was whatever, but I knew before the fight that Salido is much craftier than given credit for. He shows head movement when applying pressure. He feints to set up his shots. When throws that wide "telegraphed" overhand right of his, he dips down to take himself out of the vision of his opponent and throws that right hook where they can't see it.

He was setting Loma up for that from the get go. And you're right man. I'm very surprised that Loma didn't try to counter punch more. I remember us agreeing before the fight that Lomachenko gives up ground too easily and is too willing to back up and go to the ropes. A true counter puncher like Rigo or Mayweather would have taken smaller steps and countered Salido more. It was apparent watching the Jose Ramirez fight that this would be a big issue vs Salido.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> yeah good observation. I was noticing that from the opening bell as well. People thought Salido was whatever, but I knew before the fight that Salido is much craftier than given credit for. He shows head movement when applying pressure. He feints to set up his shots. When throws that wide "telegraphed" overhand right of his, he dips down to take himself out of the vision of his opponent and throws that right hook where they can't see it.
> 
> He was setting Loma up for that from the get go. And you're right man. I'm very surprised that Loma didn't try to counter punch more. I remember us agreeing before the fight that Lomachenko gives up ground too easily and is too willing to back up and go to the ropes. A true counter puncher like Rigo or Mayweather would have taken smaller steps and countered Salido more. It was apparent watching the Jose Ramirez fight that this would be a big issue vs Salido.


Agreed 100%. His overhand right is a very underrated weapon. Given he mostly works the body, his dipping automatically makes the opponent think a body shot was coming then like you said they don't see the right coming at all. I'm fairly certain every time he threw a overhand right it landed although it never landed in a vulnerable area. Didn't throw it enough IMO. I recall us picking up that Loma doesn't control niether distance nor pace. I remember how much time I wasted arguing with Dealt with about it :lol:


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Agreed 100%. His overhand right is a very underrated weapon. Given he mostly works the body, his dipping automatically makes the opponent think a body shot was coming then like you said they don't see the right coming at all. I'm fairly certain every time he threw a overhand right it landed although it never landed in a vulnerable area. Didn't throw it enough IMO. I recall us picking up that Loma doesn't control niether distance nor pace. I remember how much time I wasted arguing with Dealt with about it :lol:


yeah and Gaul kept ensuring us that Loma doesn't get hit by that punch :lol: Yeah well Salido lands that shit against all the southpaws he fights and I knew it wouldn't be any different now. That shot gets in around the high guard.

yeah it's funny man. We said all this stuff which was 100% correct, but got decimated for it


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> yeah I hear people bring up Gradovich (The Mexican Russian) for his next fight and I'm not convinced that's a good idea either. Billy Dib was pretty quick and skilled and he just got overwhelmed by him


Gradovich is less crafty than Salido though, and if Loma has learned from this fight then Gradovich is the perfect opponent.

Dib is less of an operator than Lomachenko, I think we can prove that from Lomachenko's showing against Salido. And he is a true feather fist.

Gradovich could win, but he's not amazing either.

Perfect fight IMO. Maybe not in the current political landscape though, and you think Loma will get a win under his belt before it gets made.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Gradovich is less crafty than Salido though, and if Loma has learned from this fight then Gradovich is the perfect opponent.
> 
> Dib is less of an operator than Lomachenko, I think we can prove that from Lomachenko's showing against Salido. And he is a true feather fist.
> 
> ...


yeah good point. Lomachenko did better than Billy Dib would have done who would have gotten stopped. Loma can win this, but shouldn't take it next imo


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Salido that night would have beaten Buster Douglas in Japan.


----------

