# Lomachenko the ATG



## Dealt_with

The fight didn't go completely as expected, as @The Undefeated Gaul had mentioned before the fight the only thing that could hold Lomachenko back is the pacing of 12 rounds. Lomachenko didn't let his hands go enough, especially to the body.
Apart from that, Lomachenko showed why he's destined for ATG status. He proved his chin (from the two clean shots Salido landed over 12 rounds) and his stamina (picking up the pace and leaving Salido holding on for life in the 12th).
The judging was rubbish but it has to be expected in the pro game, we've seen countless fights where fighters get rounds based purely on activity/ineffective aggression. Lomachenko is used to the amateur game where only clean shots count. Lomachenko throws his punches so short and he's so efficient in his defence that most people can't see what's really going on. I scored the fight 9-3 for Lomachenko, there were rounds where he simply didn't throw enough. Salido didn't land anything but Lomachenko was too concerned with defence and pacing himself that Salido stole rounds based purely on more punches thrown. Salido not making weight and coming in at 147 was disgraceful as well, but it wasn't really a problem since Lomachenko showed that he was the physically stronger guy.

Apart from the pacing issue this fight has just reinforced my belief in Lomachenko, he was the one who took Salido into deep waters and was drowning him :lol:
If only Lomachenko threw more body punches in the earlier rounds then there's no way Salido would've lasted 12, Salido had the look of a defeated man until the decision was announced. Lomachenko handled the BS decision with as much class as I've ever seen, his attitude and mental strength just constantly impresses me.

Lomachenko has learned about pacing and pro judging now, he won't let fights look close again. Maybe Lomachenko can get that bout against GRJ for the vacant title? Lomachenko will demolish him and then he can take on Rigo, I think Vasyl needs that win on his record now to get back the respect of the more casual fans who are so concerned with that 0.

Unfortunately I took a ban bet with madcap maxie so I need to leave for three months, but make no mistake, the Lomatard express rolls on :yep
Lomachenko is truly the best fighter I've ever seen, and I don't view this fight as a loss in anyway. He gained the experience of pacing for 12 rounds and had the veteran pro welterweight Salido holding on for dear life in the final two rounds, we've never seen Salido finish a fight like that. He needs to throw more body punches in the future and learn that clean punches don't matter as much in the pro game, activity matters the most (he should watch some Calzaghe). If he wants to land clean punches only he needs to fight on the outside more, they are more eye catching there as punches on the inside often get missed by judges.
Before this fight I didn't think Lomachenko had the body type to claim titles in multiple weight divisions but seeing how handled 147lb Salido I have no doubt he can move up in the future, so many exciting fights to be made for our generations SRR :yep

P.S. thanks to Gaul for mentioning that I was unbanned, that little bitch Flea Man gave me the message that it was a permanent ban for homophobia (no one has ever called someone else a **** on here before? :verysad).


----------



## Dustaine

Fuck off.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N )

Dealt_with said:


> I scored the fight 9-3 for Lomachenko


----------



## bballchump11

fuck off

Greatest amateur of all time is 1-1 as a professional :rofl


----------



## conradically

Dealt_with said:


> The fight didn't go completely as expected, as @*The Undefeated Gaul* had mentioned before the fight the only thing that could hold Lomachenko back is the pacing of 12 rounds. Lomachenko didn't let his hands go enough, especially to the body.
> Apart from that, Lomachenko showed why he's destined for ATG status. He proved his chin (from the two clean shots Salido landed over 12 rounds) and his stamina (picking up the pace and leaving Salido holding on for life in the 12th).
> The judging was rubbish but it has to be expected in the pro game, we've seen countless fights where fighters get rounds based purely on activity/ineffective aggression. Lomachenko is used to the amateur game where only clean shots count. Lomachenko throws his punches so short and he's so efficient in his defence that most people can't see what's really going on. I scored the fight 9-3 for Lomachenko, there were rounds where he simply didn't throw enough. Salido didn't land anything but Lomachenko was too concerned with defence and pacing himself that Salido stole rounds based purely on more punches thrown. Salido not making weight and coming in at 147 was disgraceful as well, but it wasn't really a problem since Lomachenko showed that he was the physically stronger guy.
> 
> Apart from the pacing issue this fight has just reinforced my belief in Lomachenko, he was the one who took Salido into deep waters and was drowning him :lol:
> If only Lomachenko threw more body punches in the earlier rounds then there's no way Salido would've lasted 12, Salido had the look of a defeated man until the decision was announced. Lomachenko handled the BS decision with as much class as I've ever seen, his attitude and mental strength just constantly impresses me.
> 
> Lomachenko has learned about pacing and pro judging now, he won't let fights look close again. Maybe Lomachenko can get that bout against GRJ for the vacant title? Lomachenko will demolish him and then he can take on Rigo, I think Vasyl needs that win on his record now to get back the respect of the more casual fans who are so concerned with that 0.
> 
> Unfortunately I took a ban bet with madcap maxie so I need to leave for three months, but make no mistake, the Lomatard express rolls on :yep
> Lomachenko is truly the best fighter I've ever seen, and I don't view this fight as a loss in anyway. He gained the experience of pacing for 12 rounds and had the veteran pro welterweight Salido holding on for dear life in the final two rounds, we've never seen Salido finish a fight like that. He needs to throw more body punches in the future and learn that clean punches don't matter as much in the pro game, activity matters the most (he should watch some Calzaghe). If he wants to land clean punches only he needs to fight on the outside more, they are more eye catching there as punches on the inside often get missed by judges.
> Before this fight I didn't think Lomachenko had the body type to claim titles in multiple weight divisions but seeing how handled 147lb Salido I have no doubt he can move up in the future, so many exciting fights to be made for our generations SRR :yep
> 
> P.S. thanks to Gaul for mentioning that I was unbanned, that little bitch Flea Man gave me the message that it was a permanent ban for homophobia (no one has ever called someone else a **** on here before? :verysad).


Did we just witness perhaps the closest thing to a complete boxer in the history of the sport?

I was just blown away by his performance. Not ordinary in the least. His holding was exquisite, the pitty-pat sublime, the vulnerability to the body breath-taking.


----------



## DirtyDan

:lol:


----------



## MadcapMaxie

Enjoy your 3 month ban. Now fuck off.


----------



## Dealt_with

MadcapMaxie said:


> Enjoy your 3 month ban. Now fuck off.


I'm still here for a day remember.. did you see how Salido destroyed Lomachenko? :lol: Salido hit arms and air all night and was holding on for his life in the 12th :deal


----------



## gumbo2176

bballchump11 said:


> fuck off
> 
> Greatest amateur of all time is 1-1 as a professional :rofl


Come on man. The guy fought a seasoned pro who came in over the limit and had a ref that allowed the guy to land repeated low blows on Lomanchencko. He did this in only his second pro fight and lost a close decision. I say if they fight again, Lomanchencko likely beats the guy inside the limit.

You should be so talented.


----------



## Dealt_with

conradically said:


> Did we just witness perhaps the closest thing to a complete boxer in the history of the sport?
> 
> I was just blown away by his performance. Not ordinary in the least. His holding was exquisite, the pitty-pat sublime, the vulnerability to the body breath-taking.


See what happens then..


----------



## Sweethome_Bama

LOL


----------



## MadcapMaxie

Dealt_with said:


> I'm still here for a day remember.. did you see how Salido destroyed Lomachenko? :lol: Salido hit arms and air all night and was holding on for his life in the 12th :deal


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasyl_Lomachenko Scroll down for his record. 1-1.

This is the guy who was going to beat Rigo in his next fight and was beating Mayweather 10:2. Bye.


----------



## Dealt_with

bballchump11 said:


> fuck off
> 
> Greatest amateur of all time is 1-1 as a professional :rofl


Yeah you're right, Ottke is undoubtedly going to go down in history as a far greater fighter than Lomachenko :rolleyes
That 0 is pretty important to you isn't it? I care about opponents. I don't give a shit about that 0 and obviously neither does Lomachenko, he fights for history, not for the money and dick holding you're so interested in.


----------



## ~Cellzki~

bballchump11 said:


> fuck off
> 
> Greatest amateur of all time is 1-1 as a professional :rofl


:lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Bogotazo

gumbo2176 said:


> Come on man. The guy fought a seasoned pro who came in over the limit and had a ref that allowed the guy to land repeated low blows on Lomanchencko. He did this in only his second pro fight and lost a close decision. I say if they fight again, Lomanchencko likely beats the guy inside the limit.
> 
> You should be so talented.


The point is not that Lomachenko is a bum, the point is insisting Loma has the talent of an ATG post after post and making ludicrous claims was clearly bullshit and his failure to beat a very good but not great veteran on his way out is undeniable proof of that.


----------



## conradically

Dealt_with said:


> I'm still here for a day remember.. did you see how Salido destroyed Lomachenko? :lol: Salido hit arms and air all night and was holding on for his life in the 12th :deal


it was a far cry from TKO-3.

Mikey Garcia was knocking Salido down all over the place with crisp, easily delivered counter-punches. Why the difference?


----------



## Dealt_with

MadcapMaxie said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasyl_Lomachenko Scroll down for his record. 1-1.
> 
> This is the guy who was going to beat Rigo in his next fight and was beating Mayweather 10:2. Bye.


Because that 1-1 record is indicative of his quality as a fighter :verysad
I thought you might have gained some respect for Lomachenko for fighting 147 Salido, going 12 with ease and having him drowning in the 12th. But no, you're still the same emotional fucktard who isn't even a fan of the sport, you care about an argument on the internet more than anything else. Pathetic cunt.


----------



## bballchump11

gumbo2176 said:


> Come on man. The guy fought a seasoned pro who came in over the limit and had a ref that allowed the guy to land repeated low blows on Lomanchencko. He did this in only his second pro fight and lost a close decision. I say if they fight again, Lomanchencko likely beats the guy inside the limit.
> 
> You should be so talented.


Did you see the bullshit this asshole Dealt_With said for the past year? I'm going to talk all the shit I want


----------



## Dealt_with

conradically said:


> it was a far cry from TKO-3.
> 
> Mikey Garcia was knocking Salido down all over the place with crisp, easily delivered counter-punches. Why the difference?


Lomachenko didn't throw enough punches to catch the judges eyes, he didn't go the body enough. Garcia timed his punches on Salido coming in and caught him off balance early in the fight. Garcia never really hurt him though, not like Haya did. Salido was coming on strong against Garcia in the end, Salido against Lomachenko was ready to go out at the end. 
Lomachenko has been competing in sprints, he prepared for a marathon and he fought like that. Next time he needs to prepare for a middle distance race and get busier sooner. That's that pacing issue and now that he has that under his belt his fights aren't going to be close/debatable from now on.


----------



## Tko6

Lomachenko did absolutely NOTHING tonight, you could list the meaningful punches he landed over 12 rounds on one hand. Now please fuck off and take the Klitards with you.


----------



## bhopheadbut

Dealt_with said:


> Yeah you're right, Ottke is undoubtedly going to go down in history as a far greater fighter than Lomachenko :rolleyes
> That 0 is pretty important to you isn't it? I care about opponents. I don't give a shit about that 0 and obviously neither does Lomachenko, he fights for history, not for the money and dick holding you're so interested in.


ottke beat better fighters then salido and he won world titles so yeah he is going to go down in history as a far greater fighter than Lomachenko.Loma took he loss so easy i except him to do it again, he seemed ok with losing


----------



## Dealt_with

bballchump11 said:


> Did you see the bullshit this asshole Dealt_With said for the past year? I'm going to talk all the shit I want


Say what you want, I always thought you were slightly reasonable/objective but you've shown that you're just an emotional, racist retard. I can't respect anything you say from here on tbh.


----------



## gumbo2176

bballchump11 said:


> Did you see the bullshit this asshole Dealt_With said for the past year? I'm going to talk all the shit I want


You can be as mad as you want at Dealt_With, but give the fighter props. I can't remember a fighter entering the ring in only his second fight taking on a fighter of Salido's experience and showing as well as he did. This young man is a special talent and one to watch. There's no doubt in my mind he will be a world champion, and likely do so in record pace.


----------



## conradically

Dealt_with said:


> Lomachenko didn't throw enough punches to catch the judges eyes, he didn't go the body enough. Garcia timed his punches on Salido coming in and caught him off balance early in the fight. Garcia never really hurt him though, not like Haya did. Salido was coming on strong against Garcia in the end, Salido against Lomachenko was ready to go out at the end.
> Lomachenko has been competing in sprints, he prepared for a marathon and he fought like that. Next time he needs to prepare for a middle distance race and get busier sooner. That's that pacing issue and now that he has that under his belt his fights aren't going to be close/debatable from now on.


But I would expect a world-historical once-in-a-lifetime talent to easily outperform ... Mikey Garcia.

There is a disconnect between the person you have been describing over these past months and the person I saw on TV. 
I cannot reconcile these two things. They are at odds.


----------



## bballchump11

Dealt_with said:


> Say what you want, I always thought you were slightly reasonable/objective but you've shown that you're just an emotional, racist retard. I can't respect anything you say from here on tbh.


:lol: yes I'm racist because I rooted so hard for my fellow Mexican. You know I love my latin fighters. Proof is my Danny Garcia avatar :rofl


----------



## Dealt_with

bhopheadbut said:


> ottke beat better fighters then salido and he won world titles so yeah he is going to go down in history as a far greater fighter than Lomachenko.Loma took he loss so easy i except him to do it again, he seemed ok with losing


Is Lomachenko's career over? It's just starting and you'll see just how exceptional he is. Him being okay with the decision isn't indicative of a lack of motivation/competitive instinct, it's indicative of his supreme mental strength that drove him to challenge for the title in his second bout.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Dealt_with! Nice to have you back on here, even though it's for a short time or both of us. 

Not forgetting the horrid number of low blows committed by Salido. 

Guys, this is not 'nuthugging', actually read what Dealt wrote in that. 

As a sidenote, ESPN, Lederman and another credible scorer had it 114-114. I feel Loma won by a bigger margin.


----------



## bballchump11

gumbo2176 said:


> You can be as mad as you want at Dealt_With, but give the fighter props. I can't remember a fighter entering the ring in only his second fight taking on a fighter of Salido's experience and showing as well as he did. This young man is a special talent and one to watch. There's no doubt in my mind he will be a world champion, and likely do so in record pace.


I'll do that once the 2 premature ejaculators are serving their ban bet :good


----------



## Dealt_with

bballchump11 said:


> :lol: yes I'm racist because I rooted so hard for my fellow Mexican. You know I love my latin fighters. Proof is my Danny Garcia avatar :rofl


You make an exception for him because he's from Philly. And he's part-what matters to you so much. Your "kiss my black ass" comment revealed everything we need to know about you. Classless and racist.


----------



## Hands of Iron

Gumbo making an exceptionally rare WBF appearance :rofl

Tell these young boys


----------



## conradically

Case in Point. I do not recognize the person described in the paragraph below. I cannot square this description with what I just witnessed. This cannot be a mere matter of "pacing". I am hard-pressed to believe that. Something else is afoot. My leading theory: the paragraph below is a pure fantasy, a figment of @*Dealt_with*'s imagination.

"Because he literally has no weaknesses, he can combine and transition from offence to defence like no fighter I've ever seen before, I've seen him deal with every style there is, he can fight on the outside like Roy Jones and fight on the inside like Mike Tyson. He doesn't have a set style, he's highly adaptable. That combined with his technical and athletic brilliance, makes him the closest thing I've ever seen to an unbeatable fighter. There have been many dynamic, offensive combination boxers over the years (Leonard one of them) who are the equal of Lomachenko in that regard, but where Lomachenko is different is with his defence right in the middle of his combinations, no one can attack and defend at the same time like he can."


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

I said this in response to Hands of Iron who accurately analysed it. 
Yeah that was the big problem that had me and dealt questioning from his pro fight - Lomachenko is pacing himself way too much Lomachenko didn't even move out of 1st gear it looked like, the gameplan was structured in such a way where he was trying to protect himself from actually fighting. They were too cautious to actually fight, not just from a pacing perspective - this is Lomachenko's camps fault. 
Lomachenko had plenty in the gas tank because he barely used any energy at all in the first few rounds. 

No doubt if this was a 15 round fight, Lomachenko would have stopped him - but we're talking about a pacing factor here. 

Lomachenko will continue to not be the fighter that I KNOW he can be if he doesn't sort out the pacing. Without this understanding, there's no gameplan that can be effectively implemented, no higher 'gears'. 

---------
Also, subtleties in Loma's defence will be easily missed and I guarentee that people gave Salido more credit than he deserved when it came to his body punches. Yet, ESPN, Lederman and more had it an even fight. 

Anatoly should have let Loma be Loma, and actually fight. It would have been as we had expected rather than like this. But Lomachenko's upside is off the charts.


----------



## PistolPat

You said he was the best or atleast equal to the best in every category which is why posters aren't impressed with this performance. Best defense, offense, counter punching, in/out boxing if he was as you described him tonight's fight would have looked completely different. He took a fair amount of body shots and resulted to clinching many times where other boxers wouldn't have needed to. Why did Gamboa, Marquez and Garcia perform so much better against a much closer to prime version of Salido when Loma is meant to be the best at every field in boxing.


----------



## Abraham

Dealt_with said:


> Because that 1-1 record is indicative of his quality as a fighter :verysad
> I thought you might have gained some respect for Lomachenko for fighting 147 Salido, going 12 with ease and having him drowning in the 12th. But no, you're still the same emotional fucktard who isn't even a fan of the sport, you care about an argument on the internet more than anything else. Pathetic cunt.


Oh, now records don't mean shit? You went on and one about how Loma lost (controversially) only once in 67,000 amateur fights. You went on and on how he went 6-0 against top tier competition in his wsb fights, now you're brushing off the fact that he lost his second pro fight, giving him props for being so ambitious. No, he doesn't deserve props for being so ambitious. It's a stupid move, and that's why you fucking never see it in boxing! His exceptional talent was enough to allow him survive, keep it close, and even hurt a dirty, seasoned vet, but it WAS NOT enough to win him the fight. You were wrong. We were right. "Deal with" it.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Bogotazo said:


> The point is not that Lomachenko is a bum, the point is insisting Loma has the talent of an ATG post after post and making ludicrous claims was clearly bullshit and his failure to beat a very good but not great veteran on his way out is undeniable proof of that.


You're completely wrong here atsch


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Abraham said:


> Oh, now records don't mean shit? You went on and one about how Loma lost (controversially) only once in 67,000 amateur fights. You went on and on how he went 6-0 against top tier competition in his wsb fights, now you're brushing off the fact that he lost his second pro fight, giving him props for being so ambitious. No, he doesn't deserve props for being so ambitious. *It's a stupid move, and that's why you fucking never see it in boxing!* His exceptional talent was enough to allow him survive, keep it close, and even hurt a dirty, seasoned vet, but it WAS NOT enough to win him the fight. You were wrong. We were right. "Deal with" it.


Hardly a stupid move if there are some credible scorers (and probabyl more I'm not aware of right now) watching FIRST TIME ROUND didn't even have Salido winning.


----------



## quincy k

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> You're completely wrong here atsch


every great fighter is capable of putting together one last performance(most recently zab/garcia).

salido, for guys that actually back their mouths with their wallets, is a fade from here on out.


----------



## Hands of Iron

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Hardly a stupid move if there are some credible scorers (and probabyl more I'm not aware of right now) watching FIRST TIME ROUND didn't even have Salido winning.


HBO LATINO is showing a replay right now.

I'm gonna finish that bottle


----------



## Dealt_with

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Dealt_with! Nice to have you back on here, even though it's for a short time or both of us.
> 
> Not forgetting the horrid number of low blows committed by Salido.
> 
> Guys, this is not 'nuthugging', actually read what Dealt wrote in that.
> 
> As a sidenote, ESPN, Lederman and another credible scorer had it 114-114. I feel Loma won by a bigger margin.


Lomachenko needs to learn to complain about and exaggerate lowblows as well, just another pro trick. He should talk to Bhop :yep
I can't complain about that too much though, Lomachenko held a bit too much for my liking so it evens out. I was screaming for Loma to throw to the body, I don't know what happened there. Great experience for Lomachenko, at least this loss gives the haters something to cling onto in the future, it was going to be too one-sided for us otherwise :yep
I hope the GRJ or Gradovich fight can still be made, that will be a fine showcase for Loma and winning a pro title in your third fight is still pretty impressive (even though I truly believe he should've won tonight, but like Loma we can't focus on the things we can't control).

I expected to be nervous before the fight but it wasn't actually that bad, and after the decision I was relaxed and smiling. Partly because of Lomachenko's class and seeing him go 12 rounds with Salido holding on for life and partly because I knew what was waiting here :lol:
These fools talking about suicide watch, these Lomahaters don't realise that Lomatards come equipped with Lomachenko level mental strength and resilience :cheers
I'm honestly more excited about Lomachenko's career than ever, and I can't wait to watch the fight again.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

It's 5am, I'll wake up tomorrow and maybe give my analysis of things if I have the time, analysing the fight too as a result...properly. 


People are imagining too many holes, but if you understand why Loma performed the way he did (less decisive than we thought), then its ok. It's just a post-fight panic by you guys.


----------



## Pimp C

bballchump11 said:


> fuck off
> 
> Greatest amateur of all time is 1-1 as a professional :rofl


This sums it up!


----------



## FloydPatterson

Damage control walks into the ring


----------



## Bogotazo

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> You're completely wrong here atsch


No I'm not. You two made ludicrous claims about Loma's talent-level and vehemently guaranteed his greatness and assured an impressive win over Salido. He couldn't even beat a fighter ranked well outside of the top 30 P4P. Those are all facts.



The Undefeated Gaul said:


> It's 5am, I'll wake up tomorrow and maybe give my analysis of things if I have the time, analysing the fight too as a result...properly.
> 
> People are imagining too many holes, but if you understand why Loma performed the way he did (less decisive than we thought), then its ok. It's just a post-fight panic by you guys.


We're not panicking, we're celebrating. It's the Lomatards we have to hear backtrack and make excuses, before we don't have to hear them at all for months.


----------



## Tko6

Please post a vid of all the good work Loma did over 12 rounds to take the title away from the champ. Maybe the vodka got to me but I can't remember him putting 2 meaningful punches together.


----------



## Abraham

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Hardly a stupid move if there are some credible scorers (and probabyl more I'm not aware of right now) watching FIRST TIME ROUND didn't even have Salido winning.


Credible scores? Are you serious? Salido won fair and square! And I said that even in a victory, Loma was bound to get some premature wear taking on such ambitious challenges so quickly, which would, in the long run, damage his chances to be a ATG. So, yes, stupid move. I never saw him on the level of a guy who could destroy a seasoned vet like Salido. I picked Salido to win, but knew that even if Loma did pull it off, it wouldn't be easy. I'll give you and dealt credit, you stick to your guns, regardless of how fucking delusional it makes you seem.


----------



## conradically

Tko6 said:


> Please post a vid of all the good work Loma did over 12 rounds to take the title away from the champ. Maybe the vodka got to me but I can't remember him putting 2 meaningful punches together.


it's too subtle for that. It's so incredibly subtle that it's for all practical purposes invisible. The human eye is simply ill-equipped for the task posed by Lomachenko's unobservable greatness.


----------



## Dealt_with

Abraham said:


> Oh, now records don't mean shit? You went on and one about how Loma lost (controversially) only once in 67,000 amateur fights. You went on and on how he went 6-0 against top tier competition in his wsb fights, now you're brushing off the fact that he lost his second pro fight, giving him props for being so ambitious. No, he doesn't deserve props for being so ambitious. It's a stupid move, and that's why you fucking never see it in boxing! His exceptional talent was enough to allow him survive, keep it close, and even hurt a dirty, seasoned vet, but it WAS NOT enough to win him the fight. You were wrong. We were right. "Deal with" it.


I would mention his amateur record to make the point he has fought all different style and dealt with all of them, consistently against the best.
Lomachenko didn't have any problems with the opponent Salido, he had problems with the pacing over 12 rounds. As soon as Loma turned it up later in the fight then it was clear how far above Salido he was. Lomachenko is unlucky that most can't see the nuances of boxing and that pro judging is far more subjective than the 'clean punches score points' amateur judging. That's what cost him those close rounds and that's the main reason he isn't a world champ after his second bout. 
Lomachenko's performance wasn't flawless but his mistakes were about things he didn't do, rather than anything he lacks as a boxer. He is the most complete fighter I've ever seen, I still stand by that completely. Salido landed two clean punches to the head all fight, and a whole lot to the arms. He proved that his defence is better than Gamboa's and Garcia's, and I've never seen Salido backing up and wanting out of a fight like that. This was a 147lb version of Salido as well.
I'm honestly very impressed with Lomachenko's performance as a whole, and I had him comfortably winning.


----------



## MadcapMaxie

Tko6 said:


> Please post a vid of all the good work Loma did over 12 rounds to take the title away from the champ. Maybe the vodka got to me but I can't remember him putting 2 meaningful punches together.


Not even kidding when I say this but there are some rounds where I don't think Loma threw anything but a range finding jab.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Dealt_with said:


> Lomachenko needs to learn to complain about and exaggerate lowblows as well, just another pro trick. He should talk to Bhop :yep
> I can't complain about that too much though, Lomachenko held a bit too much for my liking so it evens out. I was screaming for Loma to throw to the body, I don't know what happened there. Great experience for Lomachenko, at least this loss gives the haters something to cling onto in the future, it was going to be too one-sided for us otherwise :yep
> I hope the GRJ or Gradovich fight can still be made, that will be a fine showcase for Loma and winning a pro title in your third fight is still pretty impressive (even though I truly believe he should've won tonight, but like Loma we can't focus on the things we can't control).
> 
> I expected to be nervous before the fight but it wasn't actually that bad, and after the decision I was relaxed and smiling. Partly because of Lomachenko's class and seeing him go 12 rounds with Salido holding on for life and partly because I knew what was waiting here :lol:
> These fools talking about suicide watch, these Lomahaters don't realise that Lomatards come equipped with Lomachenko level mental strength and resilience :cheers
> I'm honestly more excited about Lomachenko's career than ever, and I can't wait to watch the fight again.


:cheers

Loma is deffo being too nice, and I know he will get rough. 
Lomachenko would no doubt have people talking again if he is in the ring with GRJ or Grado.

Lomachenko didn't throw to the body because Anatoly wanted him to just stay on the outside and box, and it was an energy conservation thing. Very frustrating because Lomachenko is a renown elite body puncher and could have and DID best Salido in that department when they both went for it later on in the fight.

I was nervous before the fight because there were uncertainties that we spoke of, but I'm deffo not feeling sad about it. 'it will be what it will be', and Loma HAS A FUCKING chin! LomaCHINko which is what mattered most to me.

There are many, many positives to take from this fight. I'm so happy he got a 12 round experience, in the long run I prefer that much more than him getting 4 round KO's against Salido's before fighting actual elites like Mikey and Gamboa.

A true test of his stamina now would to go 12 rounds as he would 5 rounds in WSB, and incorporate the points you mentioned in that post.


----------



## Chatty

I love Loma an he will come again but the amatur who everyone shoud be watching is from Cuba and his name is Ramirez. This kid will destroy the pros if he can turn over.


----------



## conradically

Dealt_with said:


> I would mention his amateur record to make the point he has fought all different style and dealt with all of them, consistently against the best.
> Lomachenko didn't have any problems with the opponent Salido, he had problems with the pacing over 12 rounds. As soon as Loma turned it up later in the fight then it was clear how far above Salido he was. Lomachenko is unlucky that most can't see the nuances of boxing and that pro judging is far more subjective than the 'clean punches score points' amateur judging. That's what cost him those close rounds and that's the main reason he isn't a world champ after his second bout.
> Lomachenko's performance wasn't flawless but his mistakes were about things he didn't do, rather than anything he lacks as a boxer. *He is the most complete fighter I've ever seen*, I still stand by that completely. Salido landed two clean punches to the head all fight, and a whole lot to the arms. He proved that his defence is better than Gamboa's and Garcia's, and I've never seen Salido backing up and wanting out of a fight like that. This was a 147lb version of Salido as well.
> I'm honestly very impressed with Lomachenko's performance as a whole, and I had him comfortably winning.


does that completeness extend to "pacing"?

He's the GOAT with one caveat: he's a terrible pacer. Can't pace if his life depended on it.


----------



## Tko6

MadcapMaxie said:


> Not even kidding when I say this but there are some rounds where I don't think Loma threw anything but a range finding jab.


I don't think I give him a single round despite picking him to win from what I've seen in the amateurs and WSB. This wasn't a Calzaghe-Lacy type destruction, but Loma did absolutely nothing over 12 rounds, it was like man v boy in there.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Bogotazo said:


> No I'm not. You two made ludicrous claims about Loma's talent-level and vehemently guaranteed his greatness and assured an impressive win over Salido. He couldn't even beat a fighter ranked well outside of the top 30 P4P. Those are all facts.
> 
> We're not panicking, we're celebrating. It's the Lomatards we have to hear backtrack and make excuses, before we don't have to hear them at all for months.


We're not backtracking or making excuses. We've always said the exact reasons why the fight could be closer, and our reasons were correct.
I actually will be going even harder than I did before because I feel that from Loma's win against Salido, I have more reason to, given all of the circumstances that I occurred. You're just coming to premature conclusions and want to enjoy a 'victory', but I'm going to lift the lid on this attitude soon.


----------



## bballchump11

Dealt_with said:


> You make an exception for him because he's from Philly. And he's part-what matters to you so much. Your "kiss my black ass" comment revealed everything we need to know about you. Classless and racist.


kiss my black ass isn't a racist :lol:


----------



## Abraham

Dealt_with said:


> I would mention his amateur record to make the point he has fought all different style and dealt with all of them, consistently against the best.
> Lomachenko didn't have any problems with the opponent Salido, he had problems with the pacing over 12 rounds. As soon as Loma turned it up later in the fight then it was clear how far above Salido he was. Lomachenko is unlucky that most can't see the nuances of boxing and that pro judging is far more subjective than the 'clean punches score points' amateur judging. That's what cost him those close rounds and that's the main reason he isn't a world champ after his second bout.
> Lomachenko's performance wasn't flawless but his mistakes were about things he didn't do, rather than anything he lacks as a boxer. He is the most complete fighter I've ever seen, I still stand by that completely. Salido landed two clean punches to the head all fight, and a whole lot to the arms. He proved that his defence is better than Gamboa's and Garcia's, and I've never seen Salido backing up and wanting out of a fight like that. This was a 147lb version of Salido as well.
> I'm honestly very impressed with Lomachenko's performance as a whole, and I had him comfortably winning.


Salido was backing up and wanting out of the fight? You're talking about in the 12th round, when he was hurt? :think

His mistakes were about what he _couldn't_ do, not what he didn't do. You also went on and on about he fought in the AMs with a pro style, but now you cite his being unfamiliar with the pacing as his downfall. Come on, man.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

conradically said:


> does that completeness extend to "pacing"?
> 
> He's the GOAT with one caveat: he's a terrible pacer. Can't pace if his life depended on it.


Top pros who only do 12 rounders would have to adjust their pacing if the rule turned to 15 rounds again. With Loma's particular style and skill, pacing is an important factor.


----------



## conradically

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> We're not backtracking or making excuses. We've always said the exact reasons why the fight could be closer, and our reasons were correct.
> I actually will be going even harder than I did before because I feel that from Loma's win against Salido, I have more reason to, given all of the circumstances that I occurred. You're just coming to premature conclusions and want to enjoy a 'victory', but I'm going to lift the lid on this attitude soon.


Sugar Ray Robinson, look in your rearview mirror, because Lomachenko is here and he's 1-1 as a pro!


----------



## Hands of Iron

conradically said:


> Sugar Ray Robinson, look in your rearview mirror, because Lomachenko is here and he's 1-1 as a pro!


Duran deserves a mention.

And he got it.


----------



## conradically

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Top pros who only do 12 rounders would have to adjust their pacing if the rule turned to 15 rounds again. With Loma's particular style and skill, pacing is an important factor.


Do you mean to say the GOAT couldn't outclass Salido in second gear? Why? Crude Salido?


----------



## Bogotazo

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> We're not backtracking or making excuses. We've always said the exact reasons why the fight could be closer, and our reasons were correct.


"Closer?" He lost. There is no way you can objectively justify 7 rounds for Lomachenko, at all. He lost, and you insisted he would win and shine and prove his ATG potential. To the point we were all sick of it. It didn't happen. Eat it.



The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I actually will be going even harder than I did before because I feel that from Loma's win against Salido,
> I have more reason to, given all of the circumstances that I occurred. You're just coming to premature conclusions and want to enjoy a 'victory', but I'm going to lift the lid on this attitude soon.


He LOST. He did not win. To suggest he didn't is already borderline trolling, and to be even more insistent than you have in the past definitely would be. Word of advice, don't.

Enjoy your vacation.


----------



## bballchump11

conradically said:


> does that completeness extend to "pacing"?
> 
> He's the GOAT with one caveat: he's a terrible pacer. Can't pace if his life depended on it.


:lol:


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Chatty said:


> I love Loma an he will come again but the amatur who everyone shoud be watching is from Cuba and his name is Ramirez. This kid will destroy the pros if he can turn over.


I love Robeisy, I do question him in some aspects. I think a humbling experience and grit will make him a boss. He's a bit too ADD.


----------



## Abraham

A kid who was the best basketball player in the country in high school challenges a NBA vet to a game of one on one up to 10. The kid loses 10-3. The people who predicted the kid would lose say "I told you so" while the people that predicted the kid would handily beat the pro say, "hey I've even more impressed with the kid. He had the balls to take on such a big challenge, and he scored 3 points on the NBA vet!"


----------



## TeddyL

It's over. Whenever people think hear his name, all they will ever think is that he was the guy who thought he could go and win a world title in his second fight and was shown up


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Bogotazo said:


> "Closer?" He lost. There is no way you can objectively justify 7 rounds for Lomachenko, at all. He lost, and you insisted he would win and shine and prove his ATG potential. To the point we were all sick of it. It didn't happen. Eat it.
> 
> He LOST. He did not win. To suggest he didn't is already borderline trolling, and to be even more insistent than you have in the past definitely would be. Word of advice, don't.
> 
> Enjoy your vacation.


No, completely disagree. My vacation starts in 3 days, not tomorrow. I am going to watch the fight again and analyse it properly bit by bit. It could be that I end up saying Salido won. Im not eating anything, I don't give a flying fuck if you're sick of it, if there's important points to be made then I have to make them. These conversations aren't for the faint hearted you pussy. To suggest he definitely didn't win is borderline trolling considering some reliable non-official scorecards had it 114-114, maybe some to Lomachenko, one official judge had it 115-113 to Lomachenko, and yet they don't understand the subtleties in Lomachenko's defence.

I remember watching Lomachenko's amateur fight with Jose Carlos Ramirez, the first time I watched it, I thought it was much closer than the scorecards, but then I realised when watching it again what the real deal was.

As I used to say..._Fuck The Judges_


----------



## Chatty

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I love Robeisy, I do question him in some aspects. I think a humbling experience and grit will make him a boss. He's a bit too ADD.


I honestly think Robeisy is the most naturally talented fighter I have seen since SRL. Its hard to fully predict but this kid coud really dominate if allowed to step out.


----------



## Dealt_with

bballchump11 said:


> kiss my black ass isn't a racist :lol:


It shows that race is on your mind. You're not fooling anyone you little bitch.


----------



## tliang1000

Loma train didn't go very far.


----------



## Bogotazo

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> No, completely disagree. My vacation starts in 3 days, not tomorrow. I am going to watch the fight again and analyse it properly bit by bit. It could be that I end up saying Salido won. Im not eating anything, I don't give a flying fuck if you're sick of it, if there's important points to be made then I have to make them. These conversations aren't for the faint hearted you pussy. To suggest he definitely didn't win is borderline trolling considering some reliable non-official scorecards had it 114-114, maybe some to Lomachenko, one official judge had it 115-113 to Lomachenko, and yet they don't understand the subtleties in Lomachenko's defence.
> 
> I remember watching Lomachenko's amateur fight with Jose Carlos Ramirez, the first time I watched it, I thought it was much closer than the scorecards, but then I realised when watching it again what the real deal was.
> 
> As I used to say..._Fuck The Judges_


Take my warning as you will. You troll, you'll be banned. Simple. Make your points, but make your points based in reality.


----------



## Dealt_with

Bogotazo said:


> "Closer?" He lost. There is no way you can objectively justify 7 rounds for Lomachenko, at all. He lost, and you insisted he would win and shine and prove his ATG potential. To the point we were all sick of it. It didn't happen. Eat it.
> 
> He LOST. He did not win. To suggest he didn't is already borderline trolling, and to be even more insistent than you have in the past definitely would be. Word of advice, don't.
> 
> Enjoy your vacation.


:lol: Are you serious?
Make a compilation of all the clean shots Salido landed. It was a matter of quality versus Salido's activity. Every fight is subjective, you saying that you can't justify 7 rounds for Lomachenko is just about the stupidest thing I've ever heard.


----------



## Dealt_with

tliang1000 said:


> Loma train didn't go very far.


It's just starting, and I love the fact that there will be more Lomadoubters now :yep


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Chatty said:


> I honestly think Robeisy is the most naturally talented fighter I have seen since SRL. Its hard to fully predict but this kid coud really dominate if allowed to step out.


I think he can potentially go on to be an unbelievable, elite pro. The major questions I have are:
1. When he throws his big combinations, how would his stamina hold over a longer haul. 
2. He can be a bit passive and lazy mentally, he doesn't have the mental rigour of Lomachenko for example. Although I feel be beat Yeraliyev in the 2013 Worlds, it was a close fight and it was this which fucked him - he has too much ego in his game. 
3. His defense can do with a little improvement.

With all that considered, I honestly feel he is a sure thing to being a great pro, he's so naturally talented as you have pointed out.


----------



## Abraham

Well, like I said before, I like Lomachenko. I really do. Hell, I was even hoping for a bs decision, tbh. Thought it'd be better for boxing. I've been following Loma since his first Olympic appearance. All this smug satisfaction at his losing is sad, because he doesn't deserve it. He isn't overtly arrogant, he is not an asshole, which he proved in his post fight interview, but a lot of his fans can be absolutely infuriating, which is the reason behind the smug satisfaction. Same thing happened to Pacquiao.


----------



## Rockinghorseshit

Dealt_with said:


> It shows that race is on your mind. You're not fooling anyone you little bitch.


----------



## tliang1000

Dealt_with said:


> It's just starting, and I love the fact that there will be more Lomadoubters now :yep


His no excuse making post fight interview made me a fan. I wish him the best in the future.


----------



## Dealt_with

tliang1000 said:


> His no excuse making post fight interview made me a fan. I wish him the best in the future.


:cheers


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Bogotazo said:


> Take my warning as you will. You troll, you'll be banned. Simple. Make your points, but make your points based in reality.


So basically you're asking me to be a yes-man and just say every point that agrees with yours. You consider one of the judges a 'borderline troll' and Lederman close to being a borderline troll. Nice one buddy. That's fucking ridiculous and you're just wanting to warn me because I called you a pussy and faint hearted. That's not grounds for giving me a warning.

You are not allowing for a difference of opinion. I understand Lomachenko's game and I'm certainly not being a troll. I will make my points and you're going to be humbled because there will be intelligent reasoning behind it.

You picked Lomachenko beating Salido by KO let's not forget and I haven't even said my scorecard, it could have been judged as a close fight by me.

You are not banning me for shit as you don't have any reason for it. I'm off in 3 days time for a month anyway cos of the bet with Madcap.


----------



## Chatty

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I think he can potentially go on to be an unbelievable, elite pro. The major questions I have are:
> 1. When he throws his big combinations, how would his stamina hold over a longer haul.
> 2. He can be a bit passive and lazy mentally, he doesn't have the mental rigour of Lomachenko for example. Although I feel be beat Yeraliyev in the 2013 Worlds, it was a close fight and it was this which fucked him - he has too much ego in his game.
> 3. His defense can do with a little improvement.
> 
> With all that considered, I honestly feel he is a sure thing to being a great pro, he's so naturally talented as you have pointed out.


He has faults which all boxers do but I really think if he gets moved right the kid will be the main man of the next generation. He is 20 year old and already has the mind of a veteran, he is strong, has beat the crap out of seasoned amateurs and seems to have the x factor that everyone needs to go that extra mile. I really am excited about the kid.


----------



## bballchump11

Abraham said:


> A kid who was the best basketball player in the country in high school challenges a NBA vet to a game of one on one up to 10. The kid loses 10-3. The people who predicted the kid would lose say "I told you so" while the people that predicted the kid would handily beat the pro say, "hey I've even more impressed with the kid. He had the balls to take on such a big challenge, and he scored 3 points on the NBA vet!"


:lol: ya feel me. It's crazy. If you dared said he couldn't beat him, you'd get viciously attacked.

They said this highschool player could beat Micheal Jordan, Dr. J, Magic and Lebron in one on one. He played an old faded Vince Carter though


----------



## Bogotazo

Dealt_with said:


> :lol: Are you serious?
> Make a compilation of all the clean shots Salido landed. It was a matter of quality versus Salido's activity. Every fight is subjective, you saying that you can't justify 7 rounds for Lomachenko is just about the stupidest thing I've ever heard.


Why would I make a compilation? So you can do damage control and downplay it? You're the one who's not comporting to the majority view Salido won clearly, and you just so happen to be the biggest Lomatard on the net. Not likely a coincidence.

Saying Loma won 7 rounds is borderline trolling, yes. If that's the stupidest thing you've ever heard, try re-reading some of your early posts about how Lomachenko already has ATG pro ability.


----------



## bballchump11

Dealt_with said:


> It shows that race is on your mind. You're not fooling anyone you little bitch.


That's just a common saying from Afro Americans. I was told to kiss somebody's black ass twice today :lol: 
Stop trying to read something that's not there


----------



## Bogotazo

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> So basically you're asking me to be a yes-man and just say every point that agrees with yours. You consider one of the judges a 'borderline troll' and Lederman close to being a borderline troll. Nice one buddy. That's fucking ridiculous and you're just wanting to warn me because I called you a pussy and faint hearted. That's not grounds for giving me a warning.
> 
> You are not allowing for a difference of opinion. I understand Lomachenko's game and I'm certainly not being a troll. I will make my points and you're going to be humbled because there will be intelligent reasoning behind it.
> 
> You picked Lomachenko beating Salido by KO let's not forget and I haven't even said my scorecard, it could have been judged as a close fight by me.
> 
> You are not banning me for shit as you don't have any reason for it. I'm off in 3 days time for a month anyway cos of the bet with Madcap.


I didn't give you warnings for calling me anything, I'm warning you that "going even harder", which you said you would do, would go into troll territory, since you're already quite delusional and biased. Although fyi, the "grounds" are our discretion.

You don't have to be a yes-man, but if your views are so out of touch with the majority and are espoused in such high volume and insistence, it constitutes trolling.

I'll ban you if you warrant it. So, as I advised, don't stray from reasonableness and start trolling.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Bogotazo said:


> Why would I make a compilation? So you can do damage control and downplay it? You're the one who's not comporting to the majority view Salido won clearly, and you just so happen to be the biggest Lomatard on the net. Not likely a coincidence.
> 
> Saying Loma won 7 rounds is borderline trolling, yes. If that's the stupidest thing you've ever heard, try re-reading some of your early posts about how Lomachenko already has ATG pro ability.


 @Flea Man @Jay @Pabby

I'm being warned just because I think Lomachenko winning the fight is 'trollish'. 'Majority view', hardly when it was a split decision and it's considered a draw or 115-113 for Salido, and maybe 115-113 to Lomachenko. You have only watched the fight once too.


----------



## Bogotazo

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> @Flea Man @Jay @Pabby
> 
> I'm being warned just because I think Lomachenko winning the fight is 'trollish'. 'Majority view', hardly when it was a split decision and it's considered a draw or 115-113 for Salido, and maybe 115-113 to Lomachenko. You have only watched the fight once too.


:lol: You think tagging those guys actually HELPS you. That's cute.

I'm simply warning you not to take it farther and troll. Doing you a favor really.


----------



## bballchump11

Bogotazo said:


> I didn't give you warnings for calling me anything, I'm warning you that "going even harder", which you said you would do, would go into troll territory, since you're already quite delusional and biased. Although fyi, the "grounds" are our discretion.
> 
> You don't have to be a yes-man, but if your views are so out of touch with the majority and are espoused in such high volume and insistence, it constitutes trolling.
> 
> I'll ban you if you warrant it. So, as I advised, don't stray from reasonableness and start trolling.


 @Lunny @Wiirdo help!


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Chatty said:


> He has faults which all boxers do but I really think if he gets moved right the kid will be the main man of the next generation. He is 20 year old and already has the mind of a veteran, he is strong, has beat the crap out of seasoned amateurs and seems to have the x factor that everyone needs to go that extra mile. I really am excited about the kid.


Yeah I agree I really think he could be. See the way he toyed that Mexican dude in WSB? Showboating, sticking his tongue out, following it with strong combinations.


----------



## Dealt_with

Bogotazo said:


> Why would I make a compilation? So you can do damage control and downplay it? You're the one who's not comporting to the majority view Salido won clearly, and you just so happen to be the biggest Lomatard on the net. Not likely a coincidence.
> 
> Saying Loma won 7 rounds is borderline trolling, yes. If that's the stupidest thing you've ever heard, try re-reading some of your early posts about how Lomachenko already has ATG pro ability.


Watch the fight again without your expectations and see what really happened. Many of the rounds were close thanks to Lomachenko's lack of output, to say that he conclusively lost those rounds is idiotic.


----------



## Cableaddict

conradically said:


> it's too subtle for that. It's so incredibly subtle that it's for all practical purposes invisible. The human eye is simply ill-equipped for the task posed by Lomachenko's unobservable greatness.


:rofl

Clearly, we need better-trained judges !

Hey, I gave Loma the 12th. That's something, at least.


----------



## bballchump11




----------



## itsmeagain

i really dont see any trolling. was an awful fight to score.


----------



## MadcapMaxie

Chatty said:


> He has faults which all boxers do but I really think if he gets moved right the kid will be the main man of the next generation. He is 20 year old and already has the mind of a veteran, he is strong, has beat the crap out of seasoned amateurs and seems to have the x factor that everyone needs to go that extra mile. I really am excited about the kid.


He's 25. He's in his physical prime now. He's had 7 pro fights when looking at it objectively and close to 400 amateur fights. I don't think he'll amount to THAT much. He clearly is not very strong mentally, he couldn't will himself for a good 10 rounds to actually let his hands go. Still in amateur mode which was obvious when he did land something and then tied Salido up instead of landing more. Something I said ages ago when he did it in the Ramirez fight.


----------



## Hands of Iron

Dealt_with said:


> Watch the fight again without your expectations and see what really happened. Many of the rounds were close thanks to Lomachenko's lack of output, to say that he conclusively lost those rounds is idiotic.


Through 7 I'd have to agree.


----------



## Bogotazo

Dealt_with said:


> Watch the fight again without your expectations and see what really happened. Many of the rounds were close thanks to Lomachenko's lack of output, to say that he conclusively lost those rounds is idiotic.


Many of the rounds were Salido's due to his body punching and Lomachenko's lack of output, is what you must have meant to say. I'll watch the fight again when I have the time, but it was decisive enough that I don't need to in order to come to the correct and vast majority opinion that Salido clearly did enough to win 7 rounds, and Lomachenko didn't.


----------



## Chatty

MadcapMaxie said:


> He's 25. He's in his physical prime now. He's had 7 pro fights when looking at it objectively and close to 400 amateur fights. I don't think he'll amount to THAT much. He clearly is not very strong mentally, he couldn't will himself for a good 10 rounds to actually let his hands go. Still in amateur mode which was obvious when he did land something and then tied Salido up instead of landing more. Something I said ages ago when he did it in the Ramirez fight.


Im talking about Ramirez, he is 20 and showcasing the skill of a 30 year old master.


----------



## bballchump11

MadcapMaxie said:


> He's 25. He's in his physical prime now. He's had 7 pro fights when looking at it objectively and close to 400 amateur fights. I don't think he'll amount to THAT much. He clearly is not very strong mentally, he couldn't will himself for a good 10 rounds to actually let his hands go. Still in amateur mode which was obvious when he did land something and then tied Salido up instead of landing more. Something I said ages ago when he did it in the Ramirez fight.


damn that must hurt :kwonooh


----------



## Dealt_with

Bogotazo said:


> Many of the rounds were Salido's due to his body punching and Lomachenko's lack of output, is what you must have meant to say. I'll watch the fight again when I have the time, but it was decisive enough that I don't need to in order to come to the correct and vast majority opinion that Salido clearly did enough to win 7 rounds, and Lomachenko didn't.


Expectations affect the way you score a bout, with Lomachenko's expectations he was always going to suffer if the result was anything other than an early round knockout.


----------



## BuriK

if he would of let his hands go more like he did in the later rounds then it might of been a different outcome and also he should of low blowed salido the fuck back....... but damn you make it hard for others to like lomachenko as a fighter


----------



## Bogotazo

Dealt_with said:


> Expectations affect the way you score a bout,


Not always, not overwhelmingly, and not to the extent that all observation made in the course of judging becomes an impossible exercise.



Dealt_with said:


> with Lomachenko's expectations he was always going to suffer if the result was anything other than an early round knockout.


He suffered because he got outlanded in a majority of rounds, and his opponent was awarded points for it.


----------



## Abraham

When a fight is tough to score, how do you score it? You score it for what it is. And scoring it for what it was, Salido won. He didn't dominate Lomachenko, but he did more than enough to win based on activity, and Loma's lack thereof.


----------



## FelixTrinidad

Damn are people fucking retarded?

The problem isn't that Lomachenko sucked or did bad. He doesn't suck and he didn't do bad. The problem is that a lot of Lomachenko fans and a fair number of the boxing press had Lomachenko 'doing great things' before he even had 1 pro fight. The perception is that he is a future ATG and an amazing fighter already. That's the problem.

If Lomachenko was actually as great as some members of the press and as some of his fans thought he was, Lomachenko should have knocked Salido the fuck out within 6 rounds. 


Lomachenko didn't do bad and he doesn't suck. He's simply not as good as some people thought.



Lomachenko's career will probably end up somewhere between Zab Judah and Miguel Cotto. He actually remind me of a poor man's Mikey Garcia.


----------



## JDK

Dealt_with said:


> Expectations affect the way you score a bout, with Lomachenko's expectations he was always going to suffer if the result was anything other than an early round knockout.


You're making tons of assumptions again. 
Believe it or not, there's some of us who watch a fight for what it is. Salido made it his fight and lost control of it far less than Lomachenko. Lomachenko still has an amateur mentality and was not comfortable in there. I'm impressed he made it a close fight, but he was not ready for a Salido at the end of the day


----------



## artful

bballchump11 said:


> fuck off
> 
> Greatest amateur of all time is 1-1 as a professional :rofl


:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul




----------



## artful

This result says alot about the so called CHB boxing experts tbh all picking Loma.


----------



## Flea Man

Salido might've been heavy but Dealt With and Gauls posts about Loma being able to easiky beat welterweights look cuntish now.

I sincerely hope neither of them show their faces round here agaim and I've gladly activated Dealts ban, and chucked a couple more months on for the lols.

Well done Maxie.

LONG LIVE SAENSAK!


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Flea Man said:


> Salido might've been heavy but Dealt With and Gauls posts about Loma being able to easiky beat welterweights look cuntish now.
> 
> I sincerely hope neither of them show their faces round here agaim and I've gladly activated Dealts ban, and chucked a couple more months on for the lols.
> 
> Well done Maxie.
> 
> LONG LIVE SAENSAK!


gee thanks Flea


----------



## JDK

Flea Man said:


> Salido might've been heavy but Dealt With and Gauls posts about Loma being able to easiky beat welterweights look cuntish now.
> 
> I sincerely hope neither of them show their faces round here agaim and I've gladly activated Dealts ban, and chucked a couple more months on for the lols.
> 
> Well done Maxie.
> 
> LONG LIVE SAENSAK!


Don't forget his pet monkey, the snitch


----------



## Reppin501

Dealt_with said:


> The fight didn't go completely as expected, as @The Undefeated Gaul had mentioned before the fight the only thing that could hold Lomachenko back is the pacing of 12 rounds. Lomachenko didn't let his hands go enough, especially to the body.
> Apart from that, Lomachenko showed why he's destined for ATG status. He proved his chin (from the two clean shots Salido landed over 12 rounds) and his stamina (picking up the pace and leaving Salido holding on for life in the 12th).
> The judging was rubbish but it has to be expected in the pro game, we've seen countless fights where fighters get rounds based purely on activity/ineffective aggression. Lomachenko is used to the amateur game where only clean shots count. Lomachenko throws his punches so short and he's so efficient in his defence that most people can't see what's really going on. I scored the fight 9-3 for Lomachenko, there were rounds where he simply didn't throw enough. Salido didn't land anything but Lomachenko was too concerned with defence and pacing himself that Salido stole rounds based purely on more punches thrown. Salido not making weight and coming in at 147 was disgraceful as well, but it wasn't really a problem since Lomachenko showed that he was the physically stronger guy.
> 
> Apart from the pacing issue this fight has just reinforced my belief in Lomachenko, he was the one who took Salido into deep waters and was drowning him :lol:
> If only Lomachenko threw more body punches in the earlier rounds then there's no way Salido would've lasted 12, Salido had the look of a defeated man until the decision was announced. Lomachenko handled the BS decision with as much class as I've ever seen, his attitude and mental strength just constantly impresses me.
> 
> Lomachenko has learned about pacing and pro judging now, he won't let fights look close again. Maybe Lomachenko can get that bout against GRJ for the vacant title? Lomachenko will demolish him and then he can take on Rigo, I think Vasyl needs that win on his record now to get back the respect of the more casual fans who are so concerned with that 0.
> 
> Unfortunately I took a ban bet with madcap maxie so I need to leave for three months, but make no mistake, the Lomatard express rolls on :yep
> Lomachenko is truly the best fighter I've ever seen, and I don't view this fight as a loss in anyway. He gained the experience of pacing for 12 rounds and had the veteran pro welterweight Salido holding on for dear life in the final two rounds, we've never seen Salido finish a fight like that. He needs to throw more body punches in the future and learn that clean punches don't matter as much in the pro game, activity matters the most (he should watch some Calzaghe). If he wants to land clean punches only he needs to fight on the outside more, they are more eye catching there as punches on the inside often get missed by judges.
> Before this fight I didn't think Lomachenko had the body type to claim titles in multiple weight divisions but seeing how handled 147lb Salido I have no doubt he can move up in the future, so many exciting fights to be made for our generations SRR :yep
> 
> P.S. thanks to Gaul for mentioning that I was unbanned, that little bitch Flea Man gave me the message that it was a permanent ban for homophobia (no one has ever called someone else a **** on here before? :verysad).


Didnt read this bullshit, but if it said anything other than "I went full retard, and put all my eggs in the basket of a turd", then I'm not interested in hearing it. Loma sucks balls...


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Trust me, I'm going to give my opinion on it all and I will not be rewarding extra unwarranted points to either fighter.


----------



## Reppin501

Dealt_with said:


> Yeah you're right, Ottke is undoubtedly going to go down in history as a far greater fighter than Lomachenko :rolleyes
> That 0 is pretty important to you isn't it? I care about opponents. I don't give a shit about that 0 and obviously neither does Lomachenko, he fights for history, not for the money and dick holding you're so interested in.


Your boy sucks ass, he got out pointed...think about that out fucking pointed by Salido. Fuck off bro, seriously.


----------



## Hatesrats

Loma was schooled by a waaaay past it


> "Face first brawler".[unquote]


----------



## Reppin501

Dealt_with said:


> Lomachenko needs to learn to complain about and exaggerate lowblows as well, just another pro trick. He should talk to Bhop :yep
> I can't complain about that too much though, Lomachenko held a bit too much for my liking so it evens out. I was screaming for Loma to throw to the body, I don't know what happened there. Great experience for Lomachenko, at least this loss gives the haters something to cling onto in the future, it was going to be too one-sided for us otherwise :yep
> I hope the GRJ or Gradovich fight can still be made, that will be a fine showcase for Loma and winning a pro title in your third fight is still pretty impressive (even though I truly believe he should've won tonight, but like Loma we can't focus on the things we can't control).
> 
> I expected to be nervous before the fight but it wasn't actually that bad, and after the decision I was relaxed and smiling. Partly because of Lomachenko's class and seeing him go 12 rounds with Salido holding on for life and partly because I knew what was waiting here :lol:
> These fools talking about suicide watch, these Lomahaters don't realise that Lomatards come equipped with Lomachenko level mental strength and resilience :cheers
> I'm honestly more excited about Lomachenko's career than ever, and I can't wait to watch the fight again.


He would be better served "learning" how to not be a shit box.


----------



## artful

Flea Man said:


> Salido might've been heavy but Dealt With and Gauls posts about Loma being able to easiky beat welterweights look cuntish now.
> 
> I sincerely hope neither of them show their faces round here agaim and I've gladly activated Dealts ban, and chucked a couple more months on for the lols.
> 
> Well done Maxie.
> 
> LONG LIVE SAENSAK!


Don't be a shit mod ban them for what the bet was no need to throw your tiny e-penis around.


----------



## LeapingHook

Reppin501 said:


> Your boy sucks ass, he got out pointed...think about that out fucking pointed by Salido. Fuck off bro, seriously.


Why does he suck balls? He lost a close fight against a tough champion in his 2nd fight, in a fight where he didn't get any favors from the ref at all. If he was KOed in 2 rounds or gassed after 6 then I'd see your point, but IMO Lomachenko proved that he could be a very good fighter but just tried to do too much too soon.


----------



## Bryn

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


----------



## FelixTrinidad

Lomachenko got exposed and his fans can't deal with it.

Lomachenko is a poor man's Adrien Broner. Lol.

He's like the Nissan to Broner's Infiniti. 
The Buick to Broner's Cadillac


----------



## Brnxhands

lmao damn. Im proud of lomachenko though. Salido in his second fight is no joke. He will be a great fighter no doubt.


----------



## FelixTrinidad

LeapingHook said:


> Why does he suck balls? He lost a close fight against a tough champion in his 2nd fight, in a fight where he didn't get any favors from the ref at all. If he was KOed in 2 rounds or gassed after 6 then I'd see your point, but IMO Lomachenko proved that he could be a very good fighter but just tried to do too much too soon.


He got beaten up and raped dude. Joshua destroyed his opponent in ONE ROUND and he only had 35 AMATEUR FIGHTS COMPARED TO LOMACHENKO'S FUCKING 400+.


----------



## LeapingHook

FelixTrinidad said:


> He got beaten up and raped dude. Joshua destroyed his opponent in ONE ROUND and he only had 35 AMATEUR FIGHTS COMPARED TO LOMACHENKO'S FUCKING 400+.


Yeah, that trollin ain't obvious at all, FelixTrinidad.


----------



## steviebruno

Dealt_with said:


> The fight didn't go completely as expected, as @The Undefeated Gaul had mentioned before the fight the only thing that could hold Lomachenko back is the pacing of 12 rounds. Lomachenko didn't let his hands go enough, especially to the body.
> Apart from that, Lomachenko showed why he's destined for ATG status. He proved his chin (from the two clean shots Salido landed over 12 rounds) and his stamina (picking up the pace and leaving Salido holding on for life in the 12th).
> The judging was rubbish but it has to be expected in the pro game, we've seen countless fights where fighters get rounds based purely on activity/ineffective aggression. Lomachenko is used to the amateur game where only clean shots count. Lomachenko throws his punches so short and he's so efficient in his defence that most people can't see what's really going on. I scored the fight 9-3 for Lomachenko, there were rounds where he simply didn't throw enough. Salido didn't land anything but Lomachenko was too concerned with defence and pacing himself that Salido stole rounds based purely on more punches thrown. Salido not making weight and coming in at 147 was disgraceful as well, but it wasn't really a problem since Lomachenko showed that he was the physically stronger guy.
> 
> Apart from the pacing issue this fight has just reinforced my belief in Lomachenko, he was the one who took Salido into deep waters and was drowning him :lol:
> If only Lomachenko threw more body punches in the earlier rounds then there's no way Salido would've lasted 12, Salido had the look of a defeated man until the decision was announced. Lomachenko handled the BS decision with as much class as I've ever seen, his attitude and mental strength just constantly impresses me.
> 
> Lomachenko has learned about pacing and pro judging now, he won't let fights look close again. Maybe Lomachenko can get that bout against GRJ for the vacant title? Lomachenko will demolish him and then he can take on Rigo, I think Vasyl needs that win on his record now to get back the respect of the more casual fans who are so concerned with that 0.
> 
> Unfortunately I took a ban bet with madcap maxie so I need to leave for three months, but make no mistake, the Lomatard express rolls on :yep
> Lomachenko is truly the best fighter I've ever seen, and I don't view this fight as a loss in anyway. He gained the experience of pacing for 12 rounds and had the veteran pro welterweight Salido holding on for dear life in the final two rounds, we've never seen Salido finish a fight like that. He needs to throw more body punches in the future and learn that clean punches don't matter as much in the pro game, activity matters the most (he should watch some Calzaghe). If he wants to land clean punches only he needs to fight on the outside more, they are more eye catching there as punches on the inside often get missed by judges.
> Before this fight I didn't think Lomachenko had the body type to claim titles in multiple weight divisions but seeing how handled 147lb Salido I have no doubt he can move up in the future, so many exciting fights to be made for our generations SRR :yep
> 
> P.S. thanks to Gaul for mentioning that I was unbanned, that little bitch Flea Man gave me the message that it was a permanent ban for homophobia (no one has ever called someone else a **** on here before? :verysad).


This thread is amateurish at best.


----------



## FelixTrinidad

LeapingHook said:


> Yeah, that trollin ain't obvious at all, FelixTrinidad.


Who's trolling you fucking degenerate.

Anthony Joshua had 35 AM fights. He's 5-0 right now with 5 brutal knock outs.
Lomachenko had over 400 AM FIGHTS and he's 1-1. If he loses again, he'll be sub 500 lmfao.

Let me ask you this fucktard.

How would Salido do against the Joshua who fought today?


----------



## LeapingHook

FelixTrinidad said:


> Who's trolling you fucking degenerate.
> 
> Anthony Joshua had 35 AM fights. He's 5-0 right now with 5 brutal knock outs.
> Lomachenko had over 400 AM FIGHTS and he's 1-1. If he loses again, he'll be sub 500 lmfao.
> 
> Let me ask you this fucktard.
> 
> How would Salido do against the Joshua who fought today?


If you aren't trolling you should blow your brains out.


----------



## FelixTrinidad

LeapingHook said:


> If you aren't trolling you should blow your brains out.


Ya because I deserve to die because I gave my OPINION on a boxer who neither one of us have ever met.

Boxing is not life bro, you seriously gonna let a poster's opinions affect you that much bro?

But tell you what.... When I'm driving in my Brand New 2014 Lexus IS 350 F Sport tomorrow, I'll go an extra 10 miles past the speed limit.


----------



## bballchump11

FelixTrinidad said:


> Who's trolling you fucking degenerate.
> 
> Anthony Joshua had 35 AM fights. He's 5-0 right now with 5 brutal knock outs.
> Lomachenko had over 400 AM FIGHTS and he's 1-1. If he loses again, he'll be sub 500 lmfao.
> 
> Let me ask you this fucktard.
> 
> How would Salido do against the Joshua who fought today?


:lol:


----------



## Strike

Dealt_with said:


> Lomachenko is truly the best fighter I've ever seen


:lol:


----------



## ChicoTheBoy

This guy was gonna beat Rigo, LMFAOOOO, stop it, stop it!:rofl

In fairness, if he had fought 3 more fights, maybe one 10 rounder before tonight, he probably beats Salido. Horrible management and career choices on his part. Have some fucking patience. Ice those balls and enjoy the loss, byeeeeeeeee. :clap:

0 fan base, 1-1 record. Poor bob , he still has the the chinese kid.


----------



## Flea Man

artful said:


> Don't be a shit mod ban them for what the bet was no need to throw your tiny e-penis around.


Who the fuck are you? Dealt With is a cheeky cunt.


----------



## Flea Man

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> gee thanks Flea


You're a nice kid. But you fucked up with your assumptions which were kinda' like a little girl hypothesising over what bubble bath Harry Styles uses.


----------



## FelixTrinidad

Damn Lomachenko is so shit, even the Glass Jaw Polish Gimp Strike is laughing at his fans.

I heard it was recently your birthday Strike.
Happy Birthday Old Man.
I'll enjoy youthful life a little bit more for the memories you left behind.


----------



## ChicoTheBoy

Dealt_with said:


> Expectations affect the way you score a bout, with Lomachenko's expectations he was always going to suffer if the result was anything other than an early round knockout.


Aaaaaaaaand who set those expectations?


----------



## Strike

Bogotazo said:


> Take my warning as you will. You troll, you'll be banned. Simple. Make your points, but make your points based in reality.


You're going to ban someone for having a different opinion on a fight?:rolleyes


----------



## Bogotazo

Strike said:


> You're going to ban someone for having a different opinion on a fight?:rolleyes


No, I'm warning someone who has been borderline trolling and creating personal conflicts with other posters constantly for months on this topic to refrain from "going even harder" as they claimed they would with troll-like posts which have no basis in reality. Like Dealt_With's claim that Loma could beat Mayweather at 147 pounds tomorrow, for example, after months of his own trolling campaign.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Flea Man said:


> You're a nice kid. But you fucked up with your assumptions which were kinda' like a little girl hypothesising over what bubble bath Harry Styles uses.


It's only under those assumptions that I could formulate any sort of argument, it was hypothesising but was for fun and entertaining what could have potentially been the case....otherwise I acknowledged my statements were without basis. People wrongly see that as trolling, as though I don't think those premises apply and I force my opinion down the neck of people (I never have).


----------



## Felix




----------



## Flea Man

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> It's only under those assumptions that I could formulate any sort of argument, it was hypothesising but was for fun and entertaining what could have potentially been the case....otherwise I acknowledged my statements were without basis. People wrongly see that as trolling, as though I don't think those premises apply and I force my opinion down the neck of people (I never have).


Honestly you became one of the most annoying, unswayable and persistently unbelievable posters I've ever come across.

When you disputed that Muangsurin was the harder puncher because Lomachenko has dropped some people in the WSB I genuinely wanted to scream.

You are very biased, very unreasonable, and all your posts on the matter were fan posts disguised as analysis.

I would suggest going forward that if you persist you should start up a fan forum and go there. Which is a shame because on everything else you're a really good poster and one I love conversing with.

As far as Dealt_With is concerned, I hope that punk has an aneurysm.


----------



## Flea Man

Let's not forget that I thought Salido was past his best and that I thought Lomachenko would win handily!

Why I don't look (as big of) a stupid cunt is because I haven't been banging the drum that Lomachenko is the greatest and most complete fighter to ever step into a ring.

Dealt_With said Chang didn't compare in any facet of the game to Lomachenko atsch :rofl

A shame Loma didn't win though as I'd have loved a superfight with Rigo where someones '0' had to go.

Guess it shows that the top amateurs in the WSB aren't automatically better than the top pros.


----------



## Cableaddict

Flea Man said:


> Who the fuck are you? Dealt With is a cheeky cunt.


In fairness, he's not all that cheeky. :lol:


----------



## Flea Man

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> @Flea Man @Jay @Pabby
> 
> I'm being warned just because I think Lomachenko winning the fight is 'trollish'. 'Majority view', hardly when it was a split decision and it's considered a draw or 115-113 for Salido, and maybe 115-113 to Lomachenko. You have only watched the fight once too.


I'm with @Bogotazo

As far as I'm concerned Dealt_With is a troll and you have been caught up with him and have become one of the most irritating posters outside of those that can't spell and post hyped stuff.

If you 'go harder' or whatever, I would gladly see you banned. Although I think most posters don't mind and just enjoy the hilarity that comes from your posts.


----------



## Flea Man

Cableaddict said:


> In fairness, he's not all that cheeky. :lol:


Are you an alt of his?


----------



## Them Bones

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> @*Flea Man* @*Jay* @*Pabby*
> 
> I'm being warned just because I think Lomachenko winning the fight is 'trollish'. 'Majority view', hardly when it was a split decision and it's considered a draw or 115-113 for Salido, and maybe 115-113 to Lomachenko. You have only watched the fight once too.


:smile


----------



## Felix

Dealt_with said:


> Expectations affect the way you score a bout, with Lomachenko's expectations he was always going to suffer if the result was anything other than an early round knockout.


Too many excuses.


----------



## FelixTrinidad

Flea Man said:


> I'm with @Bogotazo
> 
> As far as I'm concerned Dealt_With is a troll and you have been caught up with him and have become one of the most irritating posters outside of those that can't spell and post hyped stuff.
> 
> If you 'go harder' or whatever, I would gladly see you banned. Although I think most posters don't mind and just enjoy the hilarity that comes from your posts.


Don't listen to the haters, Flea. You are doing a great job. I agree with you. Trolls need to be contained and we need to keep an eye on those types of posters. This is a wonderful site and posters like Dealt_With just drag down the overall quality of this site. I hate it when posters can't be objective. 
Do I have 'favorites'? Yes. Did I let that affect my judgement in regards to my highly respected top 100 ATG List? No I did not.


----------



## JamieC

Lomachenko will still be an ATG. If Russell Jr picks up the vacant title it will sum up everything wrong with boxing. I. Fact this forums reaction to his loss sums it up pretty well tbh. You have a guy who wants to push himself to the limit and takes on a tough campaigner in his second bout, a veteran who doesn't bother attempting to make weight, who hits low throughout the fight, he loses a close SD that could be scored to him and "boxing fans" revel in it, bizarre


----------



## Cableaddict

Flea Man said:


> Are you an alt of his?


I think you missed the joke. :smile

(remember that old joke from grade school? A tough kid walks up to little Jimmy and says, " Hey, did you here? Billy Connolly claims that your Mother blows dead horses! - but I stuck up for you. I said , "Nah, once I saw one of them move."

- same thing. :yep


----------



## Strike

Bogotazo said:


> No, I'm warning someone who has been borderline trolling and creating personal conflicts with other posters constantly for months on this topic to refrain from "going even harder" as they claimed they would with troll-like posts which have no basis in reality. Like Dealt_With's claim that Loma could beat Mayweather at 147 pounds tomorrow, for example, after months of his own trolling campaign.


Fair enough...although the biggest troll on the forum seems to get away with and is trolling right here on this thread with his stupid Joshua vs Salido comparison.


----------



## Bogotazo

Strike said:


> Fair enough...although the biggest troll on the forum seems to get away with and is trolling right here on this thread with his stupid Joshua vs Salido comparison.


He's been disciplined before and will be again if necessary. Right now he seems to just be having a laugh. He has a trollish nature but hasn't been creating personal conflicts and spamming threads with the same damn topic for months.


----------



## MadcapMaxie

Flea Man said:


> Salido might've been heavy but Dealt With and Gauls posts about Loma being able to easiky beat welterweights look cuntish now.
> 
> I sincerely hope neither of them show their faces round here agaim and I've gladly activated Dealts ban, and chucked a couple more months on for the lols.
> 
> Well done Maxie.
> 
> LONG LIVE SAENSAK!


:rofl:rofl:rofl You legend Flea!


----------



## JMP

JamieC said:


> Lomachenko will still be an ATG. If Russell Jr picks up the vacant title it will sum up everything wrong with boxing. I. Fact this forums reaction to his loss sums it up pretty well tbh. You have a guy who wants to push himself to the limit and takes on a tough campaigner in his second bout, a veteran who doesn't bother attempting to make weight, who hits low throughout the fight, he loses a close SD that could be scored to him and "boxing fans" revel in it, bizarre


+1


----------



## Flea Man

Cableaddict said:


> I think you missed the joke. :smile
> 
> (remember that old joke from grade school? A tough kid walks up to little Jimmy and says, " Hey, did you here? Billy Connolly claims that your Mother blows dead horses! - but I stuck up for you. I said , "Nah, once I saw one of them move."
> 
> - same thing. :yep


Oh, shit atsch

You the man. I'm still half asleep, sorry :good


----------



## JamieC

Bogotazo said:


> He's been disciplined before and will be again if necessary. Right now he seems to just be having a laugh. He has a trollish nature but hasn't been creating personal conflicts and spamming threads with the same damn topic for months.


There's his weird top 100 but at least that's contained


----------



## ~Cellzki~

Dealt_with said:


> It shows that race is on your mind. You're not fooling anyone you little bitch.


lmao hes mad


----------



## Flea Man

JamieC said:


> Lomachenko will still be an ATG. If Russell Jr picks up the vacant title it will sum up everything wrong with boxing. I. Fact this forums reaction to his loss sums it up pretty well tbh. You have a guy who wants to push himself to the limit and takes on a tough campaigner in his second bout, a veteran who doesn't bother attempting to make weight, who hits low throughout the fight, he loses a close SD that could be scored to him and "boxing fans" revel in it, bizarre


I love Lomachenko amd I actually think he proved his class.

I think the hilarity is on a very small, forum-based scale and not all that serious. Just a chance for a giggle at those who thought Lomachenko was already a more complete fighter than Jung Koo Chang, more dynamic than Ray Leonard and would go undefeated right up 'til welterweight, prove himself the P4P hardest puncher in boxing and prove to be the G.O.A.T.


----------



## Hands of Iron

JamieC said:


> Lomachenko will still be an ATG. If Russell Jr picks up the vacant title it will sum up everything wrong with boxing. I. Fact this forums reaction to his loss sums it up pretty well tbh. You have a guy who wants to push himself to the limit and takes on a tough campaigner in his second bout, a veteran who doesn't bother attempting to make weight, who hits low throughout the fight, he loses a close SD that could be scored to him and "boxing fans" revel in it, bizarre


:sad5


----------



## JamieC

Flea Man said:


> I love Lomachenko amd I actually think he proved his class.
> 
> I think the hilarity is on a very small, forum-based scale and not all that serious. Just a chance for a giggle at those who thought Lomachenko was already a more complete fighter than Jung Koo Chang, more dynamic than Ray Leonard and would go undefeated right up 'til welterweight, prove himself the P4P hardest puncher in boxing and prove to be the G.O.A.T.


What annoys me about tonight us that on another night he might have got the nod or won it clearly, just wasn't his night and he'll never get the chance to avenge it and now he'll be set back and won't fight for a title again for a while, even though he's ample good enough to win one. If I was hin I'd want a world level opponent in 10 weeks, get straight back on it and get this behind hin asap, don't take a break or fight cans to build a record


----------



## JamieC

Hands of Iron said:


> :sad5


I'd that a "you crazy" :sad5 or" unfortunately true" :sad5? I'm guessing im way off with public opinion


----------



## Bogotazo

JamieC said:


> What annoys me about tonight us that on another night he might have got the nod or won it clearly, just wasn't his night and he'll never get the chance to avenge it and now he'll be set back and won't fight for a title again for a while, even though he's ample good enough to win one. If I was hin I'd want a world level opponent in 10 weeks, get straight back on it and get this behind hin asap, don't take a break or fight cans to build a record


Here's the thing, ATG caliber fighters don't "just not have their night" against opposition like Salido (who is very good, but not great). At least not when they're young and starting out as professionals. He might get there, but he's clearly not there yet. It's actually hurt him that some of his fans tried to force-feed us that pathetic idea. He's clearly very good, and hung in there competitively with Salido, nearly stopping him in the 12th. No need for him to crawl back under the rug, he just needs to progress gradually.


----------



## Hands of Iron

JamieC said:


> I'd that a "you crazy" :sad5 or" unfortunately true" :sad5? I'm guessing im way off with public opinion


The latter.

I honestly don't know what else there is to look forward to with this sport pretty soon. It's already so diluted and fractured.


----------



## JamieC

Bogotazo said:


> Here's the thing, ATG caliber fighters don't "just not have their night" against opposition like Salido (who is very good, but not great). At least not when they're young and starting out as professionals. He might get there, but he's clearly not there yet. It's actually hurt him that some of his fans tried to force-feed us that pathetic idea. He's clearly very good, and hung in there competitively with Salido, nearly stopping him in the 12th. No need for him to crawl back under the rug, he just needs to progress gradually.


Of course they do. ATG fighters have off nights all the time at all levels, whether it's Hopkins against Mitchell (not sure if off night but you get what im saying) or Pac against Rustecampo, losing early on means nothing to future standing and neither of those losses were against Salido calibre opposition. He will get there, if he could rewind he would win that fight, he paced himself a bit too much early which was always a possibility and a risk he took, but I think he was the better fighter in there just let Salido into the fight too much. No point going back too many levels and progressing slowly, get straight back on the horse and right this wrong.


----------



## JamieC

Hands of Iron said:


> The latter.
> 
> I honestly don't know what else there is to look forward to with this sport pretty soon. It's already so diluted and fractured.


Thats honestly how I'm feeling, i might take a break from watching it for a while, this was the last bit of "good news" the sport had coming for the next few months but it came so close but didn't quite happen and people are loving it :conf everything else just seems anti climactic for a while with nothing in the horizon


----------



## Strike

Bogotazo said:


> He's been disciplined before and will be again if necessary. Right now he seems to just be having a laugh. He has a trollish nature but hasn't been creating personal conflicts and spamming threads with the same damn topic for months.


The only reason there is not a personal conflict is because I am above his boring trolling and ignore his constant insults, weird references to me and so on.


----------



## MadcapMaxie

Bogotazo said:


> Here's the thing, ATG caliber fighters don't "just not have their night" against opposition like Salido (who is very good, but not great). At least not when they're young and starting out as professionals. He might get there, but he's clearly not there yet. It's actually hurt him that some of his fans tried to force-feed us that pathetic idea. He's clearly very good, and hung in there competitively with Salido, nearly stopping him in the 12th. No need for him to crawl back under the rug, he just needs to progress gradually.


I said this same thing months ago to Dealt with, I said give the kid time, let him have some fights before making such statements and now a performance that otherwise would've been said to be very good for their second pro fight is being trashed pretty heavily. I find it funny because I was on the other side. Then again this is really his 8th pro fight, Rigo at the time had already beaten a beltholder.


----------



## FelixTrinidad

Strike said:


> The only reason there is not a personal conflict is because I am above his boring trolling and ignore his constant insults, weird references to me and so on.


You got a problem with me? Take it to the lounge glass boy.

If you can't tell the difference between me occasionally calling you a glass jaw ***, and Dealt_With constantly spamming for months on end about one fighter.. you are a moron.

You ask me politely to stop calling you glass jaw, and I will. You know what you are doing right now?
You are being a rat.

What's the most ironic thing about your posts is that you say 'you are above my insults' yet you are complaining about my insults by saying 'the only reason I don't response to his insults is because I'm above his insults'.

That line might be too complicated for your pea sized brain to register. Think about it for a while ok.


----------



## FelixTrinidad

JamieC said:


> There's his weird top 100 but at least that's contained


Did you read the poems? Those were pretty good. Also you can't really say that's a troll list because there are a lot of ATGs on that list, just in different orders from how people normally rank them.

It's not like I listed 100 fighters with losing records. Every fighter on that list is a champion of some sort.

I actually care about most of you. The only reason I haven't made a thread called 'My 50,000 dollar car have arrived, feeling good at age 21' is because I don't want to look down upon the vast majority of you guys who's not as blessed as I am. I may troll for fun, but I never want to hurt y'all.


----------



## Strike

FelixTrinidad said:


> You got a problem with me? Take it to the lounge glass boy.
> 
> If you can't tell the difference between me occasionally calling you a glass jaw ***, and Dealt_With constantly spamming for months on end about one fighter.. you are a moron.
> 
> You ask me politely to stop calling you glass jaw, and I will. You know what you are doing right now?
> You are being a rat.
> 
> What's the most ironic thing about your posts is that you say 'you are above my insults' yet you are complaining about my insults by saying 'the only reason I don't response to his insults is because I'm above his insults'.
> 
> That line might be too complicated for your pea sized brain to register. Think about it for a while ok.


Nah...if I wanted to complain about you, I'd have reported your incessant trolling ages ago. I was using you as an example of why I thought it seemed harsh to call Dealt_with a troll etc. Your obsession with me is fucking weird, but you evidently a weird person so who knows why you are as you are? I will go back to ignoring you now. Bye.


----------



## Bogotazo

Strike said:


> The only reason there is not a personal conflict is because I am above his boring trolling and ignore his constant insults, weird references to me and so on.


Well if you see anything undesirably trollish, please report it. There are some wacky characters on here who are well received, despite their antics, and some who aren't.


----------



## Bogotazo

JamieC said:


> Of course they do. ATG fighters have off nights all the time at all levels, whether it's Hopkins against Mitchell (not sure if off night but you get what im saying) or Pac against Rustecampo, losing early on means nothing to future standing and neither of those losses were against Salido calibre opposition. He will get there, if he could rewind he would win that fight, he paced himself a bit too much early which was always a possibility and a risk he took, but I think he was the better fighter in there just let Salido into the fight too much. No point going back too many levels and progressing slowly, get straight back on the horse and right this wrong.


But that's what I'm saying, Pac wasn't there YET. Neither is Lomachenko, which is the opposite of what has been suggested by the two fanboys on here. It's not like he just had a bad round or two, he lost fairly clearly and looked unprepared to handle a swarmer who could use feints so well. Those are problems beyond just a bad night, they are technical problems. As I said, he doesn't need to go back under the rug, but there's no reason he should risk taking more losses at a level he has time to get to more gradually.


----------



## JamieC

Bogotazo said:


> But that's what I'm saying, Pac wasn't there YET. Neither is Lomachenko, which is the opposite of what has been suggested by the two fanboys on here. It's not like he just had a bad round or two, he lost fairly clearly and looked unprepared to handle a swarmer who could use feints so well. Those are problems beyond just a bad night, they are technical problems. As I said, he doesn't need to go back under the rug, but there's no reason he should risk taking more losses at a level he has time to get to more gradually.


But he's much further along than they were, he's _basically_ there, he would win if they fought again tomorrow imo. I don't think he did lose clearly, I thought he looked like he edged it (didn't score it as missed sone of it so will revisit). Yes it was close but that experience is invaluable to him. I never he was a bonafide ATG already, fighters learn throughout their careers even at the top so he will still improve regardless of the result. I think fight two tough contenders or one guaranteed twelve rounder and then one he can look impressive against and go again. I just hope Bob doesn't pput him down the cards fighting scrubs, invest in his opposition and get him a title shot within a year imo


----------



## Bogotazo

JamieC said:


> But he's much further along than they were, he's _basically_ there, he would win if they fought again tomorrow imo.


That's not ATG level though. That's just World Class.



JamieC said:


> I don't think he did lose clearly, I thought he looked like he edged it (didn't score it as missed sone of it so will revisit). Yes it was close but that experience is invaluable to him. I never he was a bonafide ATG already, fighters learn throughout their careers even at the top so he will still improve regardless of the result. I think fight two tough contenders or one guaranteed twelve rounder and then one he can look impressive against and go again. I just hope Bob doesn't pput him down the cards fighting scrubs, invest in his opposition and get him a title shot within a year imo


Right, but there's a tradeoff between learning and losing. You can learn without losing. I'm sure this was a valuable experience for him, but I'm also sure he's not happy that his record as a pro right now is 1-1. That could have been avoided. He can keep learning without taking losses against fighters he's not prepared to deal with. He doesn't have to fight scrubs, but he doesn't need to rush towards a world title for no reason and pick up losses.


----------



## Felix

Bogotazo said:


> But that's what I'm saying, Pac wasn't there YET. Neither is Lomachenko, which is the opposite of what has been suggested by the two fanboys on here. It's not like he just had a bad round or two, he lost fairly clearly and looked unprepared to handle a swarmer who could use feints so well. Those are problems beyond just a bad night, they are technical problems. As I said, he doesn't need to go back under the rug, but there's no reason he should risk taking more losses at a level he has time to get to more gradually.


Yet you'd have been shouted down for so much as suggesting Lomachenko was anything less than a complete fighter. Earlier in this thread I noticed Dealt With claim Lomachenko proved his chin despite apparently only being hit cleanly a couple of times, and that he proved his stamina despite also apparently having problems with his pacing. Both of those seem pretty careless contradictions to me.


----------



## dyna

I already said before I was very scared Lomanclinchko isn't as good as they say he is.
Fuck that fight was boring.

2 have tried, 1 has succeeded


----------



## JamieC

Bogotazo said:


> That's not ATG level though. That's just World Class.


Ye but that's world class after 2 fights, his ATG standing depends on what he can do at this class of fight. If he unifies or becomes the man at feather and does the same at super feather and lightweight (all very plausible) then that gives him ATG status, him ppacing his fight wrong doesn't change his upside



> Right, but there's a tradeoff between learning and losing. You can learn without losing. I'm sure this was a valuable experience for him, but I'm also sure he's not happy that his record as a pro right now is 1-1. That could have been avoided. He can keep learning without taking losses against fighters he's not prepared to deal with. He doesn't have to fight scrubs, but he doesn't need to rush towards a world title for no reason and pick up losses.


But he would have thought himself prepared, as lots of us did, me included. No point holding back if you really want it. With hindsight it would have been useful to get him a 12 rounder done, and that would have won him last night's fight but it was worth a shot imo. He sshould play the rankings game with contenders and fight at least 3 times this year with a title shot at the end of it for him. Anything less than that is waiting time imo, he's good enough to be at that level and kick on from there


----------



## dyna

I hope dealt_With comes back, he's a good dude but my concern was right.


----------



## Bogotazo

Felix said:


> Yet you'd have been shouted down for so much as suggesting Lomachenko was anything less than a complete fighter. Earlier in this thread I noticed Dealt With claim Lomachenko proved his chin despite apparently only being hit cleanly a couple of times, and that he proved his stamina despite also apparently having problems with his pacing. Both of those seem pretty careless contradictions to me.


:lol:atsch Good catch. I doubt these two will be missed on their vacation.


----------



## Bogotazo

JamieC said:


> Ye but that's world class after 2 fights, his ATG standing depends on what he can do at this class of fight. If he unifies or becomes the man at feather and does the same at super feather and lightweight (all very plausible) then that gives him ATG status, him ppacing his fight wrong doesn't change his upside


Right, it's a long fucking road. Plenty of fighters have accomplished more than him and are still far away form ATG status. That "upside" is nonexistent at the moment for him.

And can we please stop reducing this to a "pacing problem"? It wasn't a pacing problem. He was getting out-landed to the body and didn't know what to do when swarmed besides clinch.



JamieC said:


> But he would have thought himself prepared, as lots of us did, me included. No point holding back if you really want it. With hindsight it would have been useful to get him a 12 rounder done, and that would have won him last night's fight but it was worth a shot imo. He sshould play the rankings game with contenders and fight at least 3 times this year with a title shot at the end of it for him. Anything less than that is waiting time imo, he's good enough to be at that level and kick on from there


This isn't uncharted territory. Fighters have done it before. Rigondeaux took a few pro fights before going for a title. As did Gamboa, Lara, Ward, Mayweather, etc. Lomachenko for whatever reason "thought himself prepared" and overstepped. He should take a step back, he doesn't lose anything by doing so. Work on certain things against a live body, then bounce back. Not every fight needs to be against a former champion for a title. Especially not your 3rd when you've lost half your fights thus far. I don't see why you insist on keeping Loma where he is. Nobody's saying he should fight scrubs, but he'd be stupid to take on a big challenge after realizing his deficiencies.


----------



## MadcapMaxie

Bogotazo said:


> :lol:atsch Good catch. I doubt these two will be missed on their vacation.


Doubt it.

I'm surprised Dealt with hasn't taken a serious vacation before. Every thread I've ever seen him post in is filled with him making personal insults or insanely delusional posts that you'd think were trolling attempts. He adds nothing of value to this forum. Not humour, not interesting threads and certainly not any serious, civil or rational discussions.


----------



## Bogotazo

MadcapMaxie said:


> Doubt it.
> 
> I'm surprised Dealt with hasn't taken a serious vacation before. Every thread I've ever seen him post in is filled with him making personal insults or insanely delusional posts that you'd think were trolling attempts. He adds nothing of value to this forum. Not humour, not interesting threads and certainly not any serious, civil or rational discussions.


I've seen him make some fair posts about other fights and fighters. But he generally seems up his own ass and determined to make some odd points.


----------



## Hands of Iron

Bogotazo said:


> But that's what I'm saying, Pac wasn't there YET. Neither is Lomachenko, which is the opposite of what has been suggested by the two fanboys on here. It's not like he just had a bad round or two, he lost fairly clearly and looked unprepared to handle a swarmer who could use feints so well. Those are problems beyond just a bad night, they are technical problems. As I said, he doesn't need to go back under the rug, but there's no reason he should risk taking more losses at a level he has time to get to more gradually.


I don't know what the hell they're going to do or how they're going to go about it, but he needs to get over this one quick. 5-6 months of inactivity would be horrendous although the only reason this fight didn't happen in January was due to a hand injury.


----------



## JamieC

Bogotazo said:


> Right, it's a long fucking road. Plenty of fighters have accomplished more than him and are still far away form ATG status. That "upside" is nonexistent at the moment for him.
> 
> And can we please stop reducing this to a "pacing problem"? It wasn't a pacing problem. He was getting out-landed to the body and didn't know what to do when swarmed besides clinch.
> 
> This isn't uncharted territory. Fighters have done it before. Rigondeaux took a few pro fights before going for a title. As did Gamboa, Lara, Ward, Mayweather, etc. Lomachenko for whatever reason "thought himself prepared" and overstepped. He should take a step back, he doesn't lose anything by doing so. Work on certain things against a live body, then bounce back. Not every fight needs to be against a former champion for a title. Especially not your 3rd when you've lost half your fights thus far. I don't see why you insist on keeping Loma where he is. Nobody's saying he should fight scrubs, but he'd be stupid to take on a big challenge after realizing his deficiencies.


I think pacing was the difference, he would have won it had he stepped it up a bit in a few rounds early and then we wouldn't likely be having this discussion. I'm not saying that's his only flaw, im not a blind fanboys, but that's the reason he lost last night, I think he's the better fighter. Why is his upside non existent after one close loss? He's still got the skills but now he has more experience.

I think he proved he can hang at this level, ok he will need to step back to get a ranking but he shouldn't do any more than that, he would likely beat any of the belt holders as it stands so why wait?


----------



## Bogotazo

Hands of Iron said:


> I don't know what the hell they're going to do or how they're going to go about it, but he needs to get over this one quick. 5-6 months of inactivity would be horrendous although the only reason this fight didn't happen in January was due to a hand injury.


Tune up against a top 20 featherweight.



JamieC said:


> I think pacing was the difference, he would have won it had he stepped it up a bit in a few rounds early and then we wouldn't likely be having this discussion. I'm not saying that's his only flaw, im not a blind fanboys, but that's the reason he lost last night, I think he's the better fighter. Why is his upside non existent after one close loss? He's still got the skills but now he has more experience.
> 
> I think he proved he can hang at this level, ok he will need to step back to get a ranking but he shouldn't do any more than that, he would likely beat any of the belt holders as it stands so why wait?


When I say "his upside", I'm talking about things you were describing that hadn't happened yet; climbing the ranks and beating fighters he hasn't yet. His worth as a pro fighter can't be built solely on the imagination.

He can hang at the level, sure, he proved that. But his aspirations should be higher than "hanging" and he'd lose nothing by taking a tune-up.

Will he likely beat the beltholders? I think we all thought he'd likely beat this one and look what happened. He needs to get a few fights first because you can't anticipate everything. If he fights a below elite level guy, and finds "hmm, I could actually use some practice on the inside, they're more physical in the pros than I'm sued to", or "hmm, I'm having trouble chasing this negative fighter, maybe I should try cutting off the ring more urgently" WITHOUT taking a loss, he doesn't have to make those discoveries 6, 7, 8, rounds into a championship level fight in which he hurts his stock and damages his record.

*"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."*

That's what the pros is about. Knowing yourself, and becoming familiar with what your enemy might bring. Loma lacked a bit of both tonight, and so he lost, needlessly.


----------



## Flea Man

I think Lomachenko Vs Russell Jr for the vacant title should be next up and I'd expect Lomachenko to win handily.

He has learned more in a single fight than Russell Jr has against 30 cans. 

Totally different stylistically of course, but in a boxing match that's Vasyl's domain.


----------



## Hands of Iron

JamieC said:


> Thats honestly how I'm feeling, i might take a break from watching it for a while, this was the last bit of "good news" the sport had coming for the next few months but it came so close but didn't quite happen and people are loving it :conf everything else just seems anti climactic for a while with nothing in the horizon


Yeah, it's probably time to step out. I'm more irritated by the amount of time I put into this place discussing this stuff. I couldn't just up and leave the kid out to dry though so immediately, he got so much class to deserve all this hate and absolutely zilch for excuses. He could've rolled around the ring and made a circus out of things as many times he was getting ripped downstairs.


----------



## Flea Man

Hands of Iron said:


> Yeah, it's probably time to step out. I'm more irritated by the amount of time I put into this place discussing this stuff. I couldn't just up and leave the kid out to dry though so immediately, he got so much class to deserve all this hate and absolutely zilch for excuses. He could've rolled around the ring and made a circus out of things as many times he was getting ripped downstairs.


Should Wlad get less criticism for his holding now?

Don't step out! No one rational is hating on the kid, still an exceptional talent.


----------



## Bogotazo

Hands of Iron said:


> Yeah, it's probably time to step out. I'm more irritated by the amount of time I put into this place discussing this stuff. I couldn't just up and leave the kid out to dry though so immediately, he got so much class to deserve all this hate and absolutely zilch for excuses. He could've rolled around the ring and made a circus out of things as many times he was getting ripped downstairs.


I will say though that people aren't really hating on Lomachenko. So far I haven't seen anyone call him a bum, or exaggerate the gravity of the loss, or ridiculed him in any way. People seem mostly happy that Salido won as a huge underdog, and that our two resident nuthuggers got embarrassed.


----------



## rossco

FelixTrinidad said:


> I actually care about most of you. The only reason I haven't made a thread called 'My 50,000 dollar car have arrived, feeling good at age 21' is because I don't want to look down upon the vast majority of you guys who's not as blessed as I am. I may troll for fun, but I never want to hurt y'all.


:lol:


----------



## JamieC

Bogotazo said:


> Tune up against a top 20 featherweight.
> 
> When I say "his upside", I'm talking about things you were describing that hadn't happened yet; climbing the ranks and beating fighters he hasn't yet. His worth as a pro fighter can't be built solely on the imagination.
> 
> He can hang at the level, sure, he proved that. But his aspirations should be higher than "hanging" and he'd lose nothing by taking a tune-up.
> 
> Will he likely beat the beltholders? I think we all thought he'd likely beat this one and look what happened. He needs to get a few fights first because you can't anticipate everything. If he fights a below elite level guy, and finds "hmm, I could actually use some practice on the inside, they're more physical in the pros than I'm sued to", or "hmm, I'm having trouble chasing this negative fighter, maybe I should try cutting off the ring more urgently" WITHOUT taking a loss, he doesn't have to make those discoveries 6, 7, 8, rounds into a championship level fight in which he hurts his stock and damages his record.
> 
> *"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."*
> 
> That's what the pros is about. Knowing yourself, and becoming familiar with what your enemy might bring. Loma lacked a bit of both tonight, and so he lost, needlessly.


Ye he should aim higher, and I'm sure he does, but this time next year I'd expect him to be a belt holder, anything less is wasting his tiny. That should be his base imo.

Ye I think he beats any if them, including Salido again if it were to happen. This alone doesn't make him an ATG, but it's a start, and he might as well do it as he's capable. I absolutely agree a few longer fights wouldn't have hurt and imo would have resulted in him definitely getting the W, but that's hindsight and tbf he wasn't going to do that so it was a moot point, he made it clear he didn't want to hang around, ideally I wouldn't have agreed but It is what it is :conf from now I think we'll see a different Loma, as in he will start living up to the expectations but i agree it's a shame he had to find this out in his first world title tilt but he'll bounce back strong, if Bob backs him which tbh im sceptical about


----------



## JamieC

Hands of Iron said:


> Yeah, it's probably time to step out. I'm more irritated by the amount of time I put into this place discussing this stuff. I couldn't just up and leave the kid out to dry though so immediately, he got so much class to deserve all this hate and absolutely zilch for excuses. He could've rolled around the ring and made a circus out of things as many times he was getting ripped downstairs.


I agree, I came on to offer a rational view from a Loma fan, as I like the guy and he's got balls and showed too much class post fight, but I'm going to take a break after today. It's like Lucas Danny, when the underdog fights dirty no one cares and the winner gets a bit of flak. So ill stand up for them otherwise it gets out of hand :lol: I just have this feeling that it was the wrong result last night and boxing politics will stop Loma getting back to his level immediately which is just bullshit so I'm not feeling boxing atm. Other than Froch Groves there's nothing else interesting me now and with Rigo Loma off for a while there won't be for some time I doubt


----------



## Luf

I'm still kinda shocked he lost.

it's a shame considering his hype and class in the interview.

I think it is apparent he was over rated though. He should face a couple of fringe types and work his way towards a title shot. Chasing a rematch with salido down the line.


----------



## Hands of Iron

JamieC said:


> I agree, I came on to offer a rational view from a Loma fan, as I like the guy and he's got balls and showed too much class post fight, but I'm going to take a break after today. It's like Lucas Danny, when the underdog fights dirty no one cares and the winner gets a bit of flak. So ill stand up for them otherwise it gets out of hand :lol: I just have this feeling that it was the wrong result last night and boxing politics will stop Loma getting back to his level immediately which is just bullshit so I'm not feeling boxing atm. Other than Froch Groves there's nothing else interesting me now and with Rigo Loma off for a while there won't be for some time I doubt


Rigo's another one in a different sort of way. When's his next fight, three whole months from now against some nobody in China that does absolutely nothing to further prove his class or enhance his nonexistent pro legacy? That shit is depressing. I'm out, seriously :lol:

Unless @PityTheFool needs assistance with the various Ray Leonard debacles that take place on here. I'd have his back for that.


----------



## rossco

The forecasting of Loma's greatness by a few on here was so ridiculous I assumed it was heavy trolling. I'm not so sure now.

Loma looks like he lacks an edge. Throw those fucking hands man. It's frustrating to watch fighters with talent scared to throw leather.

The sport's currently boring and lacks talent. You don't get talented/technical pressure fighters any more, just mongs like Brandon Rios. Too many people jizz their load over the talents of Floyd, Rigo and Ward. Those 3 put me to fucking sleep. As pressure fighters go Provodnikovs pretty exciting to watch but he seems to have heavy down syndrome and employs pressure with no regards to his fat face.

I'm away for a wank.


----------



## Flea Man

Yay! Everyone is coming round to my way of thinking.


----------



## Matty lll

Definitely a learning curve for Lomachenko, I'm a big fan but there is no doubt that he was overhyped, I'm sure with more experience he will do better. It'll be interesting to see where he goes from here.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N )

You know it's bad when a forum nice guy like bogo is in the thread bitchslapping fools

this is the first time on ANY forum I've seen a mod say he'll ban for having a stupid opinion


----------



## BigBone

No no nooo!!!

Why was @Dealt_with banned? That's like dominating Pacquiao only to get robbed, where's the fun now?

For the love of God let we hear his excuses. @Roe @Lunny @Jay @Batman @Rorsacharch @Bogotazo @McGrain!!!!!!


----------



## Flea Man

BigBone said:


> No no nooo!!!
> 
> Why was @Dealt_with banned? That's like dominating Pacquiao only to get robbed, where's the fun now?
> 
> For the love of God let we hear his excuses. @Roe @Lunny @Jay @Batman @Rorsacharch @Bogotazo @McGrain!!!!!!


I've brought him back!


----------



## dyna

Flea Man said:


> I've brought him back!


He had a ban bet though, so Madcapmaxie sort of deserves it to have Dealt get his full duration ban.


----------



## Flea Man

dyna said:


> He had a ban bet though, so Madcapmaxie sort of deserves it to have Dealt get his full duration ban.


He will.

We will just bully him for a day first.


----------



## Markyboy86

Loma was obviously tight at the weight, he needs to move up to 130 where hes already better than Mayweather


----------



## BigBone

Yeah I don't wanna interfere with that, but ban bets are stupid cause it takes away the post-fight fun. So how about us hear what Dealt_with has to say, and then ban him? :lol:


----------



## JamieC

Hands of Iron said:


> Rigo's another one in a different sort of way. When's his next fight, three whole months from now against some nobody in China that does absolutely nothing to further prove his class or enhance his nonexistent pro legacy? That shit is depressing. I'm out, seriously :lol:
> 
> Unless @PityTheFool needs assistance with the various Ray Leonard debacles that take place on here. I'd have his back for that.


Ye Rigo is the most depressing thing about boxing right now, the guy is NOT boring, and has a legitimate ATG skillset yet is just ignored and will likely fade into obscurity at the end of his career where he'll be like 20-0 with Donaire as his only big win, shit is sad. Now Loma will likely have to scrounge for paper straps on undercards and be avoided by lineal champs and be called a Eurobum hype job or some shit and forever have a wafer thin loss to a cheating Salido hanging over him, that shit is also sad. And boxing fans make it worse by validating this shit. I probably won't come back on for Froch Groves either as the way British fans have turned on Froch for nothing is pathetic and transparent, im out after today I think


----------



## McGrain

Hello Big Bone.


----------



## DBerry

Bogotazo said:


> The point is not that Lomachenko is a bum, the point is insisting Loma has the talent of an ATG post after post and making ludicrous claims was clearly bullshit and his failure to beat a very good but not great veteran on his way out is undeniable proof of that.


Please, bogo, enforce the ban?! Nay even better, give this self righteous, unpleasant, nasty little cock lover a three month stint in Gulag!


----------



## Danny

:rofl 9-3 fuck off.

2 have tried, only 1 has failed.

Loma has absolutely no defence to the body at all. Easy work for WARlando.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

I'm going to analyse the fight now.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

@Bogotazo a reporter in an ESNEWS interview said he had it 7-5 for Lomachenko and said ALL OF THE REPORTERS IN HIS ROW had it 7-5 Lomachenko. Bogo, CEASE THEM! They are borderline trolling, right?


----------



## Bryn

:rofl Rage quitting the forum because Loma lost.


----------



## Kieran

Dealt_with said:


> Lomachenko needs to learn to complain about and exaggerate lowblows as well, just another pro trick. He should talk to Bhop :yep
> I can't complain about that too much though, Lomachenko held a bit too much for my liking so it evens out. I was screaming for Loma to throw to the body, I don't know what happened there. Great experience for Lomachenko, at least this loss gives the haters something to cling onto in the future, it was going to be too one-sided for us otherwise :yep
> I hope the GRJ or Gradovich fight can still be made, that will be a fine showcase for Loma and winning a pro title in your third fight is still pretty impressive (even though I truly believe he should've won tonight, but like Loma we can't focus on the things we can't control).
> 
> I expected to be nervous before the fight but it wasn't actually that bad, and after the decision I was relaxed and smiling. Partly because of Lomachenko's class and seeing him go 12 rounds with Salido holding on for life and partly because I knew what was waiting here :lol:
> These fools talking about suicide watch, these Lomahaters don't realise that Lomatards come equipped with Lomachenko level mental strength and resilience :cheers
> I'm honestly more excited about Lomachenko's career than ever, and I can't wait to watch the fight again.


You're weird.


----------



## BigBone

Dealt_with said:


> Lomachenko needs to learn to complain about and exaggerate lowblows as well, just another pro trick. He should talk to Bhop :yep
> I can't complain about that too much though, Lomachenko held a bit too much for my liking so it evens out. I was screaming for Loma to throw to the body, I don't know what happened there. Great experience for Lomachenko, at least this loss gives the haters something to cling onto in the future, it was going to be too one-sided for us otherwise :yep
> I hope the GRJ or Gradovich fight can still be made, that will be a fine showcase for Loma and winning a pro title in your third fight is still pretty impressive (even though I truly believe he should've won tonight, but like Loma we can't focus on the things we can't control).
> 
> I expected to be nervous before the fight but it wasn't actually that bad, and after the decision I was relaxed and smiling. Partly because of Lomachenko's class and seeing him go 12 rounds with Salido holding on for life and partly because I knew what was waiting here :lol:
> These fools talking about suicide watch, these Lomahaters don't realise that Lomatards come equipped with Lomachenko level mental strength and resilience :cheers
> I'm honestly more excited about Lomachenko's career than ever, and I can't wait to watch the fight again.


You stupid fuck, didn't we warn you that THIS EXACT FIGHT is about to happen due to Loma's lack of professional experience? Your arrogance blinded you mate. Ask BHop yeah, he should've asked BHop before jumping in with Salido in his 2nd fight.

I don't know which was worse, your scoring or the ATGOAT looking clueless at times, cause you know, like we said before, he'd never Dealt_With 12 rounds, low blows, physical differences, advanced inside game and scoring preferences before. It's your level of delusion that put Lomachenko in a situation that ruined his unbeaten superstar prospects, one more year and 6 more fights with gradually increasing level of opposition might've made a difference, but no, his team, brave if we wanna get emotional, thought he could cut corners cause he's bigger than the sport. *Guess fucking what. HE THOUGHT WRONG.* :deal


----------



## Berliner

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> @*Bogotazo* a reporter in an ESNEWS interview said he had it 7-5 for Lomachenko and said ALL OF THE REPORTERS IN HIS ROW had it 7-5 Lomachenko. Bogo, CEASE THEM! They are borderline trolling, right?


link? them guys dont know shit:verysad


----------



## Berliner

lomachenko is so good even if he loses he wins. (lomatartd retard logic). guys like Gaul and Dealt_With are pure jokes. How can an adult be so deluded and such a big ass fanboy?


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Berliner said:


> link? them guys dont know shit:verysad


go and chek yourself.


----------



## Berliner

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> go and chek yourself.


if you state something you should back it up.


----------



## PityTheFool

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> @Bogotazo a reporter in an ESNEWS interview said he had it 7-5 for Lomachenko and said ALL OF THE REPORTERS IN HIS ROW had it 7-5 Lomachenko. Bogo, CEASE THEM! They are borderline trolling, right?


Be a man and eat your crow Gaul.I'm surprised Dealt is being such a knob about this as I thought he had the humour to take it on the chin.
It's one of the biggest "we told you so's" that this forum will ever see.
I've just posted about how piss poor Ricky Burns was and how I reckon he's done.
Take it like a man and say you got it wrong.Trust me,you'll get more respect so take this as friendly advice.


----------



## LuckyLuke

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> @*Bogotazo* a reporter in an ESNEWS interview said he had it 7-5 for Lomachenko and said ALL OF THE REPORTERS IN HIS ROW had it 7-5 Lomachenko. Bogo, CEASE THEM! They are borderline trolling, right?


I had Salido winning.
But it doesnt matter: Fact is Lomachenko is nowhere near as good as you and Dealt-With think he is.

BTW: I predicted a Salido win.


----------



## LuckyLuke

Beating featherweight Mayweather?? 10:2?
No he would have got knocked the fuck out if that would have been featherweight Mayweather.

And Lomachenko needs a proper trainer. Aint no good pro boxing trainer in east europe.


----------



## PBFred

:lol:


----------



## Atlanta

So @Dealt_with can you walk me through how Loma is going to whoop Mayweather's ass 10-2?


----------



## dyna

Did anyone even read dealt his whole post?

I did not


----------



## Flea Man

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> @Bogotazo a reporter in an ESNEWS interview said he had it 7-5 for Lomachenko and said ALL OF THE REPORTERS IN HIS ROW had it 7-5 Lomachenko. Bogo, CEASE THEM! They are borderline trolling, right?


You're really embarrassing yourself now lad.


----------



## MadcapMaxie

I too would be very interested to hear how it is Loma would beat Mayweather. A good but past prime pressure fighter beat him and beat him convincingly on my card. Mayweather would have absolutely taken Loma's soul if he fought the 130 version. It would be such a convincing beating Loma will be begging to go back to the amateurs where he'll continue to be a big fish in a small pool. That's Loma or his team's problem. They thought because they beat some Euro amateurs nobody has ever heard of that he could sweep the pro's. He got the wake up call he needs.


----------



## Felix

Honestly, Dealt and Gaul are sounding like a couple of teenage girls who just found out their crush asked someone else to the prom. Now they're spiralling down into an endless cycle of denial and delusion.


----------



## DBerry

LuckyLuke said:


> Beating featherweight Mayweather?? 10:2?
> No he would have got knocked the fuck out if that would have been featherweight Mayweather.
> 
> And Lomachenko needs a proper trainer. Aint no good pro boxing trainer in east europe.


Kostya tszyu?


----------



## BuriK

if anything he was thrown in with a crafty/dirty veteran far too early, i know he wanted to go for the record but arum should of let him have a few more fights and get used to the pros, what he was doing in the 12th round thats what he should of been doing from the get go but he was just not throwing enough punches.... hopefully he can bounce back as im sure it was a great learning experience for him....


----------



## Hatesrats

Lomachenko was Dealt_with last night.


----------



## PityTheFool

MadcapMaxie said:


> I too would be very interested to hear how it is Loma would beat Mayweather. A good but past prime pressure fighter beat him and beat him convincingly on my card. Mayweather would have absolutely taken Loma's soul if he fought the 130 version. It would be such a convincing beating Loma will be begging to go back to the amateurs where he'll continue to be a big fish in a small pool. That's Loma or his team's problem. They thought because they beat some Euro amateurs nobody has ever heard of that he could sweep the pro's. He got the wake up call he needs.


Don't you think you'd have more pleasure from giving Dealt a week's grace on his ban mate?


----------



## Berliner

PityTheFool said:


> Don't you think you'd have more pleasure from giving Dealt a week's grace on his ban mate?


and for gaul. it would be funnier for the whole forum. but maybe they are too scared to get online anyway. the shit talk is huge. but they deserve it for being big ass deluded and retarded fanboys.:lol:


----------



## LuckyLuke

DBerry said:


> Kostya tszyu?


Lebedev vs Jones was one of the worst corners I saw in boxing. They dindt even had a chill in the corner. They put a fucking ice bag on his face.
There is a reason why Lebedev trains now in america. Drozd trains in america now too with Solis.

And with Wladimir vs Povetkin: Wladimirs co trainer said Povetkin corner was the most amateurish he saw.

And you could see it with Lomachenko. He still fought like a amateur. I think with a trainer like Roach or Robert Garcia he would have won.

There is a big amateur boxing scene in east europe. Very big. But the pro boxing scene is still very green there.


----------



## MadcapMaxie

PityTheFool said:


> Don't you think you'd have more pleasure from giving Dealt a week's grace on his ban mate?


If the mods want to yeah sure. But I want them to serve their full sentences as I would've without question. I can tell you right now what they're going to be saying anyway and it's going to be a whole lot of fucking delusional borderline troll type shit that isn't worth typing a response too.


----------



## LuckyLuke

MadcapMaxie said:


> If the mods want to yeah sure. But I want them to serve their full sentences as I would've without question. I can tell you right now what they're going to be saying anyway and it's going to be a whole lot of fucking delusional borderline troll type shit that isn't worth typing a response too.


For me their post are a good laugh.


----------



## MadcapMaxie

LuckyLuke said:


> For me their post are a good laugh.


I dunno I think after 2-3 days people will be sick of it. It will be the same points rehashed. It was a great told you so but it's basically fallen on deaf ears. I was laughing at their posts ages ago so same shit for me.


----------



## Kieran

The Ring's headline: "Salido Schools Lomachenko" :lol:


----------



## PityTheFool

MadcapMaxie said:


> I dunno I think after 2-3 days people will be sick of it. It will be the same points rehashed. It was a great told you so but it's basically fallen on deaf ears. I was laughing at their posts ages ago so same shit for me.


I get what you're saying mate,and it's your bet,but I thought the reaction would have been a bit more grown up.The excuses were dreadful and it's always better for your future on here to eat crow when necessary.
I've had a few plates myself,and respect people who do the same.


----------



## Boogle McDougal

This is a great moment for the forum


----------



## PityTheFool

I can't get the image out of my head of Salido saying Ali-style,"I must be the greatest!"( in English)
He's beaten the GOAT,shown he can get to 147.
Surely this is Floyd's fall fight now?


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c

bballchump11 said:


> fuck off
> 
> Greatest amateur of all time is 1-1 as a professional :rofl


Or is he 13-0 :hey


----------



## PBFred

Hands of Iron said:


> That shit is depressing. I'm out, seriously :lol:.


Taking your ball and going home? :rofl


----------



## Eoghan

Markyboy86 said:


> Loma was obviously tight at the weight, he needs to move up to 130 where hes already better than Mayweather


I'd fancy Loma today over Floyd at 130:deal


----------



## Zopilote

But but but..this was the almighty Lomachenko, who would have beaten the likes of Mayweather, Fenech, and Morales...and whom Barrera shoudln't even be mentioned in the same sntence as him! This was the dude who was suppose to viciously KO Salido under 4 rounds! :rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

Warlando says Fuck your gold medals, and welcome to the pros, cabron! :deal


----------



## EvianMcGirt

I'll just leave this here......


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c

Dealt and gaul are having a shocker here.


----------



## shaunster101

EvianMcGirt said:


> I'll just leave this here......


:lol:


----------



## Bogotazo

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> @Bogotazo a reporter in an ESNEWS interview said he had it 7-5 for Lomachenko and said ALL OF THE REPORTERS IN HIS ROW had it 7-5 Lomachenko. Bogo, CEASE THEM! They are borderline trolling, right?


Cease them? I'm not going to kill them, no.

They would be if they went on the campaign you and DW did and then claimed they'd "go harder". Yes that would all be, in sum, trolling.


----------



## KERRIGAN

Loma has been exposed as being Feather Fisted like Paulie Malignaggi.

Also the Loma Nuthuggers have had the worst dose of reality since the Pavlik Nuthuggers got when their boy got schooled by Hopkins & Sergio.

The Loma Express has been derailed.

The best prediction though had to be Dealt_with predicting Loma by TKO3. :lol:


----------



## tommygun711

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> No doubt if this was a 15 round fight, Lomachenko would have stopped him - but we're talking about a pacing factor here. .


:lol: Rofl, does that make you feel better? If Taylor-Chavez I was a 15 round fight there would be no controversy. what the fuck is your point. There are no 15 round fights anymore. Loma lost. Deal with it. he aint no ATG.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

tommygun711 said:


> :lol: Rofl, does that make you feel better? If Taylor-Chavez I was a 15 round fight there would be no controversy. what the fuck is your point. There are no 15 round fights anymore. Loma lost. Deal with it. he aint no ATG.


Lomachenko won http://checkhookboxing.com/showthre...-WON-the-fight-Post-your-SCORECARDS-Here*-*-*


----------



## tommygun711

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Lomachenko won http://checkhookboxing.com/showthre...-WON-the-fight-Post-your-SCORECARDS-Here*-*-*


no, he didn't at all :lol:

Impressive that Loma almost stopped him in the 12th but he still largely got outhustled and outworked


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

tommygun711 said:


> no, he didn't at all :lol:
> 
> Impressive that Loma almost stopped him in the 12th but he still largely got outhustled and outworked


Everything I have to say is in that post tbh. People can say he didn't win but I've seen the fight very carefully again and I'm aware that with Loma, you have to pay attention. Unfortunately the HBO commentators were giving Salido credit where it wasn't due.


----------



## KERRIGAN

Loma has been exposed as the new Paulie Malignaggi - he's Feather Fisted.


----------



## Zopilote

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Everything I have to say is in that post tbh. People can say he didn't win but I've seen the fight very carefully again and I'm aware that with Loma, you have to pay attention. Unfortunately the HBO commentators were giving Salido credit where it wasn't due.


Fucking dumbass, HBO were all over Loma's ballsack :rofl

HBhoe having it a draw is really all you need to know.

Warlando won, deal with it pussy. :hi:


----------



## KERRIGAN

Felix said:


>


:lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Berliner

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Lomachenko won http://checkhookboxing.com/showthre...-WON-the-fight-Post-your-SCORECARDS-Here*-*-*


You are pathetic. I mean dont you see how pathetic you sound? DONT YOU SEE IT?
Grow up man.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Berliner said:


> You are pathetic. I mean dont you see how pathetic you sound? DONT YOU SEE IT?
> Grow up man.


No I think you're pathetic because I watched the fight again, closely. Replayed the bits where there were trades or if I was unsure if certain punches landed or not.

Thats not to say I'm annoyed at Loma's camp.


----------



## shaunster101

Fuck getting in the ring and decisively beating your opponent, Loma is so special that he wins fights in a style that you can only see on several repeats and slow motion views. That's a proper way to win fight. Much prefer this to the way Garcia and Gamboa handled Salido. 

This should be his marketing angle. He's like an optical illusion of a fighter. Lomachenko, so exceptional that his wins look like losses.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

Zopilote said:


> Fucking dumbass, HBO were all over Loma's ballsack :rofl
> 
> HBhoe having it a draw is really all you need to know.
> 
> Warlando won, deal with it pussy. :hi:


They wasn't at all, I even quoted them in here:
http://checkhookboxing.com/showthre...-WON-the-fight-Post-your-SCORECARDS-Here*-*-*

Salido was just a dirty cunt who had many low blows. Shit ref is what prevented Salido getting knocked out.


----------



## BunnyGibbons

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Shit ref is what prevented Salido getting knocked out.


Just be thankful the ref's a **** and was too busy enjoying Loma's constant holding to penalise it.


----------



## Zopilote

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> They wasn't at all, I even quoted them in here:
> http://checkhookboxing.com/showthre...-WON-the-fight-Post-your-SCORECARDS-Here*-*-*
> 
> Salido was just a dirty cunt who had many low blows. Shit ref is what prevented Salido getting knocked out.


Welcome to the Pros!

If your stupid ****** ass would have listen to what we've been saying all along, maybe then you wouldn't be looking like a complete fucking dumbass right now.

Quote them all you want, i know what i fucking heard last night.

Warlando won, deal with it! :hi:


----------



## Zopilote

shaunster101 said:


> Fuck getting in the ring and decisively beating your opponent, Loma is so special that he wins fights in a style that you can only see on several repeats and slow motion views. That's a proper way to win fight. Much prefer this to the way Garcia and Gamboa handled Salido.
> 
> This should be his marketing angle. He's like an optical illusion of a fighter. Lomachenko, so exceptional that his wins look like losses.


:rofl


----------



## Berliner

shaunster101 said:


> Fuck getting in the ring and decisively beating your opponent, Loma is so special that he wins fights in a style that you can only see on several repeats and slow motion views. That's a proper way to win fight. Much prefer this to the way Garcia and Gamboa handled Salido.
> 
> This should be his marketing angle. He's like an optical illusion of a fighter. Lomachenko, so exceptional that his wins look like losses.


You cant beat Lomachenko even if you beat him. Gaul Lomatard logic!!!
I actually think I have never seen a worse retard fanboy than him and Dealt_With. But they are funny. Will miss some of theire funny (unintentional) comments.


----------



## FelixTrinidad

rossco said:


> The forecasting of Loma's greatness by a few on here was so ridiculous I assumed it was heavy trolling. I'm not so sure now.
> 
> Loma looks like he lacks an edge. Throw those fucking hands man. It's frustrating to watch fighters with talent scared to throw leather.
> 
> The sport's currently boring and lacks talent. You don't get talented/technical pressure fighters any more, just mongs like Brandon Rios. Too many people jizz their load over the talents of Floyd, Rigo and Ward. Those 3 put me to fucking sleep. As pressure fighters go Provodnikovs pretty exciting to watch but he seems to have heavy down syndrome and employs pressure with no regards to his fat face.
> 
> I'm away for a wank.


 This is actually a fantastic post, delivered in a simple manner.
This is exactly what's wrong with Lomachenko last night and what was wrong with fighters like Rigo/Wlad.
It's not that Lomachenko lost, it's that he looked so fucking scared and tentative doing it. We are talking about a guy with 400+ AM fights who fought like chickenshit.

All respect to Hands of Iron, I agree with him about how classy Lomachenko was, but it doesn't erase the fact he refuse to engage, rarely threw combinations until the end and throughout the entire fight up until the last round, fought like a small version of Wladimir.

If we wanted to see a former Olympian hero fight like a god damn vagina, why need Lomachenko for that?
We got a more skilled version of that in Rigo.


----------



## LuckyLuke

FelixTrinidad said:


> This is actually a fantastic post, delivered in a simple manner.
> This is exactly what's wrong with Lomachenko last night and what was wrong with fighters like Rigo/Wlad.
> It's not that Lomachenko lost, it's that he looked so fucking scared and tentative doing it. We are talking about a guy with 400+ AM fights who fought like chickenshit.
> 
> All respect to Hands of Iron, I agree with him about how classy Lomachenko was, but it doesn't erase the fact he refuse to engage, rarely threw combinations until the end and throughout the entire fight up until the last round, fought like a small version of Wladimir.
> 
> If we wanted to see a former Olympian hero fight like a god damn vagina, why need Lomachenko for that?
> We got a more skilled version of that in Rigo.


Wladimir at least throws a jab and a right hand now and then. Or even a left hook. Lomachenko did fuck all.


----------



## Flea Man

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Everything I have to say is in that post tbh. People can say he didn't win but I've seen the fight very carefully again and I'm aware that with Loma, you have to pay attention. Unfortunately the HBO commentators were giving Salido credit where it wasn't due.


You fucking pompous cunt.


----------



## Flea Man

shaunster101 said:


> Fuck getting in the ring and decisively beating your opponent, Loma is so special that he wins fights in a style that you can only see on several repeats and slow motion views. That's a proper way to win fight. Much prefer this to the way Garcia and Gamboa handled Salido.
> 
> This should be his marketing angle. He's like an optical illusion of a fighter. Lomachenko, so exceptional that his wins look like losses.


I honesty think suicide is the only option for Gaul. He is a broken, deluded kid.


----------



## tommygun711

the fact that gaul and dealt with are actually trying to say that this is a VICTORY rather than just accepting the loss takes this fan boy shit to a new level. You mothafuckas need help.


----------



## dyna

Flea Man said:


> I honesty think suicide is the only option for Gaul. He is a broken, deluded kid.


For me Gaul leaves an impression that he isn't serious, sometimes he's just too over the top.
He's probably a normally functioning adult in real life, he don't need to die Flea.

Dealt_with is good at times though he can be deluded also, especially when he's going against the grain.


----------



## Felix

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Everything I have to say is in that post tbh. People can say he didn't win but I've seen the fight very carefully again and I'm aware that with Loma, you have to pay attention. Unfortunately the HBO commentators were giving Salido credit where it wasn't due.


Just listen to yourself.


----------



## bballchump11

Chacal said:


> Or is he 13-0 :hey


:yep you're right my brother


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul

dyna said:


> For me Gaul leaves an impression that he isn't serious, sometimes he's just too over the top.
> He's probably a normally functioning adult in real life, he don't need to die Flea.
> 
> Dealt_with is good at times though he can be deluded also, especially when he's going against the grain.


lool that was actually nice of you to say that dyna yeah I certainly do have a normal functioning life, and I did say that I'm not going to be on here much anymore unless for Loma, a few others, or like whenever big things happen i.e Floyd's announcement where he did't fight Khan :cry
@Flea Man you are way too serious, I'm talking about Loma but I'm not personally invested in any way other than wanting Loma to create history because I feel he can (I just want personally for there ot be more ATG's coming in). I never said anything to you personally for you to go full retard.


----------



## Flea Man

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> lool that was actually nice of you to say that dyna yeah I certainly do have a normal functioning life, and I did say that I'm not going to be on here much anymore unless for Loma, a few others, or like whenever big things happen i.e Floyd's announcement where he did't fight Khan :cry
> 
> @Flea Man you are way too serious, I'm talking about Loma but I'm not personally invested in any way other than wanting Loma to create history because I feel he can (I just want personally for there ot be more ATG's coming in). I never said anything to you personally for you to go full retard.


You're a fucking tosser. I don't know how anyone could go through life being as deluded as you are. I honestly hope that once your ban is up you never return. You are not a real boxing fan.


----------



## Brownies

In my opinion, Salido clearly won that fight and I was damn impressed by him last night. He was damn hard to hit cleanly. I don't value amateur experience as much as Dealt With, which means that I was not willing to consider him a top fighter until he proves his trade against the big boys. However, that also means that I've seen a guy last night who gave hell to a damn good veteran and champion in his second pro fight. I think he was better last night than most boxer I've seen with so little pro experience. I'm still in the bandwagon. 

By the way,I keep hearing people talking about Lomachenko and Rigondeaux since the fight, so I'll give my opinion. Rigondeaux is a bit overrated too in my book. He's not invincible and I'm not willing to say that he's much better than the two guys who fought last night.


----------



## mrtony80

I was always leery about how fast they were moving the kid. I picked Salido to win. I'm not happy I was right, but...damn. Someone should have knew better. Moving that fast successfully has been extremely rare throughout boxing history, and I saw nothing outside of the Olympics to indicate Loma was ready for such a big jump.


----------



## Indigo Pab

Bogotazo said:


> :lol: You think tagging those guys actually HELPS you. That's cute.





bballchump11 said:


> @*Lunny* @*Wiirdo* help!


I've only just gotten here NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

:sad5

What I've basically done here is:


----------



## bballchump11

Pabby said:


> I've only just gotten here NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
> 
> :sad5
> 
> What I've basically done here is:


:lol:


----------



## turbotime

Hands of Iron said:


> Yeah, it's probably time to step out. I'm more irritated by the amount of time I put into this place discussing this stuff. I couldn't just up and leave the kid out to dry though so immediately, he got so much class to deserve all this hate and absolutely zilch for excuses. He could've rolled around the ring and made a circus out of things as many times he was getting ripped downstairs.


Yup.


----------



## Royal-T-Bag

loma got beat up and hurt, he'll be pissing blood for weeks and contemplating retirement. man vs boy, pro vs am, deal with it


----------



## The Sweet Science

I stopped reading after the "I scored the fight 9-3 for Lomachenko" part.


----------



## LittleRed

bballchump11 said:


> kiss my black ass isn't a racist :lol:


It is if I were to say it.


----------



## bballchump11

LittleRed said:


> It is if I were to say it.


If I say "I'll kick your white, mexican or asian ass", then that's racist. But if I say to "kiss my black ass" that's not racist at all. If you feel it is, then I'll try not to offend you


----------



## Royal-T-Bag

this is even better than the pactards getting their comeuppance cause at least they supported a great pro champ who was proven. this thread and every deluded post by dealth with/gaul are killing me here, i'm laughing my ass off


----------



## bballchump11

Man I just rewatched the fight and is it me or is it almost everytime Salido was going low, Lomachenko was grabbing his ass already and hugging.


----------



## LittleRed

bballchump11 said:


> If I say "I'll kick your white, mexican or asian ass", then that's racist. But if I say to "kiss my black ass" that's not racist at all. If you feel it is, then I'll try not to offend you


No, no it was a joke because I'm Mexican so if I were to say 'kiss my black ass'...


----------



## bballchump11

LittleRed said:


> No, no it was a joke because I'm Mexican so if I were to say 'kiss my black ass'...


:lol: my bad man. I guess only one person actually feels that way then. The same one who thinks



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.


----------



## Bogotazo

Pabby said:


> I've only just gotten here NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
> 
> :sad5
> 
> What I've basically done here is:


:lol:

The well-oiled mongrel strikes again.


----------



## Ivan Drago

Was kinda put off Lomachenko with all the undeserved acclaim he's been getting so when I heard them call out Salido I was kinda happy. But after hearing his post fight interview I felt kinda bad as he couldn't have come across any better.

I'd really like to see him get 10 pro fights under his belt at least before jumping back in for another title shot. Face a variety of styles in a pro context and build some winning momentum again. Just goes to show what everyone always says about the amateurs and pro's being completely different as the biggest difference last night was Salido's craftiness which can only be gained in the pro's.


----------



## Johnstown

well he can pick up the rate of passing out personal training cars at the local leather club gay bar.


We should all keep an eye out for a new poster who references how much skill it takes to weight lift.


----------



## Johnstown

bballchump11 said:


> If I say "I'll kick your white, mexican or asian ass", then that's racist. But if I say to "kiss my black ass" that's not racist at all. If you feel it is, then I'll try not to offend you


what if you accuse a innocent man (who happens to be white) of being a klansmen, just because some hot headed overrated ball dribbling thug (who happens to be black) physically assaults the innocent man?


----------



## bballchump11

Johnstown said:


> what if you accuse a innocent man (who happens to be white) of being a klansmen, just because some hot headed overrated ball dribbling thug (who happens to be black) physically assaults the innocent man?


----------



## Bogotazo

Johnstown said:


> what if you accuse a innocent man (who happens to be white) of being a klansmen, just because some hot headed overrated ball dribbling thug (who happens to be black) physically assaults the innocent man?


Shut the fuck up and fuck off back to the lounge.


----------



## Hands of Iron

PBFred said:


> Taking your ball and going home? :rofl


Why did you butcher my post to make it appear as though it had to do with Lomachenko losing? This is what I said:



Hands of Iron said:


> Rigo's another one in a different sort of way. When's his next fight, three whole months from now against some nobody in China that does absolutely nothing to further prove his class or enhance his nonexistent pro legacy? That shit is depressing. I'm out, seriously :lol:
> 
> Unless @PityTheFool needs assistance with the various Ray Leonard debacles that take place on here. I'd have his back for that.


This is what I thought about the fight:

http://checkhookboxing.com/showthread.php?36879-Lomachenko-Vs-Salido-HBO-HIGHLIGHTS/page3

Just devastated. :rolleyes

TBH this was the first fight all year that I truly looked forward to at all and there's really no other on the horizon. So in that sense it's also depressing sure. but I've been very vocally disillusioned with the current scene for quite some time. It's why I hijack numerous threads talking about Mike McCallum, James Toney, Robearto(e) Duran, Ray Leonard, Ernesto Marcel, Roy Jones et al. and even did that in the Lomachenko threads where people were talking about him beating Mayweather 10-2. Don't put me in the group that was declaring him an ATG because I wasn't in it. I thought he'd beat Salido - very impressively - and it didn't happen.

Anyway, I honestly have no idea why he fought the way he did last night. I have no answer. He showed in the same bout that he could've done immeasurably better had he decided to actually pull the trigger earlier -- and he will, or he'll be out of the sport very quickly. I wouldn't bet on the latter happening though because the ability is there.


----------



## Hands of Iron

turbotime said:


> Yup.


Next time you see me I'll be 185 at 7-8%.  For 5'7 that ain't bad.

Congrats to @MadcapMaxie @Zopilote @APOLLO @bballchump11 and @Pedderrs in particular though.


----------



## TSOL

Johnstown said:


> what if you accuse a innocent man (who happens to be white) of being a klansmen, just because some hot headed overrated ball dribbling thug (who happens to be black) physically assaults the innocent man?





Bogotazo said:


> Shut the fuck up and fuck off back to the lounge.


:lol:


----------



## Johnstown

Bogotazo said:


> Shut the fuck up and fuck off back to the lounge.


:hey


----------



## Johnstown

bballchump11 said:


>


racist


----------



## bballchump11

Hands of Iron said:


> Next time you see me I'll be 185 at 7-8%.  For 5'7 that ain't bad.
> 
> Congrats to @MadcapMaxie @Zopilote @APOLLO @bballchump11 and @Pedderrs in particular though.


Well thank you mind kind sir 
I love picking the underdog and winning


----------



## PBFred

Hands of Iron said:


> Why did you butcher my post to make it appear as though it had to do with Lomachenko losing? This is what I said:
> 
> This is what I thought about the fight:
> 
> http://checkhookboxing.com/showthread.php?36879-Lomachenko-Vs-Salido-HBO-HIGHLIGHTS/page3
> 
> Just devastated. :rolleyes
> 
> TBH this was the first fight all year that I truly looked forward to at all and there's really no other on the horizon. So in that sense it's also depressing sure. but I've been very vocally disillusioned with the current scene for quite some time. It's why I hijack numerous threads talking about Mike McCallum, James Toney, Robearto(e) Duran, Ray Leonard, Ernesto Marcel, Roy Jones et al. and even did that in the Lomachenko threads where people were talking about him beating Mayweather 10-2. Don't put me in the group that was declaring him an ATG because I wasn't in it. I thought he'd beat Salido - very impressively - and it didn't happen.
> 
> Anyway, I honestly have no idea why he fought the way he did last night. I have no answer. He showed in the same bout that he could've done immeasurably better had he decided to actually pull the trigger earlier -- and he will, or he'll be out of the sport very quickly. I wouldn't bet on the latter happening though because the ability is there.


Your two prior posts talked about an exodus as a direct result of the fight, at least that's how I read it. I don't spend much time in the historical forum/threads and thus was unaware of your current feelings toward the state of the sport. This hobby is thankless more often than not and I get it, no disrespect intended.


----------



## artful

Flea Man said:


> Who the fuck are you? Dealt With is a cheeky cunt.


Im artful a nobody on a forum just like you, Dealt with's a dick yh but he took his bet, he shouldn't be banned for longer than what was agreed.


----------



## chibelle

artful said:


> Im artful a nobody on a forum just like you, Dealt with's a dick yh but he took his bet, he shouldn't be banned for longer than what was agreed.


Agreed. Total dick move on Flea Man's part.


----------



## Hands of Iron

PBFred said:


> Your two prior posts talked about an exodus as a direct result of the fight, at least that's how I read it. I don't spend much time in the historical forum/threads and thus was unaware of your current feelings toward the state of the sport. This hobby is thankless more often than not and I get it, no disrespect intended.


None taken, Fred. There wasn't any reason to lash out at you like that. We've been cool for quite a while, going back almost a couple of years now from the ESB days thanks to a mutual favorite (and still my #1 active guy, that never changed). I can see how you could view it as a bitch move of sorts even though I didn't get a single 'LMAO, Egg on your Face' mention after the fight as pretty much everybody drastically pales in comparison to Dealt and Gaul, but even if he'd won in dominant fashion I've been trying to take an exodus or at least implement some heavily reduced activity with the forum habit to just a couple posts a day for a while now with little success :lol: :sad5: The latest target date was later this month on my birthday because there are some personal goals that I could really benefit by putting more time into instead of CHB. You aren't typically a hardcore regular, you have your priorities straight.

I come on here mostly to just lounge around and talk about yesteryear ATG fighters with guys like turbo, Pity, Bogo, Zopi, JMP, et al. in favor of chatting up all the happenings with the current scene and it's been that way for quite a while now. They know how I feel about this era of boxing. Everything just moves so incredibly slow, the field of talent is heavily diluted and so many excellent would-be fights have large road blocks placed between them from happening; "boxing fans" are in here regularly citing and validating business reasons why fights shouldn't happen and acting like pseudo mini-managers.

Lomachenko brought something audacious, fresh and genuinely fascinating to the table but came up short. He says he trained to go 20 rounds and given how inactive and tentative he fought for the vast majority of it, it looks like he thought the fight was scheduled for 20. The amount of clinching was inexplicable and very much out of character. You're probably on the money in it being the straw that broke the camel's back though. In any case, he'll come back and be so, so much better having gained invaluable experience. I actually agree with @Drew101 assessment that he was literally learning on the fly throughout the fight. Arum and Klimas may need to seriously consider finding him an experienced trainer with more acclamation to the professional game even though Anatoly undoubtedly knows his kid better than anyone else. They at least corrected the weight issue this time with him coming in at 135 compared to the rather gaunt 129 in his debut. He could still realistically get ahold of a strap before the end of the year though it'll be interesting to see what they're next move is. LA Times is saying the WBO wants to give him another shot at it immediately and Arum thinks he'll fight three more times this year which is a pleasant surprise regardless of who it is.


----------



## Flea Man

chibelle said:


> Agreed. Total dick move on Flea Man's part.


Request to have me removed as a MOD then.


----------



## Flea Man

Hands of Iron said:


> None taken, Fred. There wasn't any reason to lash out at you like that. We've been cool for quite a while, going back almost a couple of years now from the ESB days thanks to a mutual favorite (and still my #1 active guy, that never changed). I can see how you could view it as a bitch move of sorts even though I didn't get a single 'LMAO, Egg on your Face' mention after the fight as pretty much everybody drastically pales in comparison to Dealt and Gaul, but even if he'd won in dominant fashion I've been trying to take an exodus or at least implement some heavily reduced activity with the forum habit to just a couple posts a day for a while now with little success :lol: :sad5: The latest target date was later this month on my birthday because there are some personal goals that I could really benefit by putting more time into instead of CHB. You aren't typically a hardcore regular, you have your priorities straight.
> 
> I come on here mostly to just lounge around and talk about yesteryear ATG fighters with guys like turbo, Pity, Bogo, Zopi, JMP, et al. in favor of chatting up all the happenings with the current scene and it's been that way for quite a while now. They know how I feel about this era of boxing. Everything just moves so incredibly slow, the field of talent is heavily diluted and so many excellent would-be fights have large road blocks placed between them from happening; "boxing fans" are in here regularly citing and validating business reasons why fights shouldn't happen and acting like pseudo mini-managers.
> 
> Lomachenko brought something audacious, fresh and genuinely fascinating to the table but came up short. He says he trained to go 20 rounds and given how inactive and tentative he fought for the vast majority of it, it looks like he thought the fight was scheduled for 20. The amount of clinching was inexplicable and very much out of character. You're probably on the money in it being the straw that broke the camel's back though. In any case, he'll come back and be so, so much better having gained invaluable experience. I actually agree with @Drew101 assessment that he was literally learning on the fly throughout the fight. Arum and Klimas may need to seriously consider finding him an experienced trainer with more acclamation to the professional game even though Anatoly undoubtedly knows his kid better than anyone else. They at least corrected the weight issue this time with him coming in at 135 compared to the rather gaunt 129 in his debut. He could still realistically get ahold of a strap before the end of the year though it'll be interesting to see what they're next move is. LA Times is saying the WBO wants to give him another shot at it immediately and Arum thinks he'll fight three more times this year which is a pleasant surprise regardless of who it is.


I'm just 'et al'??? :-(


----------



## Lester1583

Hands of Iron said:


> Just devastated. :rolleyes.


This will cheer you up - the legendary Larry Holmes' "carry my jockstrap" press conference:


----------



## Cableaddict

"When Marciano was fighting, I wasn't even a thought in my father's penis."

Fucking Larry!


----------



## DBerry

Felix said:


> Just listen to yourself.


yep, it's a fucking total stupe. I pity the cunt, he obviously will be shit at laberouring, and will be fucked at anything else but bean counting.


----------



## DBerry

Flea Man said:


> I love Lomachenko amd I actually think he proved his class.
> 
> I think the hilarity is on a very small, forum-based scale and not all that serious. Just a chance for a giggle at those who thought Lomachenko was already a more complete fighter than Jung Koo Chang, more dynamic than Ray Leonard and would go undefeated right up 'til welterweight, prove himself the P4P hardest puncher in boxing and prove to be the G.O.A.T.


Mate, you couldn't be more correct, a great effort, will learn a heap from this fight, more than a string of wins over easy beats, as has been said by many on this thread, and can move forward with even more confidence, the on distraction is those two stupid fuckwits, and it's funny how they're now making excuses for their predictions, especially considering Lomachenko has had a stint in the WBS!


----------



## Flea Man

DBerry said:


> Mate, you couldn't be more correct, a great effort, will learn a heap from this fight, more than a string of wins over easy beats, as has been said by many on this thread, and can move forward with even more confidence, the on distraction is those two stupid fuckwits, and it's funny how they're now making excuses for their predictions, especially considering Lomachenko has had a stint in the WBS!


:good

Lomachenko has realised his issues eearly on in his pro career, and had his upside proven as well.

This was not a mistake. This was a good decision, unless you're one of those fuckwits who think the only good career is an undefeated one.


----------



## Felix

Flea Man said:


> :good
> 
> Lomachenko has realised his issues eearly on in his pro career, and had his upside proven as well.
> 
> This was not a mistake. This was a good decision, *unless you're one of those fuckwits who think the only good career is an undefeated one*.


FAR too much emphasis is placed on the importance of remaining undefeated. It's just bad for the sport. If a guy goes undefeated, that's fine, but it really doesn't often mean all that much. Ottke - home refs etc, Calzaghe - lacked career-defining fights, Ward - is falling by the wayside through inaction and I think an over-inflated sense of self-worth, Marciano - quit when he wanted to and had the sense not to hang around but could be criticised for lack of longevity...my point is; there's always someone who's gonna nitpick and find a reason to criticise, but how many people talk about and re-watch the fights of Ward, Ottke, and Calzaghe, compared to those of Gatti, Corrales, Chavez, Tyson, etc?


----------



## PityTheFool

Hands of Iron said:


> None taken, Fred. There wasn't any reason to lash out at you like that. We've been cool for quite a while, going back almost a couple of years now from the ESB days thanks to a mutual favorite (and still my #1 active guy, that never changed). I can see how you could view it as a bitch move of sorts even though I didn't get a single 'LMAO, Egg on your Face' mention after the fight as pretty much everybody drastically pales in comparison to Dealt and Gaul, but even if he'd won in dominant fashion I've been trying to take an exodus or at least implement some heavily reduced activity with the forum habit to just a couple posts a day for a while now with little success :lol: :sad5: The latest target date was later this month on my birthday because there are some personal goals that I could really benefit by putting more time into instead of CHB. You aren't typically a hardcore regular, you have your priorities straight.
> 
> I come on here mostly to just lounge around and talk about yesteryear ATG fighters with guys like turbo, Pity, Bogo, Zopi, JMP, et al. in favor of chatting up all the happenings with the current scene and it's been that way for quite a while now. They know how I feel about this era of boxing. Everything just moves so incredibly slow, the field of talent is heavily diluted and so many excellent would-be fights have large road blocks placed between them from happening; "boxing fans" are in here regularly citing and validating business reasons why fights shouldn't happen and acting like pseudo mini-managers.
> 
> Lomachenko brought something audacious, fresh and genuinely fascinating to the table but came up short. He says he trained to go 20 rounds and given how inactive and tentative he fought for the vast majority of it, it looks like he thought the fight was scheduled for 20. The amount of clinching was inexplicable and very much out of character. You're probably on the money in it being the straw that broke the camel's back though. In any case, he'll come back and be so, so much better having gained invaluable experience. I actually agree with @Drew101 assessment that he was literally learning on the fly throughout the fight. Arum and Klimas may need to seriously consider finding him an experienced trainer with more acclamation to the professional game even though Anatoly undoubtedly knows his kid better than anyone else. They at least corrected the weight issue this time with him coming in at 135 compared to the rather gaunt 129 in his debut. He could still realistically get ahold of a strap before the end of the year though it'll be interesting to see what they're next move is. LA Times is saying the WBO wants to give him another shot at it immediately and Arum thinks he'll fight three more times this year which is a pleasant surprise regardless of who it is.


I sent you a PM buddy.I'll have to come up with something to keep you here.


----------



## DBerry

Flea Man said:


> :good
> 
> Lomachenko has realised his issues eearly on in his pro career, and had his upside proven as well.
> 
> This was not a mistake. This was a good decision, unless you're one of those fuckwits who think the only good career is an undefeated one.


None of the ten all time greats have a zero (unless you consider Marciano, and fair play, although he's not in my top ten P$P atg's)


----------



## Pedderrs

Hands of Iron said:


> Next time you see me I'll be 185 at 7-8%.  For 5'7 that ain't bad.
> 
> Congrats to @MadcapMaxie @Zopilote @APOLLO @bballchump11 and @Pedderrs in particular though.


:bbb Easy work.


----------



## Vic

Hands of Iron said:


> He says he trained to go 20 rounds and given how inactive and tentative he fought for the vast majority of it, it looks like he thought the fight was scheduled for 20.


Well said, so true. :lol:


----------



## Leftsmash

Dealt_With has gone full retard over at ESB.


----------



## DBerry

Leftsmash said:


> Dealt_With has gone full retard over at ESB.


:rofl Link?!

dealt_with, you fucking stupe, I have some advice for the future


----------



## TeddyL

ATG's don't go 1-1


----------



## dyna

TeddyL said:


> ATG's don't go 1-1


Henry Armstrong and B-hop?


----------



## Capaedia

dyna said:


> Henry Armstrong and B-hop?


Marquez too


----------



## Flea Man

Capaedia said:


> Marquez too


And Labarba.


----------



## Lester1583

Flea Man said:


> And Labarba.


Britton and Benny.

Cunto lost 2 of his first three fights - got stopped by some unknowns.


----------



## Flea Man

Lester1583 said:


> *Britton and Benny.*
> *Cunto lost 2 of his first three fights* - got stopped by some unknowns.


There you have it.

Only noobs that have no idea of history are freaking out about this.


----------



## Leftsmash

DBerry said:


> :rofl Link?!
> 
> dealt_with, you fucking stupe, I have some advice for the future


He's just carried his schtick over there, just saying everyone else DKSAB, making excuses for what happened.

http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=500643


----------



## shaunster101

Leftsmash said:


> He's just carried his schtick over there, just saying everyone else DKSAB, making excuses for what happened.
> 
> http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=500643


What a sad bastard.


----------



## Brownies

2 weeks later and after everyone has had their laughs, all I have left to say is that I can't wait to see the adjustments in Lomachenko's next fight. He has simple things to improve on and we haven't seen anything that looks like a major flaw from him...


----------



## DBerry

Brownies said:


> 2 weeks later and after everyone has had their laughs, all I have left to say is that I can't wait to see the adjustments in Lomachenko's next fight. He has simple things to improve on and we haven't seen anything that looks like a major flaw from him...


Hang on a fuckin' minute, wasn't that fight only on four days ago?! That's an incredible stretch to say it was two fucking weeks FFS!


----------



## Brownies

DBerry said:


> Hang on a fuckin' minute, wasn't that fight only on four days ago?! That's an incredible stretch to say it was two fucking weeks FFS!


4 days ago really ? I have so much things do to these days that a week feels like a whole month haha !


----------



## Arka

Lester1583 said:


> Britton and Benny.
> 
> Cunto lost 2 of his first three fights - got stopped by some unknowns.


Who's "Cunto"? Charlie Zelenoff?

Lomachenko signed a multi-year contract with Top Rank.From a business point of view, they'll want a return on their investment.

The terms of the contract are probably such that he's financially committed to fighting top-10 fighters,from now on,whether he's technically ready or not.


----------



## JamieC

DBerry said:


> Hang on a fuckin' minute, wasn't that fight only on four days ago?! That's an incredible stretch to say it was two fucking weeks FFS!


Only Lomachenko fans appreciate time moves quicker around the Great One, his career will fly by at an alarming rate to the human eye due to his blistering hand and foot speed slowing down time for those around him


----------



## dyna

JamieC said:


> Only Lomachenko fans appreciate time moves quicker around the Great One, his career will fly by at an alarming rate to the human eye due to his blistering hand and foot speed slowing down time for those around him


You gotta watch it in slow motion.


----------



## Luf

This makes his career more interesting. Noone wants perfection, look at Floyd he gets hated no matter who he fights.

Loma if now like a rough diamond, maybe the roughest of diamonds around.

So much natural ability, so little understanding of the pro game, yet thrown in at the deep end.

Can't wait to see it play out.


----------



## Lester1583

Arka said:


> Who's "Cunto"?


Miguel Canto


----------



## Arka

Lester1583 said:


> Miguel Canto


Ah.Ok :smile


----------



## steviebruno

shaunster101 said:


> What a sad bastard.


It really is sad to see what became of him; such a rapid deterioration in quality. He was a pretty knowledgeable poster before this whole Lomachenko shit started. I fear that he has nothing to live for now. How fitting that his home is a dying message board.


----------



## dyna

steviebruno said:


> It really is sad to see what became of him; such a rapid deterioration in quality. He was a pretty knowledgeable poster before this whole Lomachenko shit started. I fear that he has nothing to live for now. How fitting that his home is a dying message board.


Maybe his girl/boyfriend left him, or maybe Johnstown was right and is Dealt_with affected by his mother's dead

We shouldn't bully him too much


----------



## Leftsmash

@Dealt_with ban should be over by now?


----------



## Mr. Brain

gumbo2176 said:


> Come on man. The guy fought a seasoned pro who came in over the limit and had a ref that allowed the guy to land repeated low blows on Lomanchencko. He did this in only his second pro fight and lost a close decision. I say if they fight again, Lomanchencko likely beats the guy inside the limit.
> 
> You should be so talented.


Never heard of Lomanchencko before, but man oh man, He just turned pro and he's fighting some really good guys right from the start.


----------



## Zopilote

Warlando a G. :deal


----------



## MadcapMaxie

Leftsmash said:


> @Dealt_with ban should be over by now?


It was a 3 month ban that got extended due to his behaviour after Lomachenko lost.


----------



## Hands of Iron

This place is dull as shit now.


----------



## Flea Man

MadcapMaxie said:


> It was a 3 month ban that got extended due to his behaviour after Lomachenko lost.


I actually lifted Dealt With and Gaul's bans about a month ago.


----------



## MadcapMaxie

Flea Man said:


> I actually lifted Dealt With and Gaul's bans about a month ago.


Oh well there you go. It's good because if Russell of all people beats Lomachenko Dealt with is going to implode.


----------



## Hands of Iron

Flea Man said:


> I actually lifted Dealt With and Gaul's bans about a month ago.


I doubt he'll be back. He was trying to cut out on the forum stuff and focus on more productive things. Like you, me... Hell even Bogotazo had himself banned. You take some time out, come back a little invigorated but then it goes back to meh again pretty quick -- 'how it's been for me anyway.


----------



## Flea Man

Hands of Iron said:


> I doubt he'll be back. He was trying to cut out on the forum stuff and focus on more productive things. Like you, me... Hell even Bogotazo had himself banned. You take some time out, come back a little invigorated but then it goes back to meh again pretty quick -- 'how it's been for me anyway.


Hope you're alright mate.

Forum posting comes in fits and spurts. Sometimes I'm engaged enough to talk about anything and everything.

Sometimes I feel 'meh' even at threads which would usually inspire me.


----------



## FelixTrinidad

Flea Man said:


> Hope you're alright mate.
> 
> Forum posting comes in fits and spurts. Sometimes I'm engaged enough to talk about anything and everything.
> 
> Sometimes I feel 'meh' even at threads which would usually inspire me.


Ya me too mate.
I think the big issue for posters like you and me is we have too much boxing knowledge. Sometimes it feels like we are talking to utter amateurs in regards to boxing and it depresses us. If we correct them, we get called 'trolls or Nazi Masters'. It really is depressing at times, but with great knowledge comes great responsibility.
If we don't educate, they will soon self eradicate.

I love boxing mate and I don't care how stupid or naive a lot of these posters sound. Fucking casuals..............


----------



## JamieC

Hands of Iron said:


> I doubt he'll be back. He was trying to cut out on the forum stuff and focus on more productive things. Like you, me... Hell even Bogotazo had himself banned. You take some time out, come back a little invigorated but then it goes back to meh again pretty quick -- 'how it's been for me anyway.


After Loma has lost ive lost a bit of interest, Im not even that excited about Froch Groves rematch but ill watch it, and i totally forgot about Floyd Maidana until yesterday. I wanted a new superstar to be crowned in the sport and i think he got a rough deal with everything going on in that fight so its a bit of an anti climax. And you get all the people relishing in his loss which is just pure madness, hes a classy guy trying to do something amazing, gets cheated out of it in many ways and people are now saying hes peaked or is hype, sums up whats wrong with boxing fans


----------



## PityTheFool

Hands of Iron said:


> I doubt he'll be back. He was trying to cut out on the forum stuff and focus on more productive things. Like you, me... Hell even Bogotazo had himself banned. You take some time out, come back a little invigorated but then it goes back to meh again pretty quick -- 'how it's been for me anyway.


Don't you fucking leave me! I need to think of an 80's or 90's thread to get you inspired again.


----------



## Ivan Drago

JamieC said:


> After Loma has lost ive lost a bit of interest, Im not even that excited about Froch Groves rematch but ill watch it, and i totally forgot about Floyd Maidana until yesterday. I wanted a new superstar to be crowned in the sport and i think he got a rough deal with everything going on in that fight so its a bit of an anti climax. And you get all the people relishing in his loss which is just pure madness, hes a classy guy trying to do something amazing, gets cheated out of it in many ways and people are now saying hes peaked or is hype, sums up whats wrong with boxing fans


Boxing is a tough sport, boxing ain't fair and Loma knows this now. He chose a tough road and I respect him for that. I don't relish in his loss but I've got no sympathy for him losing he lost fair and square and hopefully he learns a lesson from it.


----------



## Leftsmash

Hands of Iron said:


> This place is dull as shit now.


Bro theres still a lot to be excited about. Don't tell me you ain't gonna be around for when Loma is victorious over GRJ :yep


----------



## Mexi-Box

Hands of Iron said:


> This place is dull as shit now.


Just wait until GRJ/Lomachenko and Lara/Canelo. Two fights which have the forum split up. Trust me, this place will be banging again around that time.


----------



## JamieC

Ivan Drago said:


> Boxing is a tough sport, boxing ain't fair and Loma knows this now. He chose a tough road and I respect him for that. I don't relish in his loss but I've got no sympathy for him losing he lost fair and square and hopefully he learns a lesson from it.


Ye but he didn't lose fair and square did he, he was the one that stuck to the rules Salido had no intention of making weight or fighting fair. Boxing is tough but when one guy is obeying the rules it's a shame when a close one goes against him


----------



## Ivan Drago

JamieC said:


> Ye but he didn't lose fair and square did he, he was the one that stuck to the rules Salido had no intention of making weight or fighting fair. Boxing is tough but when one guy is obeying the rules it's a shame when a close one goes against him


Salido won the fight and he would have won regardless of the weight. And they* both* fought dirty Loma just wasn't ready for him at this stage in his career and got outdone by an experienced pro.


----------



## JamieC

Ivan Drago said:


> Salido won the fight and he would have won regardless of the weight. And they* both* fought dirty Loma just wasn't ready for him at this stage in his career and got outdone by an experienced pro.


Then why didn't he bother to make weight? I do t think Loma was fighting dirty, I could be wrong but I've watched the fight a couple of times and didn't notice anything. I think what did him was he didn't pace 12, he let the middle rounds go by being conservative but still had loads left and nearly had Salido out in the 12th, if he'd have kept the pace up through the middle who knows


----------



## Ivan Drago

JamieC said:


> Then why didn't he bother to make weight? I do t think Loma was fighting dirty, I could be wrong but I've watched the fight a couple of times and didn't notice anything. I think what did him was he didn't pace 12, he let the middle rounds go by being conservative but still had loads left and nearly had Salido out in the 12th, if he'd have kept the pace up through the middle who knows


The lack of pro experience caused the pacing issue though. I'm not saying he'd never beat Salido but he chose to fight him in his second fight and although I respect it I can't help but feel it was kinda stupid and it served as an important lesson about the pro's. I don't like the way he got handed a shot at the title anyway.

Loma was holding down Salido's head and doing a lot of pushing not as obvious as the low blows but they were both at it.


----------



## Blanco

Loma definitely got a raw deal with Salido coming in overweight so lets not undermine that but as far as the fight itself, I can't complain about any of Salido dirty tactics cause that's part of the pro game.


----------



## Blanco

The main thing Loma has to work on in my opinion is to put more torque into his punches. He has great punch fluidity to the point where it takes away some of his power which why Salido was able to close the distance early on.


----------



## tommygun711

Blanco said:


> The main thing Loma has to work on in my opinion is to put more torque into his punches. He has great punch fluidity to the point where it takes away some of his power which why Salido was able to close the distance early on.


And he has to up his workrate.


----------



## JamieC

Ivan Drago said:


> The lack of pro experience caused the pacing issue though. I'm not saying he'd never beat Salido but he chose to fight him in his second fight and although I respect it I can't help but feel it was kinda stupid and it served as an important lesson about the pro's. I don't like the way he got handed a shot at the title anyway.
> 
> Loma was holding down Salido's head and doing a lot of pushing not as obvious as the low blows but they were both at it.


Ye definitely, if his first opponent had stretched him 12 rounds I think he'd have beaten Salido as you say it's that experience he turned out to need. I think fighters even less deserving than him have been given shots before so I didn't mind it too much, just a shame he didn't break the record.

Ye but I don't think the clinching had the same effect as low blows and coming in over. It's just a shame it wasn't a cut and dry outcome


----------



## LeapingHook

Ivan Drago said:


> Salido won the fight and he would have won regardless of the weight. And they* both* fought dirty Loma just wasn't ready for him at this stage in his career and got outdone by an experienced pro.


You can't just say they bought fought dirty and that's that, low blowing is much worse than clinching. Salido was landing combinations on his balls FFS, that's probably the worst type of dirty fighting there is except maybe for punching in the back of the head.


----------



## browsing

:lol:

:lol:

:lol:

:sad5

This thread is so satisfying its almost painful.


----------



## Zopilote

JamieC said:


> Ye but he didn't lose fair and square did he, he was the one that stuck to the rules Salido had no intention of making weight or fighting fair. Boxing is tough but when one guy is obeying the rules it's a shame when a close one goes against him


and exactly how the fuck do you know that Salido had no intention of making weight? Did it ever occur to you that Salido went through absolute hell to go down to 128.5lbs and his body couldn't go down any further? There are reports of him starving himself during Fight week. Salido's performance in the later rounds pretty much confirms that he was having trouble with the weight...When the fuck has Salido gassed? Dude is known for his stamina in the later rounds, and no, Lomachenko didn't have anything to do with it, since he did fuck all in the early rounds.

Loma thought that because he was some outstanding amateur that he was just going to come into the pros and take on a seasoned vet like Salido and make history just like that? Well, Salido had other plans, and gave him a nice welcome to PROFESSIONAL Boxing.

And you can come here and say that Loma made it close, and it was only his 2nd pro fight and all that, but fact of the matter is: Loma was the favorite coming into the fight, many were talking about him being this invincible complete fighter, and were already talks of what he will accomplish after defeating Salido...pretty much disrespecting Salido and talking about him as an aftertought...

Well, Mr Lomachenko happened to FUCK with the wrong Mexican. Ain't nobody gonna use Warlando to make history. :deal


----------



## JamieC

Zopilote said:


> and exactly how the fuck do you know that Salido had no intention of making weight? Did it ever occur to you that Salido went through absolute hell to go down to 128.5lbs and his body couldn't go down any further? There are reports of him starving himself during Fight week. Salido's performance in the later rounds pretty much confirms that he was having trouble with the weight...When the fuck has Salido gassed? Dude is known for his stamina in the later rounds, and no, Lomachenko didn't have anything to do with it, since he did fuck all in the early rounds.
> 
> Loma thought that because he was some outstanding amateur that he was just going to come into the pros and take on a seasoned vet like Salido and make history just like that? Well, Salido had other plans, and gave him a nice welcome to PROFESSIONAL Boxing.
> 
> And you can come here and say that Loma made it close, and it was only his 2nd pro fight and all that, but fact of the matter is: Loma was the favorite coming into the fight, many were talking about him being this invincible complete fighter, and were already talks of what he will accomplish after defeating Salido...pretty much disrespecting Salido and talking about him as an aftertought...
> 
> Well, Mr Lomachenko happened to FUCK with the wrong Mexican. Ain't nobody gonna use Warlando to make history. :deal


If he went through hell he should have carried on to make weight, or not been a cutter, no sympathy. Weight is there for a reason, it's one of the rules, if he doesn't do it he doesn't get to just have an advantage that Loma didn't get and then he fought dirty throughout. You can't just say that's professional boxing because it isn't, the rules are there for a reason. Salido didn't win fair and square really, that was his call, he gets the win but he isn't exactly the moral victor underdog you're trying to claim. Imagine how the boxing world would react if this was JCC Jr not bothering with weight and having to fight dirty, no one would say GGG got a lesson in pro boxing, they'd want Chavez banned but because it's Salido it's ok?

And how was Lomachenko disrespectful?


----------



## Hatesrats

Loma-> :fuckoff <-Salido


----------



## Zopilote

JamieC said:


> If he went through hell he should have carried on to make weight, or not been a cutter, no sympathy. Weight is there for a reason, it's one of the rules, if he doesn't do it he doesn't get to just have an advantage that Loma didn't get and then he fought dirty throughout. You can't just say that's professional boxing because it isn't, the rules are there for a reason. Salido didn't win fair and square really, that was his call, he gets the win but he isn't exactly the moral victor underdog you're trying to claim. Imagine how the boxing world would react if this was JCC Jr not bothering with weight and having to fight dirty, no one would say GGG got a lesson in pro boxing, they'd want Chavez banned but because it's Salido it's ok?
> 
> And how was Lomachenko disrespectful?


That's the lowest he could get down to..not much he could have done..You are making it out as if he purposely came in overweight to get an advantage when it was pretty much the opposite as he was clearly affected by the weight. He was offered the fight so he took it, had he declined and gave out reasons that he was having problems with the weight, you bet your ass that there would be idiots saying he's ducking Loma and you fucking know it.

Never said Loma disrespected him, the majority of the boxing world was tho, as if it was written in stone that Loma was gonna easily beat him and talking about Salido as a mere afterthought


----------



## JamieC

Zopilote said:


> That's the lowest he could get down to..not much he could have done..You are making it out as if he purposely came in overweight to get an advantage when it was pretty much the opposite as he was clearly affected by the weight. He was offered the fight so he took it, had he declined and gave out reasons that he was having problems with the weight, you bet your ass that there would be idiots saying he's ducking Loma and you fucking know it.
> 
> Never said Loma disrespected him, the majority of the boxing world was tho, as if it was written in stone that Loma was gonna easily beat him and talking about Salido as a mere afterthought


How do we know he ever intended to? How do we know Loma didn't go through he'll but he turned up at the agreed weight, Salido didn't. if a couple of lbs didn't matter why was it not mentioned before. You might get some idiots calling it a duck if he vacated and moved up, but it would have been fairer if he hadn't come in heavy, certain fighters like JCC Jr would get crucified for that but Salido gets a pass as if breaking the rules to teach Loma about pro boxing is ok. Pro boxing is a hard sport and yes people bend the rules, but Loma had the deck stacked against him and still performed very well and didn't moan at all afterwards, so he's a young 2 fight novice at the top level with a lot of class, sure he didn't the W in a close one against the toughest opponent he could have picked, but he's still bang on track for a great career, should he beat GRJr of course


----------



## Zopilote

JamieC said:


> How do we know he ever intended to? How do we know Loma didn't go through he'll but he turned up at the agreed weight, Salido didn't. if a couple of lbs didn't matter why was it not mentioned before. You might get some idiots calling it a duck if he vacated and moved up, but it would have been fairer if he hadn't come in heavy, certain fighters like JCC Jr would get crucified for that but Salido gets a pass as if breaking the rules to teach Loma about pro boxing is ok. Pro boxing is a hard sport and yes people bend the rules, but Loma had the deck stacked against him and still performed very well and didn't moan at all afterwards, so he's a young 2 fight novice at the top level with a lot of class, sure he didn't the W in a close one against the toughest opponent he could have picked, but he's still bang on track for a great career, should he beat GRJr of course


Like I said, there were reports of him starving himself during fight week, and it was clearly evident in the later rounds of the fight that Salido was affected by the weight. To be completely fair, Loma should feel lucky that Salido wasn't in shape and NOT much lighter or else he would have been more quicker, durable with more stamina in the later rounds...which wild have been absolute hell for Loma, more than it already was for him.

As for Jr, its pretty clear that anything he does, people will bash him for it.dude is amongst the most disliked fighters in the sport


----------



## JamieC

Zopilote said:


> Like I said, there were reports of him starving himself during fight week, and it was clearly evident in the later rounds of the fight that Salido was affected by the weight. To be completely fair, Loma should feel lucky that Salido wasn't in shape and much lighter or else he would have been more quicker, durable with more stamina in the later rounds...which wild have been absolute he'll for Loma, more than it already was for him.
> 
> As for Jr, its pretty clear that anything he does, people will bash him for it.dude is amongst the most disliked fibers in the sport


Or Salido should be lucky Loma was professional and put himself through the weight making process to the limit and he was allowed to throws combos below the belt. He may well have won without those things, it's just annoying they happened in a big fight.

True but it shows the double standard, I like JCC Jr and he gets some serious stick when other fighters do the same and don't get called on it. We either call every fighter on not being professional and making weight or fighting dirty or we accept it, regardless of the opponent in question


----------



## poorface

Zopilote said:


> Like I said, there were reports of him starving himself during fight week, and it was clearly evident in the later rounds of the fight that Salido was affected by the weight. To be completely fair, Loma should feel lucky that Salido wasn't in shape and much lighter or else he would have been more quicker, durable with more stamina in the later rounds...which wild have been absolute he'll for Loma, more than it already was for him.
> 
> As for Jr, its pretty clear that anything he does, people will bash him for it.dude is amongst the most disliked fibers in the sport


This is all spot on as usual. I notice that there's a lot of picking and choosing when it comes to which guys to excoriate about making weight and which ones to excuse (and I'm certainly guilty of this myself).

With Salido, while I would have liked to have seen him make the weight, the fact remains that once he failed to do so, Lomachenko could have walked away from the fight or set more stringent conditions in order for the event to take place, like a rehydration clause. He chose to do neither and merely accepted a small bump in purse. This also wasn't a case of the heavier fighter essentially buying an advantage on the scales; Salido hardly enjoyed the leverage that guys like Broner did when they couldn't make weight and this was reflected in the fact that their purses were close to the same.


----------



## Zopilote

JamieC said:


> Or Salido should be lucky Loma was professional and put himself through the weight making process to the limit and he was allowed to throws combos below the belt. He may well have won without those things, it's just annoying they happened in a big fight.
> 
> True but it shows the double standard, I like JCC Jr and he gets some serious stick when other fighters do the same and don't get called on it. We either call every fighter on not being professional and making weight or fighting dirty or we accept it, regardless of the opponent in question


OR Loma should feel lucky he wasn't fighting the Warlando of 2 years ago! :yep


----------



## Trash Bags

What happened to Undefeated Gaul? That dude was super stupid.


----------



## rjjfan

JamieC said:


> Or Salido should be lucky Loma was professional and put himself through the weight making process to the limit and he was allowed to throws combos below the belt. He may well have won without those things, it's just annoying they happened in a big fight.
> 
> True but it shows the double standard, I like JCC Jr and he gets some serious stick when other fighters do the same and don't get called on it. We either call every fighter on not being professional and making weight or fighting dirty or we accept it, regardless of the opponent in question


Well said. If the shoe was on the other foot, all the mexitards would have been claiming foul.


----------



## Zopilote

rjjfan said:


> Well said. If the shoe was on the other foot, all the mexitards would have been claiming foul.


I love how your pussy ass always cries about racism yet always brings up shit like "mexitards".

Besides, when our fighters get fouled, our fighters deal with it and still find a way to win... check out the 2nd Salido-Lopez fight.

Salido won, deal with it ****** :hi:


----------



## JamieC

Zopilote said:


> OR Loma should feel lucky he wasn't fighting the Warlando of 2 years ago! :yep


Hah maybe :good or maybe Salido was lucky he wasn't fighting the Loma 2 years down the line


----------



## Zopilote

JamieC said:


> Hah maybe :good or maybe Salido was lucky he wasn't fighting the Loma 2 years down the line


:yep

Touché

Loma in 2 years down the line will definetly be making much much noise! :good


----------



## JamieC

Zopilote said:


> :yep
> 
> Touché
> 
> Loma in 2 years down the line will definetly be making much much noise! :good


Hopefully, he's a classy guy and a good all rounder. That said it's no given he beats Russell Jr and if he loses that it's a long long way back, I think he should but if he loses....


----------



## browsing

Trash Bags said:


> What happened to Undefeated Gaul? That dude was super stupid.


Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dum are still basking in the humiliation of the Loma loss.


----------



## tommygun711

:rofl


----------



## quincy k

bballchump11 said:


> fuck off
> 
> Greatest amateur of all time is 1-1 as a professional :rofl


rofl lmfao

the greatest amatuer of all time is a two weight class champ....

after his seventh pro fight


----------



## Lester1583

dyna said:


> You're all shook and pray to the gods


Lomacho eclipsing ATG after ATG as we speak.

There is no escape,
The future belongs to Hi-Tech.


----------



## quincy k

bballchump11 said:


> Did you see the bullshit this asshole Dealt_With said for the past year? I'm going to talk all the shit I want


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasyl_Lomachenko
3 Win 2-1  Gary Russell, Jr. MD 12 21 Jun 2014  StubHub Center, Carson, California, US Won vacant *WBO featherweight title*

7 Win 6-1  Román Martínez KO 5 (12), 1:09 11 Jun 2016  The Theater at Madison Square Garden, New York City, New York, US Won* WBO junior lightweight title*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floyd_Mayweather_Jr.
3 Win 3-0  Jerry Cooper TKO 1 (4), 1:39 1997-01-18  Thomas & Mack Center, Las Vegas, Nevada

7 Win 7-0  Tony Duran TKO 1 (6), 1:12 1997-05-09  The Orleans Hotel & Casino, Las Vegas,

*rofl lmfao *


----------



## quincy k

so now there are two possible non-african american, mid-western-opie-looking white boys that are pound-for-pound candidates?

oh my

this is a flomo nightmare


----------



## Hands of Iron

Felix said:


>


:rofl :rofl

You absolute cunt of a man.



Felix said:


> Just listen to yourself.


:lol:


----------



## bballchump11

quincy k said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasyl_Lomachenko
> 3 Win 2-1  Gary Russell, Jr. MD 12 21 Jun 2014  StubHub Center, Carson, California, US Won vacant *WBO featherweight title*
> 
> 7 Win 6-1  Román Martínez KO 5 (12), 1:09 11 Jun 2016  The Theater at Madison Square Garden, New York City, New York, US Won* WBO junior lightweight title*
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floyd_Mayweather_Jr.
> 3 Win 3-0  Jerry Cooper TKO 1 (4), 1:39 1997-01-18  Thomas & Mack Center, Las Vegas, Nevada
> 
> 7 Win 7-0  Tony Duran TKO 1 (6), 1:12 1997-05-09  The Orleans Hotel & Casino, Las Vegas,
> 
> *rofl lmfao *


So you agree that Lomachenko could beat Mayweather 10-2 in his pro debut?


----------



## Boogle McDougal

Lomachenko has made it. I know because people on boxing forums are arguing about him.


----------



## Hands of Iron

LOL @ MrTony in here posting as himself along with the Abraham handle. Fucks Sake. :rofl

Wack Job (WAAAAACK JOB!) 

Wack Job (WAAAAACK JOB!)


----------



## tommygun711

EvianMcGirt said:


> I'll just leave this here......


:lol:


----------



## Felix

Hands of Iron said:


> :rofl :rofl
> 
> You absolute cunt of a man.
> 
> :lol:


Oh, yeah but of course! :lol: Gotta seize the moment right? To be fair I like Loma but Dealt With goes a bit overboard so the temptation was too much that time! :rofl


----------



## quincy k

bballchump11 said:


> So you agree that Lomachenko could beat Mayweather 10-2 in his pro debut?


what does loma beating mayweather in his pro debut have to do with the fact that vasyl is far, far, far more accomplished than floyd after seven fights loma being a concurrent two division belt holder.

dealt with, to this point, has been right in his assessment that loma appears to have the ability to be an all time great and you guys, flomos for the most part, were wrong

thats generally the case when you only see things in black and white while the entire world sees things in color.


----------



## bballchump11

quincy k said:


> what does loma beating mayweather in his pro debut have to do with the fact that vasyl is far, far, far more accomplished than floyd after seven fights loma being a concurrent two division belt holder.
> 
> dealt with, to this point, has been right in his assessment that loma appears to have the ability to be an all time great and you guys, flomos for the most part, were wrong
> 
> thats generally the case when you only see things in black and white while the entire world sees things in color.


It has to do with everything. People are talking shit because Dealt_With and Undefeated_Gaul were going around shtting on everybody's opinion who didn't agree with them that Lomachenko w/o any pro fights could come in and beat Mayweather easy at 130. They also claimed he could beat a multitude of atgs with no pro experience and talked shit if you disagreed with them.

You are completely missing the point. Nobody is hating on Lomachenko. I actually like him. And I'm still waiting on you to ride my dick for predicting that he'd lose to Salido


----------



## bballchump11

delete


----------



## bballchump11

delete


----------



## quincy k

bballchump11 said:


> It has to do with everything. People are talking shit because Dealt_With and Undefeated_Gaul were going around shtting on everybody's opinion who didn't agree with them that Lomachenko w/o any pro fights could come in and beat Mayweather easy at 130. They also claimed he could beat a multitude of atgs with no pro experience and talked shit if you disagreed with them.
> 
> You are completely missing the point. Nobody is hating on Lomachenko. I actually like him. And I'm still waiting on you to ride my dick for predicting that he'd lose to Salido


so what. he had an over-inflated opinion(lmfao you thinking that lara is going to beat 160s) of loma. doesnt take away that he was spot on regarding lomas abilities of possibly being an all-time great.

seven fights

two world titles in two seperate weight classes.

never been done before and never will again


----------



## bballchump11

quincy k said:


> so what. he had an over-inflated opinion(lmfao you thinking that lara is going to beat 160s) of loma. doesnt take away that he was spot on regarding lomas abilities of possibly being an all-time great.
> 
> seven fights
> 
> two world titles in two seperate weight classes.
> 
> never been done before and never will again


You're missing the point. I can't help you unfortunately. Pick a fight with somebody else in this thread. Maybe one of the racist white posters who are talking shit to Dealt_With


----------



## quincy k

bballchump11 said:


> You're missing the point. I can't help you unfortunately. Pick a fight with somebody else in this thread. Maybe one of the racist white posters who are talking shit to Dealt_With


who am i picking a fight with? i made a point that prior champion hall-of-fame fighters are picking both loma and golovkin as pfp #1 candidates and then you and michigan warrior got all defensive, the later mumbling something racial about me* "scrounging blueberries in the sun"* as some sort of racial inference to me being a mexican farm worker, me living in mexico.

you dont see me telling michiganwarrior to go eat fried chicken after picking his cotton all day do you?

its because im not a fuken racists


----------



## bballchump11

quincy k said:


> who am i picking a fight with? i made a point that prior champion hall-of-fame fighters are picking both loma and golovkin as pfp #1 candidates and then you and michigan warrior got all defensive, the later mumbling something racial about me* "scrounging blueberries in the sun"* as some sort of racial inference to me being a mexican farm worker, me living in mexico.
> 
> you dont see me telling michiganwarrior to go eat fried chicken after picking his cotton all day do you?
> 
> its because im not a fuken racists


There's 19 pages of posts in this thread. Bother somebody else


----------



## Dealt_with

I've never had any doubt about Lomachenko, not for a second. Even when he was cheated against Salido. I know how his career is going to progress, and I know exactly how the fights against Morales, Floyd etc. would've went. It's because I know boxing better than you, I know character better than you. Does that make me better and more intelligent than you? Probably.


----------



## rossco

Lester1583 said:


> There is no escape,
> The future belongs to Hi-Tech.


Why the fuck does Lomachenko name himself after shit tennis trainers?


----------



## quincy k

Dealt_with said:


> I've never had any doubt about Lomachenko, not for a second. Even when he was cheated against Salido. I know how his career is going to progress, and I know exactly how the fights against Morales, Floyd etc. would've went. It's because I know boxing better than you, I know character better than you. Does that make me better and more intelligent than you? Probably.


you spotted the talent of loma well before andre ward.

http://lomachenko.com/news/516-andr...joy-it-will-soon-be-in-the-top-10-p4p?lang=en

well done


----------



## Bogotazo

quincy k said:


> so now there are two possible non-african american, mid-western-opie-looking white boys that are pound-for-pound candidates?
> 
> oh my
> 
> this is a flomo nightmare


Please don't race-bait.


----------



## Lester1583

rossco said:


> Why the fuck does Lomachenko name himself after shit tennis trainers?


Loma never had a nickname actually.

Someone from the US media or his PR team gave it to him most likely.

He was/is much more often referred to as SuperVasya by his eastern euro fans.


----------



## quincy k

Bogotazo said:


> Please don't race-bait.


perhaps im betting off spending my *life scrounging blueberries in the sun* like a mexican farm worker?

http://checkhookboxing.com/index.php?threads/lomachenko-no-power.85495/page-8

horrible

just fuken horrible


----------



## Dealt_with

quincy k said:


> you spotted the talent of loma well before andre ward.
> 
> http://lomachenko.com/news/516-andr...joy-it-will-soon-be-in-the-top-10-p4p?lang=en
> 
> well done


That's because I've been a fan of amateur/Olympic boxing for a long time, I'd seen Loma in 50+ fights against all sorts of styles from all over the world. In that game there's no place to pick and choose, you have to fight the best and Loma was dominant while winning everything. I'd already seen the movement, the adaptability, the skills, the champion character of a guy willing to improve and work on his craft every day under his dad who has always been committed to creating a complete fighter. Guys like Ward and Roy Jones know boxing but they probably didn't get a chance to see him properly until Lomachenko turned pro in the US. 
People on here have been conditioned to show a lack of respect for the Olympic game, that's why I was shown a lack of respect for my knowledge of the Olympic game and my experience watching Lomachenko. People thought it wasn't relevant to the pro game. Guys like Ward and Jones know where they learned their craft, where they learned about having to fight the best, where they learned about dealing with the big fights, where they learned to be professional in their application to their craft. Boxing skills are boxing skills, amateur or professional. Fighters who have achieved in both know this and recognize fighters for their talent, not their resume, how many pro fights they've had or how much money they've made. Lomachenko is a fighters favourite fighter. Lomachenko is next level, it seems only objective posters recognize this. He was always destined to dominate in the money game.


----------



## bballchump11

I'll copy and paste what I said in another thread:

"I had issue with the assumptions and praise you were already giving to this kid who is 0-0. Then in order to hype him up, you want to knock down a universally accepted all time great. You were breaking down Floyd's resume, like that somehow would make up for Lomachenko's lack of a resume. 

and if that's your opinion then fine, but not just with Lomachenko, but with any topic, you come in and state your opinion as fact. Then shit on everybody else's even if they're not saying anything out of this world. 

You could be like "I personally think he's the best boxer I've seen. I think he'll go down as a for sure atg". But you state bizarre shit and get mad if somebody doesn't agree with you. 

If I came and said I think Errol Spence could beat a prime Thomas Hearns and got pissed off with anybody who disagreed with me, I'd be in the wrong."


----------



## Dealt_with

bballchump11 said:


> I'll copy and paste what I said in another thread:
> 
> "I had issue with the assumptions and praise you were already giving to this kid who is 0-0. Then in order to hype him up, you want to knock down a universally accepted all time great. You were breaking down Floyd's resume, like that somehow would make up for Lomachenko's lack of a resume.
> 
> and if that's your opinion then fine, but not just with Lomachenko, but with any topic, you come in and state your opinion as fact. Then shit on everybody else's even if they're not saying anything out of this world.
> 
> You could be like "I personally think he's the best boxer I've seen. I think he'll go down as a for sure atg". But you state bizarre shit and get mad if somebody doesn't agree with you.
> 
> If I came and said I think Errol Spence could beat a prime Thomas Hearns and got pissed off with anybody who disagreed with me, I'd be in the wrong."


It's not the same, because Errol Spence can't/couldn't beat the top Russian amateurs at his weight. Lomachenko could always beat anyone. If Floyd is considered the best in the pro game and Lomachenko's skills/boxing game shits all over Floyds game then I'm going to make that comparison.


----------



## godsavethequeen

Hi Tech is obviously Talented, but lets be rational he joined the Pro game Late and as you all know winning medals as an AM does not mean you will make it as a pro in the exact same way. You can have opinions for sure but if you are going to use comparisons to other fighters lets do it correctly. So look at where Morrales was back at the age of 28/29 he beat Pacquiao and had gone tooth and nail with Barrera and to be frank this was the end of Morrales's career at 50 pro fights in to a 61 career. Mayweather had won JWW and WW at 28/29 not against the greatest opposition but he had beaten P4P ranked fighters before eg Castillo.
Hi Tech will be lucky to get in to the 20 pro fights before his career is over and there is no comparison between pro and AM especialy when there were head guards being used while Hi Tech was fighting as a Pro.
On top of that lets not big up Hi Tech's wins against opponents he has faced as yet. I mean Gary Russell Jnr WTF Mayweathers first Belt came from beating Genaro Hernandez ( RIP ) 

I hope Hi Tech keeps rolling through the divisions and maybe getting to where the money men are at JWW and WW because he deserves those fights.

On a Side note did anyone see just how good AJ was at driving the Mini Rally prepped car on Top Gear?


----------



## godsavethequeen

Dealt_with said:


> It's not the same, because Errol Spence can't/couldn't beat the top Russian amateurs at his weight. Lomachenko could always beat anyone. If Floyd is considered the best in the pro game and Lomachenko's skills/boxing game shits all over Floyds game then I'm going to make that comparison.


Really? SHITS all over Floyd's skills/boxing? I am a Pacquiao fan and rarely will I side with a flomo ( sorry BBall ) but you need your head read if you believe what you just wrote.


----------



## bballchump11

Dealt_with said:


> It's not the same, because Errol Spence can't/couldn't beat the top Russian amateurs at his weight. Lomachenko could always beat anyone. If Floyd is considered the best in the pro game and Lomachenko's skills/boxing game shits all over Floyds game then I'm going to make that comparison.


But we can't simply go based off his amateur record alone to state for fact on what he'll do. You can try to make projections and educated guesses. We've seen too many skilled amateurs go on to amount to shit in the pros. We've also seen crappy amateur fighters go on to become great pros. Being a great amateur is a very good indication that you'll be a good pro, but it is not definitive. I'll analyze the 1996 Olympics.

The medalist who went pro were:
Istvan Kovacs gold
David Reid gold
Vassiliy Jirov gold
Wladimir Klitschko gold

Paea Wolfgramm silver
David Defiagbon silver
Oktay Urkal silver
Tontcho Tontchev silver

Oleh Kiryukhin bronze
Rafael Lozano bronze
Zoltan Lunka bronze
Pablo Chacón bronze
Floyd Mayweather Jr. bronze
Terrance Cauthen bronze
Leonard Dorin bronze
Fethi Missaoui bronze
Daniel Santos bronze
Karim Tulaganov bronze
Rhoshii Wells bronze
Mohamed Bahari bronze
Antonio Tarver bronze
Thomas Ulrich bronze
Nate Jones bronze
Luan Krasniqi bronze
Duncan Dokiwari bronze

Now this is a large list of some of the best amateurs in 1996. Some of the medalist from countries like Cuban and Russia didn't go pro like Felix Savon. But pick out how many of these fighters actually went on to become good professionals. Mayweather, Klitshko, Tarver, and Jirov are the best ones. The rest of them didn't go on to really do shit.

2/4 gold medalist were complete trash. Istvan Kovacs went 22-1 and got knocked out by Julio Pablo Chacon. David Reid went 17-2. He lost to Trinidad in a UD which isn't a shame. He completely underperformed as a professional though when he's getting knocked out by Sam Hill 13-2-1 at the time.


----------



## rossco

Lester1583 said:


> Loma never had a nickname actually.
> 
> Someone from the US media or his PR team gave it to him most likely.
> 
> He was/is much more often referred to as SuperVasya by his eastern euro fans.


That's two shit Nicknames.

I think we should give him our own one.


----------



## Dealt_with

bballchump11 said:


> But we can't simply go based off his amateur record alone to state for fact on what he'll do. You can try to make projections and educated guesses. We've seen too many skilled amateurs go on to amount to shit in the pros. We've also seen crappy amateur fighters go on to become great pros. Being a great amateur is a very good indication that you'll be a good pro, but it is not definitive. I'll analyze the 1996 Olympics.
> 
> The medalist who went pro were:
> Istvan Kovacs gold
> David Reid gold
> Vassiliy Jirov gold
> Wladimir Klitschko gold
> 
> Paea Wolfgramm silver
> David Defiagbon silver
> Oktay Urkal silver
> Tontcho Tontchev silver
> 
> Oleh Kiryukhin bronze
> Rafael Lozano bronze
> Zoltan Lunka bronze
> Pablo Chacón bronze
> Floyd Mayweather Jr. bronze
> Terrance Cauthen bronze
> Leonard Dorin bronze
> Fethi Missaoui bronze
> Daniel Santos bronze
> Karim Tulaganov bronze
> Rhoshii Wells bronze
> Mohamed Bahari bronze
> Antonio Tarver bronze
> Thomas Ulrich bronze
> Nate Jones bronze
> Luan Krasniqi bronze
> Duncan Dokiwari bronze
> 
> Now this is a large list of some of the best amateurs in 1996. Some of the medalist from countries like Cuban and Russia didn't go pro like Felix Savon. But pick out how many of these fighters actually went on to become good professionals. Mayweather, Klitshko, Tarver, and Jirov are the best ones. The rest of them didn't go on to really do shit.
> 
> 2/4 gold medalist were complete trash. Istvan Kovacs went 22-1 and got knocked out by Julio Pablo Chacon. David Reid went 17-2. He lost to Trinidad in a UD which isn't a shame. He completely underperformed as a professional though when he's getting knocked out by Sam Hill 13-2-1 at the time.


All that is great, whatever. Lomachenko wasn't ever 'just another talented amateur'. You just had to watch him to see that, he has always fought on the inside/mid range and liked throwing bodyshots. Again, I told everybody this and the video was there for everyone to see. It wasn't anything close to an educated guess, it was descriptive, not predictive. Nobody wanted to listen other than a handful of more objective posters here, and now you other dummies have to have it drilled into your heads with paper titles and 'pro fights', as if having pro fights is an achievement in itself.
Don't waste your time talking about other amateurs, even you aren't that dumb to think that has any relevance to Lomachenko.


----------



## thehook13




----------



## Lester1583




----------



## dyna




----------



## thehook13

^^^ ohhhh!! saved for later


----------



## ThatBoxingGuy2022

I agree Loma will go down in history

ATG List:

1. Vasyl 'Salido' Lomachenko


----------



## bballchump11

Dealt_with said:


> All that is great, whatever. Lomachenko wasn't ever 'just another talented amateur'. You just had to watch him to see that, he has always fought on the inside/mid range and liked throwing bodyshots. Again, I told everybody this and the video was there for everyone to see. It wasn't anything close to an educated guess, it was descriptive, not predictive. Nobody wanted to listen other than a handful of more objective posters here, and now you other dummies have to have it drilled into your heads with paper titles and 'pro fights', as if having pro fights is an achievement in itself.
> Don't waste your time talking about other amateurs, even you aren't that dumb to think that has any relevance to Lomachenko.


Most people on here assumed Lomachenko would become a good to great professional. Just like they assumed Usyk and Beterbiev would become great pros. We're also saying that you're putting way too much emphasis on the amateurs though. You're saying that the best skilled fighters are in the amateurs and most of these fighters underachieve as professionals


----------



## turbotime

:rofl


----------



## chibelle

Dealt_with said:


> All that is great, whatever. Lomachenko wasn't ever 'just another talented amateur'. You just had to watch him to see that, he has always fought on the inside/mid range and liked throwing bodyshots. Again, I told everybody this and the video was there for everyone to see. It wasn't anything close to an educated guess, it was descriptive, not predictive. Nobody wanted to listen other than a handful of more objective posters here, and now you other dummies have to have it drilled into your heads with paper titles and 'pro fights', as if having pro fights is an achievement in itself.
> Don't waste your time talking about other amateurs, even you aren't that dumb to think that has any relevance to Lomachenko.


So your answer is a non answer.

I'm not fan of BBall sometimes and MW when they are obviously bias towards team slick. But he gave you an honest well thought out argument with objective facts. And your reply basically comes down to "other amateurs have no relevance to Lomachenko".

If those guys have no relevance to Lomachenko, then what is the point of P4P or ATG or any list comparing and contrasting boxers to each other. THE WHOLE point of these lists is to compare and contrast.

The whole point of Loma being P4P is because COMPARED TO PREVIOUS pros no one has done what he has done in in 7 pro fights.

You can't go arguing about his ATG/P4P status and compare him to other previous ATG and then disregard other comparisons when it does not support your argument. You can't cherry pick.

As BBall said, history is against Loma. Too many amateurs have gone absolutely nowhere, let alone P4P or even ATG status.

Loma has 7 pro fights and _*closer to 30 years *_than 25 years old. So to claim any ATG status he would need to do what BHop, Mayweather, and JMM have done the last 10 years of their career - be fucking awesome. And that is just to be in the top 50 of ATG. To penertrate top 10 of ATG - he better fucking beat some ATG guys along the way because beating Martinez, and assuming Rigo and Salido victories is not very convincing at all.


----------



## rossco

No fighter from this watered down era becomes a top 10 ATG, and if boxing stays like this no one in the future will either.


----------



## Kurushi

You know what I'd quite like gifs of? That moment in the first round where Loma is very cautiously offering Martinez a glove touch and when, also in the first round, he signals to the ref about a clash of heads. Talk about being a fucking knowledge sponge. Loma's fighting style hasn't changed but his accumulation and understanding of pro game tactics is fucking on point! There's a lot to be said about learning a lesson from a loss and Loma is the one to speak it.

Cautious glove touch (01:06 - 01:16)





Ref nod (02:38 - 02:48)


----------



## Lester1583

Vasya's crowded with fans after his triumphant return to Ukraine:


----------



## tommygun711

Loma is a pretty clean fighter tbf.

Not a lot of fouling at all coming from him.


----------



## Lester1583




----------



## dyna

Maneul Charr did nicer moves during the Leapai fight.


----------



## Lester1583

Marquez breaks down Loma's greatness on Golpe a Golpe:





@Bogotazo


----------



## GlassJaw

He has the possibility to become an ATG, but you definitely can't call him that already.


----------



## thehook13




----------



## Matty lll




----------



## thehook13




----------



## Brownies

Matty lll said:


>


Fantastic video. I'm rewatching the Salido fight right now and it's interesting to look at the things Salido did to prevent Lomachenko from using some of those tricks. 2 things I noticed are that Salido was constantly feinting when getting close, which made it hard for Loma to settle his offense with those weak jab he throws to create openings. Also, Salido was good at throwing that low looping left hook when Lomachenko did his trademark short step on his right to create an angle and throw his left. lomachenko didn't have much success with his movement in the first half. I'm sure Lomachenko's team have analysed the fight thoroughly and has worked on adjustments.

I think it was a good fight that was overshadowed by Salido's weight and low blows and people being too quick to call Lomachenko a bust.


----------



## Kurushi

I was looking for this exact clip to post in this exact thread. Well done.


----------



## quincy k

sick

cant weight for the ko prop to open at plus money in the salido rematch

lomas going to go for the ko the entire 36 minutes.


----------



## Dealt_with

quincy k said:


> sick
> 
> cant weight for the ko prop to open at plus money in the salido rematch
> 
> lomas going to go for the ko the entire 36 minutes.


Lomachenko never goes for the KO. He will KO Salido as soon as he gets him hurt.


----------



## quincy k

Dealt_with said:


> Lomachenko never goes for the KO. He will KO Salido as soon as he gets him hurt.


i did not make myself clear.

by going for the ko for the entire 36 minutes is that loma is not going to coast when he already has the fight won on the cards in the 10th round ala erisladry lara or floyd mayweather. he is going to ko salido when the fight is already won like andrade recently did agaisnt willie nelson


----------



## Lester1583




----------



## thehook13

Nice photo of Loma with his daddy.


----------



## dyna

thehook13 said:


> Nice photo of Loma with his daddy.


He really got him by the balls last time, eh?


----------



## stiflers mum

Loma likely to vacate 126lb title and campaign at 130.

http://www.boxingscene.com/vasyl-lo...-106378?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Looking to fight again in October.


----------



## Casual Benson's Unknown

Good, he really needs activity now


----------



## Mexi-Box

Lester1583 said:


>


Salido looks short. Lomachenko is listed at 5' 6". I've seen Salido listed at 5' 5", but I didn't believe it because I used to see him listed at 5' 7" for a while. Now, it does look like he's a short dude.


----------



## rjjfan

Lester1583 said:


>


Looks like Salido at Caneloweight now, trying to get some of that Canelo action. He just might get it too.


----------



## rossco

Mexi-Box said:


> Salido looks short. Lomachenko is listed at 5' 6". I've seen Salido listed at 5' 5", but I didn't believe it because I used to see him listed at 5' 7" for a while. Now, it does look like he's a short dude.


I take it you're on about penis size?

Closet ***.


----------



## Hands of Iron

rossco said:


> I take it you're on about penis size?
> 
> Closet ***.


:rofl

<3 you, bruh. Thanks for all the compliments.


----------



## rossco

Hands of Iron said:


> :rofl
> 
> <3 you, bruh. Thanks for all the compliments.


:lol:


----------



## Dealt_with

Dealt_with said:


> Is Lomachenko's career over? It's just starting and you'll see just how exceptional he is. Him being okay with the decision isn't indicative of a lack of motivation/competitive instinct, it's indicative of his supreme mental strength that drove him to challenge for the title in his second bout.


Damn, the realest shit I ever said.


----------



## Dealt_with

tliang1000 said:


> Loma train didn't go very far.


Toot toot


----------



## TeddyL

Had he not been quite so arrogant in taking the Salido fight then it would all be very different.

Sadly he will forever be followed by that loss


----------



## Dealt_with

TeddyL said:


> Had he not been quite so arrogant in taking the Salido fight then it would all be very different.
> 
> Sadly he will forever be followed by that loss


Haha no he won't you clown.


----------



## hamas

Dealt_with said:


> Haha no he won't you clown.


Can you add me to the train, I tried to join a few stops back, but you was going too fast


----------



## Wordup

TeddyL said:


> Had he not been quite so arrogant in taking the Salido fight then it would all be very different.
> 
> Sadly he will forever be followed by that loss


Why would it? he was trying to a break a record. Are you criticising a fighter for being ambitious?


----------



## TeddyL

Wordup said:


> Why would it? he was trying to a break a record. Are you criticising a fighter for being ambitious?


He wasn't ready. It was arrogance.

The Lomachenko obsessives can refute it all they like but the reality is that he will forever have that 1 on his record. He's been beaten. He can have an interesting career, but he will never be a Floyd Mayweather. A fighter who beat every single person put in front of him , 49 times.


----------



## Wordup

TeddyL said:


> He wasn't ready. It was arrogance.
> 
> The Lomachenko obsessives can refute it all they like but the reality is that he will forever have that 1 on his record. He's been beaten. He can have an interesting career, but he will never be a Floyd Mayweather. A fighter who beat every single person put in front of him , 49 times.


I disagree, I'd call it ambition & there is nothing wrong with that. Besides he is fighting at a higher level at this point in his career than Mayweather was after the same amount of fights & his career can eclipse Mayweather's despite the 'L'


----------



## REDC

TeddyL said:


> He wasn't ready. It was arrogance.
> 
> The Lomachenko obsessives can refute it all they like but the reality is that he will forever have that 1 on his record. He's been beaten. He can have an interesting career, but he will never be a Floyd Mayweather. A fighter who beat every single person put in front of him , 49 times.


Does the L in your name stand for the last letter in superficial or the two L's in shallow?


----------



## TeddyL

Wordup said:


> I disagree, I'd call it ambition & there is nothing wrong with that. Besides he is fighting at a higher level at this point in his career than Mayweather was after the same amount of fights & his career can eclipse Mayweather's despite the 'L'


No. Ambition is just a determination to achieve something. He took the fight because they arrogantly thought he would win despite people in TR warning against it.

He isn't going to eclipse Mayweather. Fighters are defined by their fights, not their talents. There are not the fights out there for him unless he drastically went up in weight.


----------



## thehook13

Grown man has such a fan boy crush :rofl


----------



## LuckyLuke

thehook13 said:


> Grown man has such a fan boy crush :rofl


Fanboy? The guys is not just a fanboy. He has some serious gay love going on and is jerking off everynight in front of a Lomachenko poster.


----------



## thehook13

LuckyLuke said:


> Fanboy? The guys is not just a fanboy. He has some serious gay love going on and is jerking off everynight in front of a Lomachenko poster.


No shame about it either. have to admire that in a way. Zero fucks given


----------



## Dealt_with

I always find it strange when people go straight to homosexuality talk when someone is talking about a sport. I don't care about Lomachenko as a person (even though he seems like an intelligent and level headed person - which are things I go for in a guy), I just appreciate the high level boxing he produces. It's on a level I've never seen before, his movement is a work of art.


----------



## ThatBoxingGuy2022

Dealt_with said:


> I always find it strange when people go straight to homosexuality talk when someone is talking about a sport. I don't care about Lomachenko as a person (even though he seems like an intelligent and level headed person - which are things I go for in a guy), I just appreciate the high level boxing he produces. It's on a level I've never seen before, his movement is a work of art.


http://www.troll.me/images/bush/nice-try-******-thumb.jpg


----------



## thehook13

Dealt_with said:


> I always find it strange when people go straight to homosexuality talk when someone is talking about a sport. I don't care about Lomachenko as a person (even though he seems like an intelligent and level headed person - which are things I go for in a guy), I just appreciate the high level boxing he produces. It's on a level I've never seen before, his movement is a work of art.


Denial. :lol:


----------



## Dealt_with

thehook13 said:


> Denial. :lol:


I've been reading that SJW thread lol


----------



## Hands of Iron

Dealt_with said:


> I always find it strange when people go straight to homosexuality talk when someone is talking about a sport. I don't care about Lomachenko as a person (even though he seems like an intelligent and level headed person - *which are things I go for in a guy*), I just appreciate the high level boxing he produces. It's on a level I've never seen before, his movement is a work of art.


No ****? :lol:


----------



## Hands of Iron

Just kidding, Dealt_with. Especially considering I actually have a cock pic that's been posted on this forum. These folks can dish all the **** rhetoric they want, but at its seedy core this place is tranny-fucking obsessed central. Whatever happened to men being men and women being women? Deranged lot, CHB is.


----------



## Dealt_with

Hands of Iron said:


> No ****? :lol:


No, **** :yep


----------



## Haggis

TeddyL said:


> He wasn't ready. It was arrogance.
> 
> The Lomachenko obsessives can refute it all they like but the reality is that he will forever have that 1 on his record. He's been beaten. He can have an interesting career, but he will never be a Floyd Mayweather. A fighter who beat every single person put in front of him , 49 times.


Who gives a fuck if he was beaten? SRR was beaten. Prime Ali was beaten. Greb started off his career 5-3-1, FFS. You think a fighter takes a competitive loss in his second pro fight and that shuts him out of ATG consideration? You're an idiot.

:hat


----------



## Haggis

Hopkins lost his pro debut. Guess he should have packed it in right there eh, what a bum right? Clearly he was a no-hoper - he lost a decision that one time, he could never hope to be as good as anyone who _didn't _lose his pro debut.

:hat


----------



## paloalto00

@Dealt_with Women need to take lessons from you on how to suck a knob, you've never met this man in your life yet you suck him off like a French whore


----------



## thehook13

Dealt_with said:


> I've been reading that SJW thread lol


How can a man not admit when he's sucking off a fighter too much? It's embarressing. either you're stubborn when pulled up on it or 0 self awareness

Show some manhood and lay off another mans junk for a while


----------



## TeddyL

Haggis said:


> Nonsense


Given that the majority of your reply has nothing whatsoever to do with what I wrote perhaps you should spend more time learning to read than browsing on the internet.


----------



## Dealt_with

thehook13 said:


> How can a man not admit when he's sucking off a fighter too much? It's embarressing. either you're stubborn when pulled up on it or 0 self awareness
> 
> Show some manhood and lay off another mans junk for a while


Again, I've just been talking about boxing. You're a strange one.


----------



## mrtony80

:lol: some things never change, huh?


----------



## PityTheFool

mrtony80 said:


> :lol: some things never change, huh?


Welcome to the forum mate.
Tell us about yourselves.


----------



## Lester1583

Dealtwith sits up highly on the prophetic throne of ivory.

You will all bow down to his superior knowledge in the end.

Praised be Pacdabest.


----------



## thehook13

awesome vid


----------



## Pedderrs

Lester1583 said:


> Dealtwith sits up highly on the prophetic throne of ivory.
> 
> You will all bow down to his superior knowledge in the end.
> 
> Praised be Pacdabest.


Pacdabest.

The maligned prophet.


----------



## thehook13

respect


----------



## paloalto00

The intro on this video is crazy


----------



## Lester1583




----------



## Bogotazo

Lester1583 said:


>


Lol wat


----------



## Lester1583

Bogotazo said:


> Lol wat


It's on.

First McGregor.

Then Messi.

And finally Krang Trump.

He was born to be the Prince of the Universe.

Cowabunga!


----------



## Kurushi

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/838479250118225920


----------



## church11

Kurushi said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/838479250118225920


It's getting weird now


----------



## thehook13

church11 said:


> It's getting weird now


He must of watched that Gamboa fight and came to the realization that boxing is just too easy for him.


----------



## thehook13

Lester1583 said:


>


There's not a fighter game enough to put shit on him and call him out on this behaviour though.


----------



## Lester1583




----------



## thehook13

Lomachenko is a real larrikan. Love it hope they do 24/7 series on his next fight and capture him muck around


----------



## Kurushi

thehook13 said:


> Lomachenko is a real *larrikan*. Love it hope they do 24/7 series on his next fight and capture him muck around


Nice word. Hadn't heard that one before.


----------



## Pedrin1787

Kurushi said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/838479250118225920


Great now we know what @Dealt_with rubs one out to.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedrin1787 said:


> Great now we know what @Dealt_with rubs one out to.


Stop thinking about my dick


----------



## rjjfan

Pedrin1787 said:


> Great now we know what @Dealt_with rubs one out to.


----------



## Lester1583




----------



## Bogotazo

The kid actually does the glove removal technique at 1:07 :lol:


----------



## thehook13

This Sosa fight, Lomachenko stood out having fully transitioned to the professional fight game. It seems Loma has almost completely whiped that clinical school boy amateur ethic the officials enforce in the ABA/AIBA. Showed a tonne of pro fighting niche in this fight.

The way he was signalling/controlling the ref, foulling his opponent just enough, show boating, letting some punches in. Talking to his opponent. Pushing, elbowing. Showing tonnes of ring dominance. He used to be the perfect straight A Amateur a few years ago and it was a clear weakness when he ran into Salido. It would be completely different story second time round.


----------



## dyna

thehook13 said:


> This Sosa fight, Lomachenko stood out having fully transitioned to the professional fight game. It seems Loma has almost completely whiped that clinical school boy amateur ethic the officials enforce in the ABA/AIBA. Showed a tonne of pro fighting niche in this fight.
> 
> The way he was signalling/controlling the ref, foulling his opponent just enough, show boating, letting some punches in. Talking to his opponent. Pushing, elbowing. Showing tonnes of ring dominance. He used to be the perfect straight A Amateur a few years ago and it was a clear weakness when he ran into Salido. It would be completely different story second time round.


It would already have been a different fight with a different ref.

Just like Wlad fights are different with Luis Pabon and with that guy from the Jennings fight.


----------



## thehook13

dyna said:


> It would already have been a different fight with a different ref.
> 
> Just like Wlad fights are different with Luis Pabon and with that guy from the Jennings fight.


Well Loma is ready for either referee now. You can't pick and choose your referees, some officials let a lot of dirty boxing go on so the fighter has to work his way out of it. Other referee's will intervene as much as they can and stick to a very clean bout, by the book.


----------



## thehook13




----------



## thehook13

__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=431846867160675


----------



## thehook13

...........


----------



## Lester1583

Androids dream of Neuromancical Footwork




@V-2


----------



## thehook13

Oh man this is satisfying. Watching him through the amateurs - making me feel old!


----------



## thehook13

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/865698929505181697
this generations phenomenon easily. probably an all time great phenomenon


----------



## thehook13

thehook13 said:


> Oh man this is satisfying. Watching him through the amateurs - making me feel old!


Look at that. Ward vs kovalev 2, Canelo vs GGG and Klit vs Joshua.

But Vasyl is on the cover. the best


----------



## dyna

thehook13 said:


> Oh man this is satisfying. Watching him through the amateurs - making me feel old!


Why does he have Bob Arum tattood on his ribs?


----------



## Pedrin1787

Rigo saying he'll fight Lomachenko at any weight.

Edit, this isn't an old interview, it was published yesterday.

He was saying this before and changed his mind once Loma's team tried to make the fight. Here he goes again.


----------



## paloalto00

Gotta give credit to his father, he created Loma and has a hell of a track record with the national team


----------



## turbotime

Always been on the wagon. Glad to see most acknowledging what we knew all along :yep

Go away Rigo.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedrin1787 said:


> Rigo saying he'll fight Lomachenko at any weight.
> 
> Edit, this isn't an old interview, it was published yesterday.
> 
> He was saying this before and changed his mind once Loma's team tried to make the fight. Here he goes again.


Yawn, just hype. Rigo doesn't and never did want that fight.


----------



## Dealt_with

Looking back at this thread... this is embarrassing for the forum.


----------



## turbotime

Dealt_with said:


> Looking back at this thread... this is embarrassing for the forum.


I think it was more an attack on you then our future ATG Lomachenko, can't wait until Salido gives him a rematch.


----------



## Dealt_with

turbotime said:


> I think it was more an attack on you then our future ATG Lomachenko, can't wait until Salido gives him a rematch.


I was part of it sure, but it exposed how people can't separate the message from the messenger. People hated me therefore they had to hold the opposite view, even though I have always been completely spot on about Lomachenko. Even now some dweebs who don't like me are still denying Lomachenko's greatness. I exposed weakness in a large chunk of posters here, they either don't know boxing like they thought they did or their emotions clouded their judgement. I don't have those problems. 
I'm still sceptical that Salido will ever get back in the ring with Loma. That's his retirement fight and as we know fighters have a hard time retiring.


----------



## turbotime

Dealt_with said:


> I was part of it sure, but it exposed how people can't separate the message from the messenger. People hated me therefore they had to hold the opposite view, even though I have always been completely spot on about Lomachenko. Even now some dweebs who don't like me are still denying Lomachenko's greatness. I exposed weakness in a large chunk of posters here, they either don't know boxing like they thought they did or their emotions clouded their judgement. I don't have those problems.
> I'm still sceptical that Salido will ever get back in the ring with Loma. That's his retirement fight and as we know fighters have a hard time retiring.


I think both Salido and Loma want it but of course I think it'll be a bitch to get made if the money isn't all there.


----------



## scorpion

Rigo needs to stfu, he is just wasting every bodies time again.

These cubans guys talk a lot but haven't backed up much lately unfortunately.


----------



## thehook13

http://imgur.com/wz7C3F9


----------



## thehook13

scorpion said:


> Rigo needs to stfu, he is just wasting every bodies time again.
> 
> These cubans guys talk a lot but haven't backed up much lately unfortunately.


Rigo seems to have very little going for him at the moment. I suppose hes still content with that nonito win


----------



## Pedrin1787

thehook13 said:


> http://imgur.com/wz7C3F9


Levels


----------



## thehook13

Pedrin1787 said:


> Levels


Russels talking about a rematch....


----------



## thehook13




----------



## REDC

thehook13 said:


>


Classy.


----------



## Pedrin1787

thehook13 said:


>


----------



## thehook13

REDC said:


> Classy.


Is there anyone else who has good enough credentials to put down a boxing purist like Rigo? :rofl


----------



## REDC

thehook13 said:


> Is there anyone else who has good enough credentials to put down a boxing purist like Rigo? :rofl


Nope. IMO.


----------



## turbotime

thehook13 said:


>


----------



## rjjfan

Shame that Rigo would rather fight Lomachenko in Twitter than in the ring.


----------



## Strike

I fucking love a perfectly placed gif. :lol:


----------



## REDC

rjjfan said:


> Shame that Rigo would rather fight Lomachenko in Twitter than in the ring.


Rigo fought the best of the best, for decades. Very, very unlikely he is "scared" (LOL). Probably more to do with promotor issues (it isn't him personally responding on SM).
I do think Loma would win via decision or maybe late tko but even a shot Rigi still has superhuman defensive skills.


----------



## Lester1583




----------



## Pedderrs

turbotime said:


> I think it was more an attack on you then our future ATG Lomachenko, can't wait until Salido gives him a rematch.


Dealt With is a bit special bless him, but I'm glad he's here. This place wouldn't be as fun without him.


----------



## Pedrin1787

__
http://instagr.am/p/BV5I1NHh0aV/


----------



## Pedderrs

Er... Rigondeux has more knockouts than Loma has fights. He has a better win column too.


----------



## Strike

Pedderrs said:


> Er... Rigondeux has more knockouts than Loma has fights. *He has a better win column too.*


You reckon? It's pretty close, I mean you would you say Rigondeux's best two wins are? Assuming that we say for Loma it is Russell Jr and Walters.


----------



## Pedderrs

Strike said:


> You reckon? It's pretty close, I mean you would you say Rigondeux's best two wins are? Assuming that we say for Loma it is Russell Jr and Walters.


I'm taking Donaire, Agbeko and Cordoba over Russell, Martinez and Walters, but yeah it's quite close.

Donaire was a top 5 P4P fighter when Rigondeux comfortably beat him. Lomachenko has nothing remotely comparable.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> I'm taking Donaire, Agbeko and Cordoba over Russell, Martinez and Walters, but yeah it's quite close.
> 
> Donaire was a top 5 P4P fighter when Rigondeux comfortably beat him. Lomachenko has nothing remotely comparable.


Lol this little bitch is so salty. Lomachenko could beat anyone and you'd refuse to give him credit, your fragile ego can't get over the fact that you were so wrong about him. Meanwhile others knew he would be pound for pound within ten fights. Why didn't you know? Pedders can't be wrong can he?


----------



## Pedderrs

@Dealt_with , the last time we got into this I posted one of my quotes from like a year before where I openly congratulated you and Lomachenko on your recent successes. I heaped praise on him and yet you totally ignored it and continued to be hostile towards me whenever I would talk about Loma. Do you want me to post the quote again or are you only interested in disagreeing with me? Because if that's all you're interested in, if you honestly think this is a productive way to spend your time, then carry on buddy. Carry on.


----------



## Pedderrs

Pedderrs said:


> He's a great fighter, dude.
> 
> I do think your uncompromising tone can be a little irritating on occasion but Lomachenko is producing the goods for the time being, so I can only congratulate the both of you.


I definitely sound salty there, @Dealt_with.


----------



## Strike

Pedderrs said:


> I'm taking Donaire, Agbeko and Cordoba over Russell, Martinez and Walters, but yeah it's quite close.
> 
> Donaire was a top 5 P4P fighter when Rigondeux comfortably beat him. Lomachenko has nothing remotely comparable.


That's fair. And obviously you have to take people's wins as they were...in the end it was only a year later that Walters KO'd Donaire, but at the time is key...hence Calzaghe deserves credit for Lacy, Lewis for Grant etc. And in fairness, Donaire is still an excellent win regardless of what happened after.


----------



## CASH_718

Pedderrs said:


> I'm taking Donaire, Agbeko and Cordoba over Russell, Martinez and Walters, but yeah it's quite close.
> 
> Donaire was a top 5 P4P fighter when Rigondeux comfortably beat him. Lomachenko has nothing remotely comparable.


Except the fact that Donaire had already started fading and was not the same fighter above 118 and just walked around the ring looking to land one punch and was looking average vs average fighters.One of the most overrated wins in recent history, Loma's resume is way better and deeper.


----------



## Pedderrs

Strike said:


> That's fair. And obviously you have to take people's wins as they were...in the end it was only a year later that Walters KO'd Donaire, but at the time is key...hence Calzaghe deserves credit for Lacy, Lewis for Grant etc. And in fairness, Donaire is still an excellent win regardless of what happened after.


The timing and the weight. Donaire was no world beater at 130lbs.

But yeah, I admit it's quite close between the two. I just think it's bizarre to be suggesting Rigondeux doesn't walk the walk when he's had more professional fights and arguably more impressive victories compared to Loma.


----------



## Pedderrs

CASH_718 said:


> Except the fact that Donaire had already started fading and was not the same fighter above 118 and just walked around the ring looking to land one punch and was looking average vs average fighters.One of the most overrated wins in recent history, Loma's resume is way better and deeper.


He looked pretty good against Nishioka to me.

But yeah, if you think Lomachenko has a better resume than I don't care enough to argue. The overriding point of my post remains.


----------



## CASH_718

Pedderrs said:


> He looked pretty good against Nishioka to me.
> 
> But yeah, if you think Lomachenko has a better resume than I don't care enough to argue. The overriding point of my post remains.


Nishnioka was another fighter on his way out and he walked right into everything Donaire threw. Wilfredo Vazquez Jr gave Donaire a tough fight.... that shoukd tell us all we need to know about where Donaire's career was heading. He was getting lazy and the moves up in weight were so he didnt have to work to make weight. So by the time he hit 122 he was a pudgy, slower, plodding one punch ko artist. And vs Rigo he was pretty much tailor made to get schooled. He just wanted to take pictures like a hippie and be a part time fighter and it's too late now. He had a few more great years left in him but he pissed it all away by being lazy.


----------



## Pedderrs

CASH_718 said:


> Nishnioka was another fighter on his way out and he walked right into everything Donaire threw. Wilfredo Vazquez Jr gave Donaire a tough fight.... that shoukd tell us all we need to know about where Donaire's career was heading. He was getting lazy and the moves up in weight were so he didnt have to work to make weight. So by the time he hit 122 he was a pudgy, slower, plodding one punch ko artist. And vs Rigo he was pretty much tailor made to get schooled. He just wanted to take pictures like a hippie and be a part time fighter and it's too late now. He had a few more great years left in him but he pissed it all away by being lazy.


Wasn't Donaire the Fighter of the Year in 2012?

I think it's a little bit shortsighted to hand pick one poor day at the office and use that as evidence to suggest a fighter being shopworn, but that's fine. Like I said, I don't care enough to argue, but it's still an impressive win for Rigondeux however you slice it. I say it's worth more than any single win of Lomachenko's and you obviously disagree. That's fine.


----------



## rossco

@Pedderrs @Dealt_with

Fantasy match.

Chavez Sr vs Lomachenko.

Who wins ?


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> I definitely sound salty there, @Dealt_with.


You sound like you're begrudgingly giving a slither of respect to a guy that everyone else is blown away by, while implying that it won't last. Pathetic. Because of your ego. Definitely sounding salty.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> The timing and the weight. Donaire was no world beater at 130lbs.
> 
> But yeah, I admit it's quite close between the two. I just think it's bizarre to be suggesting Rigondeux doesn't walk the walk when he's had more professional fights and arguably more impressive victories compared to Loma.


What has Rigo done in recent years compared to Lomachenko? Do you ever think about what you're saying?


----------



## Lester1583




----------



## thehook13

Single handedly beating his opponents


----------



## Pedrin1787

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/893224501063725056
Is @Dealt_with Al's troll account? :think1


----------



## Eoghan

Pedrin1787 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/893224501063725056
> Is @Dealt_with Al's troll account? :think1


I would like see it, but he's got a point. Rigo is not exactly prime, and is significantly smaller, it wouldn't necessarily reflect who would win in their primes


----------



## jonnytightlips

Eoghan said:


> I would like see it, but he's got a point. Rigo is not exactly prime, and is significantly smaller, it wouldn't necessarily reflect who would win in their primes


I know it only lasted a round but Rigo looked very sharp in his last fight. Loma is definitely the bigger man but I think Rigo's skills could nullify that. I think Loma wins though.


----------



## GlassJaw

I want to see him fight Rigo and Garcia. I think he beats Rigo, Garcia not so sure.


----------



## thehook13

GlassJaw said:


> I want to see him fight Rigo and Garcia. I think he beats Rigo, Garcia not so sure.


Rigo will be harder than Garcia IMO.


----------



## GlassJaw

thehook13 said:


> Rigo will be harder than Garcia IMO.


You could be right. I havent seen Rigo fight in a while since they took his boring ass off TV, so I'll have to watch recent footage of him before the fight if it gets signed


----------



## Pedrin1787

jonnytightlips said:


> I know it only lasted a round but Rigo looked very sharp in his last fight. Loma is definitely the bigger man but I think Rigo's skills could nullify that. I think Loma wins though.


He didn't at all look done in his last fight, we have two of the best amateurs in history, we need to see this fight.


----------



## jonnytightlips

Pedrin1787 said:


> He didn't at all look done in his last fight, we have two of the best amateurs in history, we need to see this fight.


I agree. The skill level in the ring would be just incredible.


----------



## thehook13

'

Let the GIFS commence. Another fight, another shitload of matrix level gifs to add to the highlight reel.


----------



## Kurushi

The guy's last 3 fights have ended in an RTD. He takes these guys' souls. They just can't come out for more. It is remarkable.


----------



## mrtony80

I'm impressed with Lomachenko's footwork, angles, and defense, but his hands aren't anything terribly noteworthy. The majority of the time, he's just flicking out jabs and other shots as a measuring stick - probing to get his opponent to open up, and if they don't, he unleashes a flurry of pitty pat shots, none of which hurt the other guy, yet ppl react like he's doing something amazing with his hands. He commits to maybe one out of twenty shots he throws. From what I've seen in his last three fights, it was more about his opponents being mentally drained than truly hurt.

His face also seems to swell and bruise rather easily, which I can see being a problem when real challenges start coming.


----------



## Dealt_with

mrtony80 said:


> I'm impressed with Lomachenko's footwork, angles, and defense, but his hands aren't anything terribly noteworthy. The majority of the time, he's just flicking out jabs and other shots as a measuring stick - probing to get his opponent to open up, and if they don't, he unleashes a flurry of pitty pat shots, none of which hurt the other guy, yet ppl react like he's doing something amazing with his hands. He commits to maybe one out of twenty shots he throws. From what I've seen in his last three fights, it was more about his opponents being mentally drained than truly hurt.
> 
> His face also seems to swell and bruise rather easily, which I can see being a problem when real challenges start coming.


There are no real challenges. GRJ and Walters weren't, Garcia and Rigo aren't.
You don't know boxing and you don't know what Lomachenko is doing in the ring. Sit down and be quiet Abraham.


----------



## mrtony80

Dealt_with said:


> There are no real challenges. GRJ and Walters weren't, Garcia and Rigo aren't.
> You don't know boxing and you don't know what Lomachenko is doing in the ring. Sit down and be quiet Abraham.


Still haven't gotten off your knees, I see.


----------



## Dealt_with

mrtony80 said:


> Still haven't gotten off your knees, I see.


That doesn't even make any sense. You're a hater/loser until the end.


----------



## godsavethequeen

Dealt_with said:


> That doesn't even make any sense. You're a hater/loser until the end.


I think he is implying you suck dick.... which is neither here or there as so does Abe.
Hate is a strong word as is loser.. Abe his alter ego is a " loser " that is due to him losing a bet with BBall
As for Loma its such a shame in the Pro ranks that he stayed as an AM as long as he did. I want to see how he would do against Rigo though I do not see it ever happening


----------



## mrtony80

Dealt_with said:


> That doesn't even make any sense. You're a hater/loser until the end.


I'm just wondering why you didn't come up with any proper retorts regarding what I said instead of just brushing me off as knowing nothing about boxing just because I criticized Lomachenko. GRJ wasn't much of a challenge, and neither was Walters (which I still find peculiar that he quit the way he did, being that Donaire hit him with better shots) but then you go on to say neither Rigo nor Garcia would be a challenge, which is just a ridiculous assumption, being they'd both be better than anything Lomachenko has faced thus far.


----------



## mrtony80

godsavethequeen said:


> I think he is implying you suck dick.... which is neither here or there as so does Abe.
> Hate is a strong word as is loser.. Abe his alter ego is a " loser " that is due to him losing a bet with BBall
> As for Loma its such a shame in the Pro ranks that he stayed as an AM as long as he did. I want to see how he would do against Rigo though I do not see it ever happening


Proper spelling, punctuation, and grammar would've made this post much more powerful than you desperately intended it to be.


----------



## godsavethequeen

mrtony80 said:


> Proper spelling, punctuation, and grammar would've made this post much more powerful than you desperately intended it to be.


Ok spelling and punctuation Nazi.. Never claimed to be great with the written word, in fact I am sure I have mentioned that i am piss poor at it... Carry on


----------



## rjjfan

mrtony80 said:


> I'm impressed with Lomachenko's footwork, angles, and defense, but his hands aren't anything terribly noteworthy. The majority of the time, he's just flicking out jabs and other shots as a measuring stick - probing to get his opponent to open up, and if they don't, he unleashes a flurry of pitty pat shots, none of which hurt the other guy, yet ppl react like he's doing something amazing with his hands. He commits to maybe one out of twenty shots he throws. From what I've seen in his last three fights, it was more about his opponents being mentally drained than truly hurt.
> 
> His face also seems to swell and bruise rather easily, which I can see being a problem when real challenges start coming.


Agreed on the hands, he has the handspeed but it's mostly arm punches. But then he only has 9 pro fights.


----------



## Dealt_with

mrtony80 said:


> I'm just wondering why you didn't come up with any proper retorts regarding what I said instead of just brushing me off as knowing nothing about boxing just because I criticized Lomachenko. GRJ wasn't much of a challenge, and neither was Walters (which I still find peculiar that he quit the way he did, being that Donaire hit him with better shots) but then you go on to say neither Rigo nor Garcia would be a challenge, which is just a ridiculous assumption, being they'd both be better than anything Lomachenko has faced thus far.


Because anybody who understands the first thing about boxing knows what Lomachenko is doing with those probing shots. That's why I brushed you off, because you're incredibly clueless.
Garcia is no better than Walters. Rigo is arguably better than GRJ, but GRJ is bigger and faster so it is roughly equal again. From the start you've been reluctant to give Loma any credit. That's why it's a waste of time explaining simple shit to you. You're not interested in being honest, that's reflected in your irrational bias and creation of alter egos. A pathetic excuse for human being and a dog murderer. I would honestly drink in celebration if you killed yourself.


----------



## Dealt_with

rjjfan said:


> Agreed on the hands, he has the handspeed but it's mostly arm punches. But then he only has 9 pro fights.


Again, someone who is clueless about boxing. What happens when your opponent refuses to engage. We've seen what happens if that's in a Rigo fight. Nothing happens. We've seen what happens in a Garcia fight (v Broner). He punches arms and wins a decision. We've seen what happens when Lomachenko picks the lock, when he forces his opponent to open up. He lands hard punches when the spots open and he makes his opponents quit. Dumb fucks don't even understand what is in front of their face.


----------



## The Kraken

mrtony80 said:


> I'm impressed with Lomachenko's footwork, angles, and defense, but his hands aren't anything terribly noteworthy. The majority of the time, he's just flicking out jabs and other shots as a measuring stick - probing to get his opponent to open up, and if they don't, he unleashes a flurry of pitty pat shots, none of which hurt the other guy


You answered your own point here, if the opponent doesn't open up the "pitty pat" (or throwaway shots) force him to try and keep up with his defence thus leaving openings


----------



## The Kraken

Dealt_with said:


> We've seen what happens in a Garcia fight (v Broner). He punches arms and wins a decision.


On the other hand Garcia hit more than just Broners arms


----------



## mrtony80

Dealt_with said:


> Because anybody who understands the first thing about boxing knows what Lomachenko is doing with those probing shots. That's why I brushed you off, because you're incredibly clueless.
> Garcia is no better than Walters. Rigo is arguably better than GRJ, but GRJ is bigger and faster so it is roughly equal again. From the start you've been reluctant to give Loma any credit. That's why it's a waste of time explaining simple shit to you. You're not interested in being honest, that's reflected in your irrational bias and creation of alter egos. A pathetic excuse for human being and a dog murderer. I would honestly drink in celebration if you killed yourself.


I'm an pathetic excuse for a human being and you hope I die because I criticize your favorite fighter? You've got some serious issues, man.


----------



## mrtony80

Dealt_with said:


> Again, someone who is clueless about boxing. What happens when your opponent refuses to engage. We've seen what happens if that's in a Rigo fight. Nothing happens. We've seen what happens in a Garcia fight (v Broner). He punches arms and wins a decision. We've seen what happens when Lomachenko picks the lock, when he forces his opponent to open up. He lands hard punches when the spots open and he makes his opponents quit. Dumb fucks don't even understand what is in front of their face.


You claim to be some kind of fitness guru and amateur boxing expert, yet have never posted any kind of evidence to back it up. You go into a hissy fit, throwing out insults like a petulant child any time someone even mildly criticizes Lomachenko. You nearly turned the entire forum against Lomachenko with your incessant praise a dick sucking of Loma, saying even at 0-0 he'd have beaten all time featherweight greats, including the FMJ that fought Corrales. I may take a lot of shit on this forum, but from what I've seen, you're even less liked than me, and I'd be willing to bet that if a poll was taken regarding who everyone would "have a drink" to if they died between myself and you...you'd win handily.

I like Lomachenko, and I sincerely hope he never crosses your path, as you'd most likely go all Anne Wilkes on him.


----------



## Dealt_with

mrtony80 said:


> You claim to be some kind of fitness guru and amateur boxing expert, yet have never posted any kind of evidence to back it up. You go into a hissy fit, throwing out insults like a petulant child any time someone even mildly criticizes Lomachenko. You nearly turned the entire forum against Lomachenko with your incessant praise a dick sucking of Loma, saying even at 0-0 he'd have beaten all time featherweight greats, including the FMJ that fought Corrales. I may take a lot of shit on this forum, but from what I've seen, you're even less liked than me, and I'd be willing to bet that if a poll was taken regarding who everyone would "have a drink" to if they died between myself and you...you'd win handily.
> 
> I like Lomachenko, and I sincerely hope he never crosses your path, as you'd most likely go all Anne Wilkes on him.


You got your ass kicked sparring a girl, posted a video of it then got upset about the way you were treated at that gym. You killed a dog. You spent years posting as a pathetic loser, as an alt of a pathetic loser. I can't even take pity on you, there is nothing to justify the existence of a creature as pathetic as you.


----------



## Dealt_with

mrtony80 said:


> I'm an pathetic excuse for a human being and you hope I die because I criticize your favorite fighter? You've got some serious issues, man.


I've got serious issues. From this guy :lol::lol:


----------



## mrtony80

The Kraken said:


> You answered your own point here, if the opponent doesn't open up the "pitty pat" (or throwaway shots) force him to try and keep up with his defence thus leaving openings


I'm sorry...what?


----------



## mrtony80

Dealt_with said:


> You got your ass kicked sparring a girl, posted a video of it then got upset about the way you were treated at that gym. You killed a dog. You spent years posting as a pathetic loser, as an alt of a pathetic loser. I can't even take pity on you, there is nothing to justify the existence of a creature as pathetic as you.


I purposely posted a vid of a girl kicking my ass. I inadvertently killed a dog at the age of 13, which was 24 years ago. I posted as an alt, but I retained my normal and successful life outside of chb. But you are what you are NOW. A dick riding, childish, wanna be tough guy who very few, if any around here have an ounce of respect for. Look at how worked up you're getting, wishing death on someone over a difference in opinion. You're bleeding from the eyes, and possibly somewhere else. :lol:


----------



## The Kraken

mrtony80 said:


> I'm sorry...what?


You really are as shit a poster as they say


----------



## mrtony80

The Kraken said:


> You really are as shit a poster as they say


It's the way you typed what you typed that has me confused. I have problems understanding grade school level write ups. Just to reiterate, it's not what you typed, it's the way you typed it.


----------



## The Kraken

mrtony80 said:


> It's the way you typed what you typed that has me confused. I have problems understanding grade school level write ups. Just to reiterate, it's not what you typed, it's the way you typed it.


I guess I was caught off guard at how you don't understand the very basic boxing concept of the throwaway shot, let me try again in simpler terms. If the opponent shells up, throwaway shots can get him to leave openings, Calzaghe for example did it all the time. There, is that better?


----------



## mrtony80

The Kraken said:


> I guess I was caught off guard at how you don't understand the very basic boxing concept of the throwaway shot, let me try again in simpler terms. If the opponent shells up, throwaway shots can get him to leave openings, Calzaghe for example did it all the time. There, is that better?


If I didn't know the purpose of probes and throwaway shots, don't you think it's unlikely I'd have brought it up as specifically as I did?


----------



## The Kraken

mrtony80 said:


> If I didn't know the purpose of probes and throwaway shots, don't you think it's unlikely I'd have brought it up as specifically as I did?


Not when you question why he does it


----------



## mrtony80

The Kraken said:


> Not when you question why he does it


I didn't question why he does it, I pointed out that he does it excessively.


----------



## The Kraken

mrtony80 said:


> I didn't question why he does it, I pointed out that he does it excessively.


You kind of made a distinction without a difference with "probing" and "pitty pats" which is why I said you answered your own point, if the "probing" doesn't work then he goes to the next level which is throwaway shots, so it's not excessive


----------



## Dealt_with

mrtony80 said:


> I purposely posted a vid of a girl kicking my ass. I inadvertently killed a dog at the age of 13, which was 24 years ago. I posted as an alt, but I retained my normal and successful life outside of chb. But you are what you are NOW. A dick riding, childish, wanna be tough guy who very few, if any around here have an ounce of respect for. Look at how worked up you're getting, wishing death on someone over a difference in opinion. You're bleeding from the eyes, and possibly somewhere else. :lol:


No, let me make this very clear... I do not care in the slightest about what you say, and I don't care in the slightest if people here respect me or not. You are obviously heavily invested in your internet activity, hence your projection and alts.


----------



## Dealt_with

mrtony80 said:


> I didn't question why he does it, I pointed out that he does it excessively.


Is it possible that has something to do with his opponent then? If the purpose is to open up an opponent who isn't engaging then maybe his opponent not engaging is the difference? Goddamn you're a stupid motherfucker.


----------



## Pedrin1787

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/894325953630920704
Berchelt
Corrales
Davis
Salido
Rigondeaux
Farmer
Garcia

In that order I bet.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedrin1787 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/894325953630920704
> Berchelt
> Corrales
> Davis
> Salido
> Rigondeaux
> Farmer
> Garcia
> 
> In that order I bet.


Imagine that for a resume.


----------



## mrtony80

Dealt_with said:


> No, let me make this very clear... I do not care in the slightest about what you say, and I don't care in the slightest if people here respect me or not. You are obviously heavily invested in your internet activity, hence your projection and alts.


If I bother you to the point where you'd have a drink to my death, you obviously do care quite a bit about what I say, and are just as invested in "internet activity" as me.

Now, regarding what you said about Lomachenko, we've gone way off base. All I said from the beginning is while most of his attributes are remarkable, his hands aren't. He misses a lot of shots, and lands a lot of soft touches. Now against Martinez, the way he lifted his head with the uppercut, then followed with a left hook...THAT was impressive. Aside from that, he seems to lack true knockout power, something even his most hardcore fans should admit.


----------



## Dealt_with

mrtony80 said:


> If I bother you to the point where you'd have a drink to my death, you obviously do care quite a bit about what I say, and are just as invested in "internet activity" as me.
> 
> Now, regarding what you said about Lomachenko, we've gone way off base. All I said from the beginning is while most of his attributes are remarkable, his hands aren't. He misses a lot of shots, and lands a lot of soft touches. Now against Martinez, the way he lifted his head with the uppercut, then followed with a left hook...THAT was impressive. Aside from that, he seems to lack true knockout power, something even his most hardcore fans should admit.


I don't even drink, it's a figure of speech you imbecile.
Fighters who have knockout power and are fighting at world championship level don't stop everyone. Is Walters a knockout puncher? He couldn't dent Marriaga, and that was a Marriaga much more willing to engage than against Loma. Knockout power is relative and depending on many variables, it's not something you either have or you don't. Is that your criticism now or is it still your lack of understanding about the probing shots? You and your alt Abraham have always been vague and imprecise when pretending to make an objective criticism of Lomachenko. That's why your agenda is completely transparent and why you have zero credibility when talking about Lomachenko (not that you have credibility at any other time, but still).


----------



## thehook13

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/894086209768742912


----------



## The Sweet Science

Lomachenko vs. Rigondeaux is apparently being discussed for December 9th at the Garden.


----------



## Dealt_with

The Sweet Science said:


> Lomachenko vs. Rigondeaux is apparently being discussed for December 9th at the Garden.


If I see that I never need to see another boxing match again, I've seen the greatest match up of skill sets ever. I won't get my hopes up.


----------



## ElKiller

Change the thread title to: Lomachenko, maybe a HOFamer.


----------



## MadcapMaxie

Oh fuck I remember this debacle lololol good times

Is the Rigo-Loma talks actually legit?


----------



## dyna

MadcapMaxie said:


> Oh fuck I remember this debacle lololol good times
> 
> Is the Rigo-Loma talks actually legit?


McGregor-Mayweather is bringing all the old posters back.


MadcapMaxie said:


> Is the Rigo-Loma talks actually legit?


Not so much.


----------



## saul_ir34

Does Salido have visitation rights over Loma. I always hate it when a court separates a father from his son.


----------



## thehook13

The Sweet Science said:


> Lomachenko vs. Rigondeaux is apparently being discussed for December 9th at the Garden.


----------



## Lester1583




----------



## ThatBoxingGuy2022

MadcapMaxie said:


> Oh fuck I remember this debacle lololol good times
> 
> Is the Rigo-Loma talks actually legit?


Lots of reports saying its already done for December 9th


----------



## ThatBoxingGuy2022

Lester1583 said:


>


Finding ways to duck Rigo already lol hes gone straight suicidal


----------



## MadcapMaxie

A.C.S said:


> Lots of reports saying its already done for December 9th


I wonder where that propels Lomachenko if he wins...if it even does propel him. I feel like in years to come people won't even know who the fuck Rigo was.


----------



## REDC

Dealt_with will probably want to bump (t)his thread if/when Loma beats Rigo so I figured I'd go ahead and bump it for him already.



Dealt_with said:


> Rigo can't really beat anyone comfortably at any weight division. Dude is shot, should definitely retire.





Dealt_with said:


> There are no real challenges. GRJ and Walters weren't, Garcia and Rigo aren't.





Dealt_with said:


> Rigo is done. Stick a fork in him.


----------



## turbotime

A.C.S said:


> Finding ways to duck Rigo already lol hes gone straight suicidal


:rofl

@Dealt_with


----------



## steviebruno

Dealt_with said:


> *If I see that I never need to see another boxing match again, I've seen the greatest match up of skill sets ever*. I won't get my hopes up.


:rofl


----------



## Lester1583

Dealt_with said:


> I said that Lomachenko would be pound for pound within 10 fights


----------



## Dealt_with

Lester1583 said:


>


Hopkins knows boxing. You can see that he knows that Lomachenko is something we've never seen before. I always knew, his reaction is the same reaction I had when I saw Lomachenko at the 2008 Olympics. We're lucky to be around at the same time as Lomachenko. As I've always said, I can't see how this guy could be any better. He's the most complete fighter ever.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> Hopkins knows boxing. You can see that he knows that Lomachenko is something we've never seen before. I always knew, his reaction is the same reaction I had when I saw Lomachenko at the 2008 Olympics. We're lucky to be around at the same time as Lomachenko. As I've always said, I can't see how this guy could be any better. He's the most complete fighter ever.


More one punch power?


----------



## tommygun711

What a thread :lol:

@Dealt_with the prophet. 


Pedderrs said:


> More one punch power?


----------



## Pedderrs

tommygun711 said:


> What a thread :lol:
> 
> @Dealt_with the prophet.


Disingenuous.


----------



## steviebruno

Dealt_with said:


> Hopkins knows boxing. You can see that he knows that Lomachenko is something we've never seen before. I always knew, his reaction is the same reaction I had when I saw Lomachenko at the 2008 Olympics. We're lucky to be around at the same time as Lomachenko. As I've always said, I can't see how this guy could be any better. He's the most complete fighter ever.


Landing more than 16% of your punches against a 37 year old bantamweight would be a start.

I know, I know, the average fighter would have landed like 5% or something like that.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> More one punch power?


Based on the evidence presented in the Martinez fight, more than Garcia. 
I think it's next to impossible to have 'one punch power' at the world class level unless you're Golovkin or Tyson. Even then you have your guys you can't hurt. With opponents quitting as soon as the heat is turned up it's hard to say where Lomachenko's power is. It's obviously at least good, but he spends a lot of time setting up with softer punches so it gives the impression he's not a puncher. He has also learned to slowly ramp up the pressure mid fight, he isn't a guy who goes into the opening round with the intention of destroying his opponent. He doesn't do the Roy Jones checking the chin thing, he feels his opponent out and measures his distance.


----------



## steviebruno

Dealt_with said:


> Based on the evidence presented in the Martinez fight, more than Garcia.
> I think it's next to impossible to have 'one punch power' at the world class level unless you're Golovkin or Tyson. Even then you have your guys you can't hurt. With opponents quitting as soon as the heat is turned up it's hard to say where Lomachenko's power is. It's obviously at least good, but he spends a lot of time setting up with softer punches so it gives the impression he's not a puncher. He has also learned to slowly ramp up the pressure mid fight, he isn't a guy who goes into the opening round with the intention of destroying his opponent. *He doesn't do the Roy Jones checking the chin thing, he feels his opponent out and measures his distance*.


No, he does the Joe Calzaghe thing instead, using slaps to disguise average handspeed and then actually closing his fist on occasion and surprising his opponent with the change in power (which is also average).


----------



## Dealt_with

steviebruno said:


> No, he does the Joe Calzaghe thing instead, using slaps to disguise average handspeed and then actually closing his fist on occasion and surprising his opponent with the change in power (which is also average).


:lol: You are so dumb.


----------



## steviebruno

Dealt_with said:


> :lol: You are so dumb.


How long will your next exile be after he loses again? Can't wait till he starts fighting real comp and leaving 37 year-old bantamweights alone.


----------



## Dealt_with

steviebruno said:


> How long will your next exile be after he loses again? Can't wait till he starts fighting real comp and leaving 37 year-old bantamweights alone.


When was I ever exiled? Yep Lomachenko always looking for the soft touches. As I said, you are so dumb. Either that or Lomachenko raped your mother, if so then my condolences.


----------



## steviebruno

Dealt_with said:


> When was I ever exiled? Yep Lomachenko always looking for the soft touches. As I said, you are so dumb. Either that or Lomachenko raped your mother, if so then my condolences.


My mother isn't a bantamweight, so Loma wasn't interested. She probably wouldn't take kindly to being slapped with pillows all night, either...


----------



## Dealt_with

steviebruno said:


> My mother isn't a bantamweight, so Loma wasn't interested. She probably wouldn't take kindly to being slapped with pillows all night, either...


Okay, so you're just dumb then. Again, my condolences.


----------



## Brnxhands

Dealtwith you called it bro. I didn't even know who lomachenko was until you brought him up on here. You gotta good eye for boxing


----------



## Dealt_with

Brnxhands said:


> Dealtwith you called it bro. I didn't even know who lomachenko was until you brought him up on here. You gotta good eye for boxing


I used to be a pretty big fan of the Olympic game, that's how I was aware of him. After the 2008 Olympics I watched everything I could of Lomachenko's before he turned pro, I would've watched ~50 of his fights before he turned pro. So I had seen how complete and versatile his boxing game was. I'd seen how he adapted to every different style he came across, I'd seen him win in every style. People like to rubbish the amateur game but that's where 95% of skills and talent is developed. If you're at a level above anyone else in the Olympics you're a special fighter. He didn't do it in a safety first style either, he was working the body and working on the inside. So I knew for sure that all that talent would transfer to the pro game.


----------



## One to watch

steviebruno said:


> No, he does the Joe Calzaghe thing instead, using slaps to disguise average handspeed and then actually closing his fist on occasion and surprising his opponent with the change in power (which is also average).


Wow,your a bad poster on boxing.


----------



## One to watch

Tko6 said:


> I don't think I give him a single round despite picking him to win from what I've seen in the amateurs and WSB. This wasn't a Calzaghe-Lacy type destruction, but Loma did absolutely nothing over 12 rounds, it was like man v boy in there.


Did you watch the fight at all?


----------



## One to watch

tliang1000 said:


> Loma train didn't go very far.


This guy was the worst.

Remember his Greb thread?


----------



## Pedderrs

One to watch said:


> Wow,your a bad poster on boxing.


Stevie is a fine poster mate.


----------



## One to watch

JamieC said:


> But he's much further along than they were, he's _basically_ there, he would win if they fought again tomorrow imo. I don't think he did lose clearly, I thought he looked like he edged it (didn't score it as missed sone of it so will revisit). Yes it was close but that experience is invaluable to him. I never he was a bonafide ATG already, fighters learn throughout their careers even at the top so he will still improve regardless of the result. I think fight two tough contenders or one guaranteed twelve rounder and then one he can look impressive against and go again. I just hope Bob doesn't pput him down the cards fighting scrubs, invest in his opposition and get him a title shot within a year imo


Woah woah shit @JamieC @DaveT

Read this post back and tell me what's strange here?


----------



## One to watch

Pedderrs said:


> Stevie is a fine poster mate.


Not when hating on a fighter he ain't.

I don't like any posters who can't be objective on the sport basically.


----------



## Pedderrs

One to watch said:


> Not when hating on a fighter he ain't.
> 
> I don't like any posters who can't be objective on the sport basically.


I agree with everything Stevie said in that post. :conf

I also think TKO6 was right too. Obviously to say Lomachneko did nothing is hyperbole, even he understands that, but the overriding point is that he didn't have to do very much because Rigo lacked ambition from the start. Rigo did very very little in there, very little indeed. He clinched and threw the odd jab.


----------



## One to watch

Pedderrs said:


> I agree with everything Stevie said in that post. :conf
> 
> I also think TKO6 was right too. Obviously to say Lomachneko did nothing is hyperbole, even he understands that, but the overriding point is that he didn't have to do very much because Rigo lacked ambition from the start. Rigo did very very little in there, very little indeed. He clinched and threw the odd jab.


He said Loma didn't win a round and compared it to Calzaghe-Lacy (Salido-lomachenko is the conversation by the way,not rigo)

If you think he didn't win a round then your no better.

Stevie says he has 'average handspeed'.


----------



## Pedderrs

One to watch said:


> He said Loma didn't win a round and compared it to Calzaghe-Lacy (Salido-lomachenko is the conversation by the way,not rigo)
> 
> If you think he didn't win a round then your no better.
> 
> Stevie says he has 'average handspeed'.


Ah okay, he obviously won rounds against Salido.

Lomachenko has above average hand speed but it's not special. I'd probably compare him to a Joe Calzaghe. He's not in the elite bracket; Camacho at 130, RJJ at 168, Ali at Heavy etc.


----------



## steviebruno

One to watch said:


> Wow,your a bad poster on boxing.


*you're

I'm sure your feel that Dealt_with is fantastic.


----------



## One to watch

Pedderrs said:


> Ah okay, he obviously won rounds against Salido.
> 
> Lomachenko has above average hand speed but it's not special. I'd probably compare him to a Joe Calzaghe. He's not in the elite bracket; Camacho at 130, RJJ at 168, Ali at Heavy etc.


I don't think he has elite handspeed,just think to say it's 'average' is nonsense.

Read any post on Loma from stevie and it's over the top criticism.


----------



## One to watch

steviebruno said:


> *you're
> 
> I'm sure your feel that Dealt_with is fantastic.


Can't stand the bloke.

Just say boxing as I see it rather than getting too emotionally attached to be objective (like the vast majority of the WBF)

That kind of shit is schoolyard stuff.Discussing a fighters strengths and weaknesses and debating boxing is why I post on here.You can have a laugh without resorting to hating on someone.

You're as bad as dealt with,you just can't see it.


----------



## steviebruno

One to watch said:


> Can't stand the bloke.
> 
> Just say boxing as I see it rather than getting too emotionally attached to be objective (like the vast majority of the WBF)
> 
> That kind of shit is schoolyard stuff.Discussing a fighters strengths and weaknesses and debating boxing is why I post on here.You can have a laugh without resorting to hating on someone
> 
> You're as bad as dealt with,you just can't see it.


Oh OK. Guess you hate me, too. Who's the one getting emotional, again?

Since when is it a bad thing to be compared to Joe Calzaghe, one of the very best to ever fight at 168lbs?


----------



## One to watch

steviebruno said:


> Oh OK. Guess you hate me, too. Who's the one getting emotional, again?
> 
> Since when is it a bad thing to be compared to Joe Calzaghe, one of the very best to ever fight at 168lbs?


Yeah because your comparison was meant to complimentary wasn't it.


----------



## Tko6

One to watch said:


> Did you watch the fight at all?


Mmmm, the post you're quoting is from nearly 4 years ago so I'm guessing it was about Loma's fight against Salido. . .

EDIT: It would appear that you are aware of this. I watched that fight but I don't remember anything about it except that Loma got out-pro'd by Salido. If I say it was a 12-0 shut out, then that was my opinion at the time, although I did mention it wasn't the type of 12-0 that Calzaghe inflicted on Lacy and you appear to think I am comparing the two fights/performances directly.


----------



## steviebruno

One to watch said:


> Yeah because your comparison was meant to complimentary wasn't it.















He's very similar to Joe offensively, just smaller, faster, and more compact. Roy Jones? Not so much. It doesn't really matter how emotional you want to be about it.


----------



## One to watch

Tko6 said:


> Mmmm, the post you're quoting is from nearly 4 years ago so I'm guessing it was about Loma's fight against Salido. . .
> 
> EDIT: It would appear that you are aware of this. I watched that fight but I don't remember anything about it except that Loma got out-pro'd by Salido. If I say it was a 12-0 shut out, then that was my opinion at the time, although I did mention it wasn't the type of 12-0 that Calzaghe inflicted on Lacy and you appear to think I am comparing the two fights/performances directly.


Fair enough but the fight was never 12-0.

I'm not arguing Loma won,I just fancied a laugh so started at the beginning of this thread.Sorry dude.


----------



## Strike

Pedderrs said:


> Ah okay, he obviously won rounds against Salido.
> 
> Lomachenko has above average hand speed but it's not special. I'd probably compare him to a Joe Calzaghe. He's not in the elite bracket; Camacho at 130, RJJ at 168, Ali at Heavy etc.


He compared him to Calzaghe in more than one way, and said he slaps like him too...that's absolute bollocks. And he said Lomachenko is basically a small Calzaghe...but to compare their respective footwork and say they are the same is laughable, and Calzaghe had good footwork, but nothing like as good as Lomachenko's.


----------



## Pedderrs

Strike said:


> He compared him to Calzaghe in more than one way, and said he slaps like him too...that's absolute bollocks. And he said Lomachenko is basically a small Calzaghe...but to compare their respective footwork and say they are the same is laughable, and Calzaghe had good footwork, but nothing like as good as Lomachenko's.


I think Lomachenko is similar to Joe in that the emphasis is often on volume and speed than it is on power and precision. He shoeshines quite a bit. It's not a criticism, it keeps the opponent on the back foot and can even lull them into a false sense of security when he starts to vary the speed and power of his punches. Arguello used to do something very similar, he'd throw a tepid and purposefully slow jab before bringing a jolting right hand behind it. But the comparison is fair in that regard, and he definitely has a lot more in common with a Joe Calzaghe than he does Jones Jr.


----------



## One to watch

Pedderrs said:


> I think Lomachenko is similar to Joe in that the emphasis is often on volume and speed than it is on power and precision. He shoeshines quite a bit. It's not a criticism, it keeps the opponent on the back foot and can even lull them into a false of security when he starts to vary the speed and power of his punches. Arguello used to do something very similiar, he'd throw a tepid and purposefully slow jab before bringing a jolting right hand behind it. But the comparison is fair in that regard, and he definitely has a lot more in common with a Joe Calzaghe than he does Jones Jr.


I agree with this,there's obvious differences but some very effective similarities.


----------



## Pedderrs

One to watch said:


> I agree with this,there's obvious differences but some very effective similarities.


Strike me dead!

All you've done for 4 weeks is snipe at the posts you disagree with, which has been most of them.


----------



## One to watch

Pedderrs said:


> Strike me dead!
> 
> All you've done for 4 weeks is snipe at the posts you disagree with, which has been most of them.


Pretty sure that's a two way street isn't it?

And what a forum is all about.....debate.


----------



## Strike

Pedderrs said:


> I think Lomachenko is similar to Joe in that the emphasis is often on volume and speed than it is on power and precision. He shoeshines quite a bit. It's not a criticism, it keeps the opponent on the back foot and can even lull them into a false sense of security when he starts to vary the speed and power of his punches. Arguello used to do something very similar, he'd throw a tepid and purposefully slow jab before bringing a jolting right hand behind it. But the comparison is fair in that regard, and he definitely has a lot more in common with a Joe Calzaghe than he does Jones Jr.


This is totally different, for sure he's nothing like Jones. His handspeed is not as fast, he hits nothing like as hard, and he's less explosive...totally different fighters. So yeah, he has more in common with a Calzaghe style than RJJ, but that does not mean he is anything like a "mini Calzaghe" as he is much better technically, and he is far better defensively too. Moreover, shoe shining and slapping are not the same thing (as you know) and he explicitly said that Loma slaps like Calzaghe...this is complete bollocks.


----------



## turbotime

I see the Super Joe comparison, definitely. Why is this so heated? Joe just wasn't as athletic as Lomachenko so his punches aren't as pleasing.

IIRC Didn't JC have hand problems later on? He wasn't exactly slapping Kessler in his best win IMO he was stunning him


----------



## steviebruno

turbotime said:


> I see the Super Joe comparison, definitely. Why is this so heated? Joe just wasn't as athletic as Lomachenko so his punches aren't as pleasing.
> 
> IIRC Didn't JC have hand problems later on? He wasn't exactly slapping Kessler in his best win IMO he was stunning him


Also comparing a guy that is 5'6 130 lbs to a guy that is 6'0" 170. Of course Loma does everything with more fluidity than Joe.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> I agree with everything Stevie said in that post. :conf
> 
> I also think TKO6 was right too. Obviously to say Lomachneko did nothing is hyperbole, even he understands that, but the overriding point is that he didn't have to do very much because Rigo lacked ambition from the start. Rigo did very very little in there, very little indeed. He clinched and threw the odd jab.


That's because you're not objective either, it's just confirmation bias with that Stevie retard.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> That's because you're not objective either, it's just confirmation bias with that Stevie retard.


Now come on mate, we've turned a corner.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> I think Lomachenko is similar to Joe in that the emphasis is often on volume and speed than it is on power and precision. He shoeshines quite a bit. It's not a criticism, it keeps the opponent on the back foot and can even lull them into a false sense of security when he starts to vary the speed and power of his punches. Arguello used to do something very similar, he'd throw a tepid and purposefully slow jab before bringing a jolting right hand behind it. But the comparison is fair in that regard, and he definitely has a lot more in common with a Joe Calzaghe than he does Jones Jr.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


>


Yeah but the problem is I can also do everything he did in that video.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Now come on mate, we've turned a corner.


That doesn't mean that you're not being completely unreasonable and irrational with your evaluation of Lomachenko. As you may have noticed your opinion is in the minority now, and you're liking posts of someone who is self-admittedly hating on Lomachenko because of his fans.


----------



## steviebruno

Pedderrs said:


> Now come on mate, we've turned a corner.


Turn a corner with @Dealt_with and you learn that all roads lead to Lomachenko's musty trunks.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> That doesn't mean that you're not being completely unreasonable and irrational with your evaluation of Lomachenko. As you may have noticed your opinion is in the minority now, and you're liking posts of someone who is self-admittedly hating on Lomachenko because of his fans.


I don't think I'm being unreasonable mate. I favour Lomachenko over everyone in and around his weight class, admit he's a candidate for the P4P 1 spot, and I would give him reasonable chances against past greats. But I still maintain tougher tests await the Ukrainian and they will answer questions that at this point remain unanswered.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Yeah but the problem is I can also do everything he did in that video.


Okay but if you actually look at those full fights you'd see he looks very similar to Roy Jones stylistically at the time as well. Lomachenko is a complete fighter who can fight in any style. He's not a static, predictable and ordinary fighter; like Garcia for example. If you listened to me initially about Lomachenko you could've went back and seen him look like Roy Jones or Mike Tyson as an amateur.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> I don't think I'm being unreasonable mate. I favour Lomachenko over everyone in and around his weight class, admit he's a candidate for the P4P 1 spot, and I would give him reasonable chances against past greats. But I still maintain tougher tests await the Ukrainian and they will answer questions that at this point remain unanswered.


I disagree, his real challenges were at the Olympics (superior competition) and Salido's cheating. GRJ was the bigger challenge compared to anything in Loma's near future.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> I disagree, his real challenges were at the Olympics (superior competition) and Salido's cheating. GRJ was the bigger challenge compared to anything in Loma's near future.


:lol: Well time will tell mate, so there's no sense in arguing over this.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> :lol: Well time will tell mate, so there's no sense in arguing over this.


Time has told, some just aren't listening ;-)


----------



## thehook13

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/944964689628487680

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/945137777586274304


----------



## Lester1583

First boxing, then MMA






__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/859975120890277889


----------



## paloalto00

Lester1583 said:


> First boxing, then MMA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/859975120890277889


He would do quite well imo, the boxers I would say that would get wrecked are flat footed fucks


----------



## Bernard Black

Oh shit I forgot to unban dealt with, only meant to give him two days not a month.


----------



## Lester1583

Loma suplexes 85 kilo Olympic wrestling silver medalist


----------



## dyna

Lester1583 said:


> Loma suplexes 85 kilo Olympic wrestling silver medalist


Strangely erotic.


----------



## paloalto00

Lester1583 said:


> Loma suplexes 85 kilo Olympic wrestling silver medalist


This is fake, everyone knows that boxers don't know how to do anything else


----------



## rjjfan




----------



## Boxed Ears

This guy will never even win so much as fifty fights . Mark my words.


----------



## dyna




----------



## turbotime

Boxed Ears said:


> This guy will never even win so much as fifty fights . Mark my words.


SRL didn't win forty.


----------



## Boxed Ears

turbotime said:


> SRL didn't win forty.


Annnnnd lemme guess. You're another one of those kids who grew up thinking Leonard was legit because the indoctrination worked then...? Yeah...? Is that about the size of it then...?


----------



## 2manyusernames

Boxed Ears said:


> Annnnnd lemme guess. You're another one of those kids who grew up thinking Leonard was legit because the indoctrination worked then...? Yeah...? Is that about the size of it then...?


What are you doing here?!?! :happy Long time no see. Did you get banned over at the other place, is that what happened?


----------



## pipe wrenched

2manyusernames said:


> What are you doing here?!?! :happy Long time no see. Did you get banned over at the other place, is that what happened?


:yep

B.E. in the house...


----------



## Boxed Ears

Hey, Pipe and 2many. How's your stuff? Still stuffy? Nah, I'm not banned over that other place. I think they still respect my rugged individualism and courage to share opinions that aren't popular. Apparently, over here, they're just shocked and chagrined that anyone doesn't buy into the myths.


----------



## 2manyusernames

Boxed Ears said:


> Hey, Pipe and 2many. How's your stuff? Still stuffy? Nah, I'm not banned over that other place. I think they still respect my rugged individualism and courage to share opinions that aren't popular. Apparently, over here, they're just shocked and chagrined that anyone doesn't buy into the myths.


You're the myth. The man, the myth, AND the legend. The trinity. Speaking of which, whatever happened to Trinity? I digress, fuck Trinity, this is about you. You and your crazy nonsense.


----------



## turbotime

Boxed Ears said:


> Annnnnd lemme guess. You're another one of those kids who grew up thinking Leonard was legit because the indoctrination worked then...? Yeah...? Is that about the size of it then...?


SRLwas before my time sadly


----------



## Boxed Ears

2manyusernames said:


> You're the myth. The man, the myth, AND the legend. The trinity. Speaking of which, whatever happened to Trinity? I digress, fuck Trinity, this is about you. You and your crazy nonsense.


I don't know a lot of this stuff but be cool, bro.



turbotime said:


> SRLwas before my time sadly


Since his time people been rewritin history though. But listen I see you got a Oscar avatar that's probably a lot to do with it. Oscar = SRL, basically. But just so you know-that's not normal. Peace. Respect.


----------



## turbotime

Boxed Ears said:


> I don't know a lot of this stuff but be cool, bro.
> 
> Since his time people been rewritin history though. But listen I see you got a Oscar avatar that's probably a lot to do with it. Oscar = SRL, basically. But just so you know-that's not normal. Peace. Respect.


I've had this avatar since esb :lol:


----------



## Lester1583




----------



## Lester1583




----------



## Pedderrs

Lester1583 said:


>


:lol: First 13 months of Floyd's career compared to Lomachenko's first 5 years.

Lomachenko after 5 years:






Floyd after 4 and a bit years:


----------



## dyna

Pedderrs said:


> :lol: First 13 months of Floyd's career compared to Lomachenko's first 5 years.
> 
> Lomachenko after 5 years:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Floyd after 4 and a bit years:


Says more about Floyd's lack of talent that he was the underdog against some lanky glass jaw who got KO'd easily by Casamayor.


----------



## Pedderrs

dyna said:


> Says more about Floyd's lack of talent that he was the underdog against some lanky glass jaw who got KO'd easily by Casamayor.


:lol: 'Glass Jaw'


----------



## Pedderrs




----------



## dyna

Pedderrs said:


> :lol: 'Glass Jaw'


He got knocked out in the rematch right?


----------



## Pedderrs

Can someone help Dyna out with the definition of glass jaw please. He thinks it means losing rematches.


----------



## Kurushi

Bit unfair to pick on Floyd.


----------



## Pedderrs

Kurushi said:


> Bit unfair to pick on Floyd.


And it doesn't stand up to any level of scrutiny.

Floyd turned Pro at 19, Lomachenko at 24. One had almost 400 amateur fights, the other had 90.


----------



## dyna

Pedderrs said:


> And it doesn't stand up to any level of scrutiny.
> 
> Floyd turned Pro at 19, Lomachenko at 24. One had almost 400 amateur fights, the other had 90.


One was already past it.
The other waited for his opponents to get past it.


----------



## thehook13

Pacquiao expresses interest in fighting Lomachenko for lightweight title


----------



## steviebruno

thehook13 said:


> Pacquiao expresses interest in fighting Lomachenko for lightweight title


I don't think Pac can make 135 anymore. He'd put Loma to sleep at 140, however, even at this point in his career.


----------



## Pedderrs

steviebruno said:


> I don't think Pac can make 135 anymore. He'd put Loma to sleep at 140, however, even at this point in his career.


Indeed, but I can see a De La Hoya situation here. Drains himself beyond recognition to fight Loma at 135, gets destroyed, 50% of the boxing world hail it as a monumental victory.


----------



## Divi253

dyna said:


> One was already past it.
> The other waited for his opponents to get past it.


I'll admit, this made me chuckle..


----------



## Brownies

steviebruno said:


> I don't think Pac can make 135 anymore. He'd put Loma to sleep at 140, however, even at this point in his career.


Fast boxers often look bad against faster boxers.


----------



## PistolPat

Pedderrs said:


> Can someone help Dyna out with the definition of glass jaw please. He thinks it means losing rematches.


Sorry dude, I would help, but I've decided to jump on the Loma ATG express.


----------



## dyna

Pedderrs said:


> Can someone help Dyna out with the definition of glass jaw please. He thinks it means losing rematches.


You're as misleading as the Daily Mail.


----------



## Lester1583

dyna said:


> Slack jawed


Voices from the past


----------



## Lester1583

turbotime said:


> I've had this avatar since esb :lol:


Let me sleep all night in your soul _kitchen_


----------



## dyna

Lester1583 said:


> Voices from the past


Forever the real voice of reason.


----------



## Pedderrs

Lederman's scorecard for Castillo 1 was kinda bad though.


----------



## Kurushi

Pedderrs said:


> And it doesn't stand up to any level of scrutiny.
> 
> Floyd turned Pro at 19, Lomachenko at 24. One had almost 400 amateur fights, the other had 90.


It stands up to any kind of scrutiny. We're comparing their first 12 fights not birth certificates. I'm just wondering why people constantly pick on Floyd. Why not compare Loma's first 12 fights to Pacquiao's, or SRL's, or Ali's, or anyone else? They all come up short against Loma but I don't see those memes. There can't be many people in the history of the sport with a superior list of achievements after 12 fights.


----------



## Pedderrs

Kurushi said:


> It stands up to any kind of scrutiny. We're comparing their first 12 fights not birth certificates. I'm just wondering why people constantly pick on Floyd. Why not compare Loma's first 12 fights to Pacquiao's, or SRL's, or Ali's, or anyone else? They all come up short against Loma but I don't see those memes. There can't be many people in the history of the sport with a superior list of achievements after 12 fights.


Apologies Kurushi, but it doesn't stand up to 'scrutiny'. To scrutinise is to examine closely and thoroughly, and once we do that we realise Floyd was 19 years old and amassed his first 12 fights in a 13 month period. That can not be compared to a 24 year old Lomachenko with 400 amateur bouts under his belt fighting 12 times in 5 years. It's far more legitimate to compare the two's first 5 years in the sport. Lomachenko just had a relatively tough fight with Linares, Floyd put on one of the most comprehensive boxing displays of the last 25 years against the much bigger and favoured Diego Corrales. I sure hope we don't argue about this because any rational mind knows that the initial comparison was misleading and disingenuous, and with a clear agenda. Respectfully.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Apologies Kurushi, but it doesn't stand up to 'scrutiny'. To scrutinise is to examine closely and thoroughly, and once we do that we realise Floyd was 19 years old and amassed his first 12 fights in a 13 month period. That can not be compared to a 24 year old Lomachenko with 400 amateur bouts under his belt fighting 12 times in 5 years. It's far more legitimate to compare the two's first 5 years in the sport. Lomachenko just had a relatively tough fight with Linares, Floyd put on one of the most comprehensive boxing displays of the last 25 years against the much bigger and favoured Diego Corrales. I sure hope we don't argue about this because any rational mind knows that the initial comparison was misleading and disingenuous, and with a clear agenda. Respectfully.


You realise that just because Corrales was favoured doesn't make the victory in itself any better? It's just that Floyd was rightfully seen as not a world beater so he was underestimated in a fight where he had a stylistic advantage, against a guy who actually wasn't as good as his potential suggested to that point. You're making an argument about perceptions instead of the actuality of the situation. You seem to have this problem of crediting relative expectations instead of what is (you do the same thing with Garcia, who has yet to do anything in actuality). Loma v Garcia will be Floyd v Corrales part 2 in a sense, the boxer with the stylistic advantage schooling an alleged puncher who has undeserved hype. I hope you talk as favourably about Loma as you do about Floyd after he takes Garcia apart. That victory won't mean a thing to me, because I see very clearly.


----------



## Concrete

Lester1583 said:


> Voices from the past





dyna said:


> Forever the real voice of reason.





Pedderrs said:


> Lederman's scorecard for Castillo 1 was kinda bad though.


Had to watch the 3rd round again to see y Ledderman gave Castillo that round. And there is no real justification for it.


----------



## Lester1583

Loma vs 3


----------



## Kurushi

Pedderrs said:


> Apologies Kurushi, but it doesn't stand up to 'scrutiny'. To scrutinise is to examine closely and thoroughly, and once we do that we realise Floyd was 19 years old and amassed his first 12 fights in a 13 month period. That can not be compared to a 24 year old Lomachenko with 400 amateur bouts under his belt fighting 12 times in 5 years. It's far more legitimate to compare the two's first 5 years in the sport. Lomachenko just had a relatively tough fight with Linares, Floyd put on one of the most comprehensive boxing displays of the last 25 years against the much bigger and favoured Diego Corrales. I sure hope we don't argue about this because any rational mind knows that the initial comparison was misleading and disingenuous, and with a clear agenda. Respectfully.


The scrutiny the comparison needs to stand up to is 'did Loma achieve more in 12 fights than Mayweather'.That's what the image implies so it's the question posed. The answer is 'yes, he did'. If their respective ages invalidate a comparison of their first 12 fights then it makes no sense that it wouldn't also invalidate a comparison of their first 5 years. Either we don't compare them because of their age or we compare them despite it.

Loma clearly achieved more in his first 12 fights so we move to the topic you presented of who had the best first 5 years. An interesting discussion because many elements aren't comparable on a like-for-like basis. In terms of what does and what doesn't stand up to scrutiny however, the overly-simplistic notion that this argument is won or lost on the answer to who the better fighter is out of Linares or Corrales is certainly a good candidate.

5 years into his career and Mayweather was fighting at his debut weight of 130. 5 years into Loma's career and Vasyl is fighting two divisions up from where he started at 135 (I won't mention that it's harder to move up in weight as you get older and that this puts Loma at a disadvantage in this comparison because I'd rather not bring age into it, as previously mentioned). Do we compare Linares and Corrales or do we compare Linares with the number one guy two divisions above Mayweather at the time (Tszyu or whoever that might be)? Is beating Corrales better than breaking Fenech's record? Genuine question...how do you even compare the two things? Does Mayweather have the single better win over 5 years? Probably just. Does he have the better resume? Absolutely not.


----------



## Pedderrs

Kurushi said:


> The scrutiny the comparison needs to stand up to is 'did Loma achieve more in 12 fights than Mayweather'.That's what the image implies so it's the question posed. The answer is 'yes, he did'. If their respective ages invalidate a comparison of their first 12 fights then it makes no sense that it wouldn't also invalidate a comparison of their first 5 years. Either we don't compare them because of their age or we compare them despite it.


Did Loma achieve more in 12 fights than Floyd did? Yes, he did. But it's a completely meaningless comparison to make considering your taking one example that spans 13 months and comparing it to a span of 5 years. You're taking one fighter who had 400 amateur fights, 7 WBS fights and who was 24 years old, to a fighter that had only 90 amateur fights and who was 19 years old. So you're comparing apples to oranges. It's a meaningless comparison unless you look at the whole picture, which is precisely why the projected narrative falls to pieces once you scrutinise it. And frankly, to think the image is only intending to imply that Loma achieved more in 12 fights is extraordinarily naive. So I hope you genuinely don't think that's the case.



> Loma clearly achieved more in his first 12 fights so we move to the topic you presented of who had the best first 5 years. An interesting discussion because many elements aren't comparable on a like-for-like basis. In terms of what does and what doesn't stand up to scrutiny however, the overly-simplistic notion that this argument is won or lost on the answer to who the better fighter is out of Linares or Corrales is certainly a good candidate.


Somewhat puzzling. You read so much into the two videos I posted but can't recognise - or won't recognise - the dishonest and disingenuous agenda of the image posted which compared their 12 fight records. In any event, I haven't attempted to answer the question as to who was better after a 5 year span. I was illustrating the point that both fighters developed into world class fighters at a very comparable rate despite the differences in experience and age. The numbers alone do not tell you that.



> 5 years into his career and Mayweather was fighting at his debut weight of 130. 5 years into Loma's career and Vasyl is fighting two divisions up from where he started at 135 (I won't mention that it's harder to move up in weight as you get older and that this puts Loma at a disadvantage in this comparison because I'd rather not bring age into it, as previously mentioned). Do we compare Linares and Corrales or do we compare Linares with the number one guy two divisions above Mayweather at the time (Tszyu or whoever that might be)? Is beating Corrales better than breaking Fenech's record? Genuine question...how do you even compare the two things? Does Mayweather have the single better win over 5 years? Probably just. Does he have the better resume? Absolutely not.


This is not a debate I'm motivated for, Kurushi.


----------



## Kurushi

Pedderrs said:


> Somewhat puzzling. You read so much into the two videos I posted but can't recognise - or won't recognise


I didn't realise you'd posted any videos, sorry mate. I'll flick through the thread pages, you know, the numbers at the top of the page and that, and give your videos a watch. I guess what we can agree on is that our investment in this conversation is something that fatigues us both. Two passionate sloths too lazy to put our dukes up eh? What's become of us?


----------



## Pedderrs

Kurushi said:


> I didn't realise you'd posted any videos, sorry mate. I'll flick through the thread pages, you know, the numbers at the top of the page and that, and give your videos a watch. I guess what we can agree on is that our investment in this conversation is something that fatigues us both. Two passionate sloths too lazy to put our dukes up eh? What's become of us?


I pick my battles wisely these days, buddy. :lol:

Besides, I think we'd only disagree over tiny details that ultimately don't matter, and I see no use in us wasting time over that.


----------



## Kurushi

Pedderrs said:


> I pick my battles wisely these days, buddy. :lol:
> 
> Besides, I think we'd only disagree over tiny details that ultimately don't matter, and I see no use in us wasting time over that.


You know we'd disagree on larger than tiny details but I can't be bothered to


----------



## Pedderrs

Kurushi said:


> You know we'd disagree on larger than tiny details but I can't be bothered to


Floyd (2001) would have beat Loma's (2018) ass.


----------



## Lester1583




----------



## Kalash

Lester1583 said:


>


those numbers at the end are their wins/losses in the amateurs?? if so this means floyd lost 84 times?? wtf? i thought he only lost a few times... and isn't loma suposed to be like 400-1? im confused


----------



## REDC

Kalash said:


> those numbers at the end are their wins/losses in the amateurs?? if so this means floyd lost 84 times?? wtf? i thought he only lost a few times... and isn't loma suposed to be like 400-1? im confused


I think it's the combined record of the opponents mentioned.


----------



## Pedderrs




----------



## Sweet Pea

His prime has already passed. Shame. He just ain't as good a pro as i thought he'd be.


----------



## steviebruno

As I said before, he will be remembered as a 20 fight anomaly and will not rank amongst the all-time greats. He may have had GOAT talent but we will never know.


----------



## Dealt_with

Are those last two posts jokes? 
This forum is dead, that’s why there’s no talk about the number one pound for pound fighter in the sport.
I didn’t expect Lomachenko to look that good against Pedraza. Considering Pedraza’ style and desire to survive I rank that as a top three Lomachenko performance.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


>


Have you seen the latest training footage of Mikey? He's as fat as his brother, even slower than before. Are you annoyed that he ducked that Lomachenko? He knows he isn't going to beat Spence, he hasn't even been training. And now there's no way he can fight at 135 again. I'm not sure if Mikey is ducking or he just can't be arsed making weight anymore.


----------



## steviebruno

Dealt_with said:


> Are those last two posts jokes?
> This forum is dead, that's why there's no talk about the number one pound for pound fighter in the sport.
> I didn't expect Lomachenko to look that good against Pedraza. Considering Pedraza' style and desire to survive I rank that as a top three Lomachenko performance.


Lots of stylistic nightmares for this guy all of a sudden...


----------



## Dealt_with

steviebruno said:


> Lots of stylistic nightmares for this guy all of a sudden...


Look back through my posts and you'll see that I said that Pedraza is a tough fight, far tougher stylistically than the Mikey fight. So if you're after a consistent and accurate assessment maybe you should just read my posts.


----------



## rjjfan

Giving Loma the benefit of the doubt. Manny didn't look like a world beater against Torrecampo and floyd was gifted a decision against Castillo. Let's see if any of the big names will challenge him.


----------



## steviebruno

Dealt_with said:


> Look back through my posts and you'll see that I said that Pedraza is a tough fight, far tougher stylistically than the Mikey fight. So if you're after a consistent and accurate assessment maybe you should just read my posts.


You do that with every Loma fight, though; it's called hedging your bet. Only with Mikey Garcia have you chosen to go a different route.


----------



## Pedderrs

rjjfan said:


> Giving Loma the benefit of the doubt. Manny didn't look like a world beater against Torrecampo and floyd was gifted a decision against Castillo. Let's see if any of the big names will challenge him.


Not great comparisons.

Manny fought Torrecampo way before his prime and Castillo is light years better than Pedraza.

This fight hasn't changed anything for me though. Lomachenko is still a top 3 fighter and he might beat Garcia, all it does is reaffirm what I already knew, and that's that Lomachenko is not the demi-god he's often billed as and certainly not the most skillful fighter to have ever lived. That was always ludicrous hyperbole.


----------



## Pedderrs

I do find it absolutely fascinating that not a single word was said about Lomachenko this weekend. Not a word. All of a sudden the P4P 1 doesn't put in a world class performance and not a word. Not on here or the British Forum. I'm absolutely fascinated by that fact. Why would nobody say anything at all?


----------



## Sweet Pea

steviebruno said:


> Lots of stylistic nightmares for this guy all of a sudden...


LOL, you win this one. Good job. Too bad about Jimmy Butler, though.


----------



## steviebruno

Sweet Pea said:


> LOL, you win this one. Good job. Too bad about Jimmy Butler, though.


The Sixers all love each other now, but just wait until they get eliminated during the postseason. That's when the grumbling and finger pointing will surface.


----------



## steviebruno

Pedderrs said:


> I do find it absolutely fascinating that not a single word was said about Lomachenko this weekend. Not a word. All of a sudden the P4P 1 doesn't put in a world class performance and not a word. Not on here or the British Forum. I'm absolutely fascinated by that fact. Why would nobody say anything at all?


I was going to say that you only hear about Loma when he has a fight coming up, but now he fights and you still don't hear anything.


----------



## Dealt_with

steviebruno said:


> You do that with every Loma fight, though; it's called hedging your bet. Only with Mikey Garcia have you chosen to go a different route.


Not true, I said he would dominate GRJ, Walters, and Rigondeaux (most of the time). Again, you just need to read my posts.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> I do find it absolutely fascinating that not a single word was said about Lomachenko this weekend. Not a word. All of a sudden the P4P 1 doesn't put in a world class performance and not a word. Not on here or the British Forum. I'm absolutely fascinated by that fact. Why would nobody say anything at all?


Because this forum is a dead zone? Barely anything was even said about Wilder-Fury on here. Pedraza wasn't seen as a worthy opponent by casual boxing fans (so most on here). I post on other forums, that's where I go for boxing talk. This place is well and truly dead for boxing talk.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Not great comparisons.
> 
> Manny fought Torrecampo way before his prime and Castillo is light years better than Pedraza.
> 
> This fight hasn't changed anything for me though. Lomachenko is still a top 3 fighter and he might beat Garcia, all it does is reaffirm what I already knew, and that's that Lomachenko is not the demi-god he's often billed as and certainly not the most skillful fighter to have ever lived. That was always ludicrous hyperbole.


Hey, Pedraza would beat Mikey. Lomachenko won't beat Mikey, because Mikey wants to eat cheeseburgers and take the pressure off instead of making real fights.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> Hey, Pedraza would beat Mikey. Lomachenko won't beat Mikey, because Mikey wants to eat cheeseburgers and take the pressure off instead of making real fights.


That's insane mate.


----------



## steviebruno

Dealt_with said:


> Not true, I said he would dominate GRJ, Walters, and Rigondeaux (most of the time). Again, you just need to read my posts.


Those are older fights. Everyone except for Mikey Garcia is a stylistic nightmare for Vasyl Lomachenko these days according to you. Pedraza, Linares, Easter, etc.

Guess he's just getting old...


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> As I said before, he will be remembered as a 20 fight anomaly and will not rank amongst the all-time greats. He may have had GOAT talent but we will never know.


Bit early to be saying this. What if he has another 5 years in the sport, and wins multiple more world titles? I do feel that he needs some more defining fights, but it's far from over for him in terms of cementing his legacy, unless injuries ruin him.


----------



## Lester1583

Dealt_with said:


> dead zone


It's obvious why this was a so-so performance by the Loma standards.

Bad injury - layoff - no warm-up - stylistic difficulties.

Pedraza is mediocre overall - but he's good at clean pure amateur-style boxing.

His size and style took away Loma's best asset - the gopak legs - it's hard to outpivot a rangy outboxer like Pedraza.

You should simply beat him down - or put him into a defensive shell at least/don't allow him to box comfortably.

Or - if you're feather fisted - outcounter/counterjab him.

What someone like Whitaker would've done.

But Vasya is heavily reliant on his movement - he's not as effective at the center-of-the-ring chessboxin' game - he had to rely on his pressure counterboxing - in exchange for taking glancing blows here and there.

And this was expectedly more than enough for Pedraza.

But this was Vasya's worst performance physically-wise.

No snap in his rarely used right hand - it even looked sloppy in that huge finishing flurry in the last rounds.

For the first time Loma didn't look light on his feet - flat-footed even at times by his own standards - which was the most worrying sign.

He looked like a fighter who had to work hard, to grind in the last two rounds - again never happened before.

Was it just ring rust or the start of Lomacho's decline due to injuries and a long career.

The next fight will tell us the truth.


----------



## steviebruno

Strike said:


> Bit early to be saying this. What if he has another 5 years in the sport, and wins multiple more world titles? I do feel that he needs some more defining fights, but it's far from over for him in terms of cementing his legacy, unless injuries ruin him.


Of course it's just a prediction. He's already 31 in a couple of months, a small fighter to begin with, and I am making a relatively safe prediction that he will diminish in overall ability over the next couple of years, just as other small fighters have done all throughout boxing history.

He is aware of his own mortality, btw. It is exactly why he hit the ground running and did not waste any time once he became pro.

It's just a shame that he didn't turn pro younger. At his current rate, 20 fights would put him right around age 35. He may well beat Mikey Garcia if they fought (not sure), but what else is really going to solidify him as more than that great little contemporary who turned pro, won titles earlier than anyone in history, then retired after 20 fights?

The scene is just too barren to accomplish what he really set out to accomplish in a limited amount of time, IMO.


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> Of course it's just a prediction. He's already 30, a small fighter to begin with, and I am making a relatively safe prediction that he will diminish in overall ability over the next couple of years, just as other small fighters have done all throughout boxing history.
> 
> He is aware of his own mortality, btw. It is exactly why he hit the ground running and did not waste any time once he became pro.
> 
> It's just a shame that he didn't turn pro younnger. At his current rate, 20 fights would put him right around age 35. He may well beat Mikey Garcia if they fought (not sure), but what else is really going to solidify him as more than that great little contemporary who turned pro, won titles earlier than anyone in history, then retired after 20 fights?
> 
> The scene is just too barren to accomplish what he really set out to accomplish in a limited amount of time, IMO.


Fair post. I agree that it would have been nice to see him turn pro sooner, and he is likely to decline. I don't think someone of his size needs to be moving up through the weights much in order to be an ATG. Hagler never pushed on to a higher weight, Pep never did...in fact tons of ATG fighters never won titles in more than one weight class.

Someone of Loma's size should not be going any higher up, but there's fights to be made and the amateur record combined with the speed of winning a world title, combined with the nature of the wins and the pure eye test mean I am confident he will not be seen as some anomaly of 20 bouts who is not talked of as an ATG. I do think it's too late on for him to cement himself in general discussions about the greatest 10 p4p fighters etc.


----------



## steviebruno

Strike said:


> Fair post. I agree that it would have been nice to see him turn pro sooner, and he is likely to decline. I don't think someone of his size needs to be moving up through the weights much in order to be an ATG. Hagler never pushed on to a higher weight, Pep never did...in fact tons of ATG fighters never won titles in more than one weight class.
> 
> Someone of Loma's size should not be going any higher up, but there's fights to be made and the amateur record combined with the speed of winning a world title, combined with the nature of the wins and the pure eye test mean I am confident he will not be seen as some anomaly of 20 bouts who is not talked of as an ATG. I do think it's too late on for him to cement himself in general discussions about the greatest 10 p4p fighters etc.


The ATG fighters that you referenced who didn't win titles in more than one class had periods of prolonged dominance at their respective weights, though, and it would be a bit more impressive if Loma was moving up and taking titles from historical gatekeepers such as these. Again, the competition that he needs just isn't there, and he may well move up again looking for more challenges (Pedraza was pretty much a waste of his time)... although he probably should just hang out at 135, clean it out, and hold it down until he physically can't do it anymore.

If possible, he also needs to fight more frequently and just start kicking ass again.


----------



## DobyZhee

Loma Pacquiao at 140..

The torch needs to be taken. Not given


----------



## steviebruno

DobyZhee said:


> Loma Pacquiao at 140..
> 
> The torch needs to be taken. Not given


I've wanted to see this fight for 2 years but it probably won't happen. If Loma had turned pro after his first Olympic gold, I am sure that it would have happened by now. I think that Pac would have put him to sleep, btw.


----------



## DobyZhee

steviebruno said:


> I've wanted to see this fight for 2 years but it probably won't happen. If Loma had turned pro after his first Olympic gold, I am sure that it would have happened by now. I think that Pac would have put him to sleep, btw.


You think Loma knocks him out these days?


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> Have you seen the latest training footage of Mikey? He's as fat as his brother, even slower than before. *Are you annoyed that he ducked that Lomachenko? *He knows he isn't going to beat Spence, he hasn't even been training. And now there's no way he can fight at 135 again. I'm not sure if Mikey is ducking or he just can't be arsed making weight anymore.


I am mate to be honest. I've already made this clear.


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> I've wanted to see this fight for 2 years but it probably won't happen. If Loma had turned pro after his first Olympic gold, I am sure that it would have happened by now. I think that Pac would have put him to sleep, btw.


I think Pac gets outboxed, as he was for prolonged periods of time against several excellent boxers, none of whom had the footwork of Lomachenko.


----------



## steviebruno

DobyZhee said:


> You think Loma knocks him out these days?


No. I'd still slightly favor Manny, although he'd be a serious underdog at this point.


----------



## Pedderrs

Strike said:


> I think Pac gets outboxed, as he was for prolonged periods of time against several excellent boxers, none of whom had the footwork of Lomachenko.


Is Lomachenko a better fighter than Juan Manuel Marquez?


----------



## steviebruno

Strike said:


> I think Pac gets outboxed, as he was for prolonged periods of time against several excellent boxers, none of whom had the footwork of Lomachenko.


I don't think that Loma has been in with anything close to a Manny Pacquiao and lots of that footwork would go completely out the window if he was in an actual fight with real danger. The footwork that he imploys works best when he is in complete control of the fight and generally serves to further exert his dominance against and frustrate his opponent. A great deal of it is showmanship. Smoke and mirrors.

He was much more conventional against Linares because he was in an actual fight and couldn't afford to clown around and waste energy with useless activity.


----------



## thegee

@steviebruno, don"t know which fight you were watching. Pedroza put in a very good performance . Yes Lomo did win, but not by the judges scores, just have a look at Lomo"s face if that does"nt tell you that apart from the eleventh i t was avery good performance by Pedroza. Regards Mervyn The Gee


----------



## thegee

@Pedderrs, in a word NO. Regards Mervyn The Gee


----------



## Pedderrs

steviebruno said:


> I don't think that Loma has been in with anything close to a Manny Pacquiao and lots of that footwork would go completely out the window if he was in an actual fight with real danger. The footwork that he imploys works best when he is in complete control of the fight and generally serves to further exert his dominance against and frustrate his opponent. A great deal of it is showmanship. Smoke and mirrors.
> 
> He was much more conventional against Linares because he was in an actual fight and couldn't afford to clown around and waste energy with useless activity.


I have to keep reminding myself that the best opponent Lomachenko has defeated is Jorge Linares.


----------



## steviebruno

thegee said:


> @steviebruno, don"t know which fight you were watching. Pedroza put in a very good performance . Yes Lomo did win, but not by the judges scores, just have a look at Lomo"s face if that does"nt tell you that apart from the eleventh i t was avery good performance by Pedroza. Regards Mervyn The Gee


I don't disagree. For all that circling and pivoting, Loma eventually has to stop moving, get in range, and place himself in danger in order to get his punches off. He's not the defensive whiz that he was being given credit for being when his feet were a touch faster and he was a few pounds lighter.


----------



## Strike

Pedderrs said:


> Is Lomachenko a better fighter than Juan Manuel Marquez?


A better fighter? No. A better boxer? Yes.


----------



## Strike

Pedderrs said:


> I have to keep reminding myself that the best opponent Lomachenko has defeated is Jorge Linares.


GRJ and Rigo are outstanding wins. The latter even more so because it never involved using a size advantage and was done purely on technique.


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> I don't think that Loma has been in with anything close to a Manny Pacquiao and lots of that footwork would go completely out the window if he was in an actual fight with real danger. The footwork that he imploys works best when he is in complete control of the fight and generally serves to further exert his dominance against and frustrate his opponent. A great deal of it is showmanship. Smoke and mirrors.
> 
> He was much more conventional against Linares because he was in an actual fight and couldn't afford to clown around and waste energy with useless activity.


You're right that he hasn't been in with anything like Pac, that said, Pac was always straight lines. Linares is 4.5" taller than Pac with 2" more reach. His size was a huge factor, not to mention that (and I have no idea why this keeps having to be repeated) Loma TORE his shoulder muscle in the 2nd round. None of the footwork is smoke and mirrors at all, and I find it utterly bizarre that anyone would think so given his outstanding control of distance and space both offensively and defensively.


----------



## steviebruno

Strike said:


> You're right that he hasn't been in with anything like Pac, that said, Pac was always straight lines. Linares is 4.5" taller than Pac with 2" more reach. His size was a huge factor, not to mention that (and I have no idea why this keeps having to be repeated) Loma TORE his shoulder muscle in the 2nd round. None of the footwork is smoke and mirrors at all, and I find it utterly bizarre that anyone would think so given his outstanding control of distance and space both offensively and defensively.


He isn't controlling distance at 135. He's short and has t-rex arms. The footwork was successful in the lower weights because he was big enough to be able to alternate between close and mid range. At the higher weights, he simply does not have the frame which allows him to operate consistently from midrange. He is a pocket fighter when it's all said and done, and it's bizarre to picture Manny Pacquiao just standing there confused, not tagging Loma with devastating straight lefts and looping rights as Vasyl turns and pivots to his heart's content, then steps in to land a punch or two.

Pac has been outboxed before, but no one has ever gotten into the ring with him and come out thinking that they had an easy night. Pac would find him, in a way that Linares could only dream of, and eventually put the little tyke to sleep. You are welcome to disagree.


----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> He isn't controlling distance at 135. He's short and has t-rex arms. The footwork was successful in the lower weights because he was big enough to be able to alternate between close and mid range. At the higher weights, he simply does not have the frame which allows him to operate consistently from midrange. He is a pocket fighter when it's all said and done, and it's bizarre to picture Manny Pacquiao just standing there confused, not tagging Loma with devastating straight lefts and looping rights as Vasyl turns and pivots to his heart's content, then steps in to land a punch or two.
> 
> Pac has been outboxed before, but no one has ever gotten into the ring with him and come out thinking that they had an easy night. Pac would find him, in a way that Linares could only dream of, and eventually put the little tyke to sleep. You are welcome to disagree.


I hope we're not talking about modern day Pac, because he's old as fuck and had a very close fight with Jeff fucking Horn.


----------



## steviebruno

paloalto00 said:


> I hope we're not talking about modern day Pac, because he's old as fuck and had a very close fight with Jeff fucking Horn.


Prime. But I'd make Pac a live dog even now.


----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> Prime. But I'd make Pac a live dog even now.


I don't know man, Pac was always pretty wreckless and moved in straight lines. Loma is not only an offensive power house, but has very underrated defense. If pac were to win currently, it would be due to size


----------



## Pedderrs

Strike said:


> GRJ and Rigo are outstanding wins. The latter even more so because it never involved using a size advantage and was done purely on technique.


Sorry Strike, you're incorrect. Neither are 'outstanding wins'.


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> He isn't controlling distance at 135. He's short and has t-rex arms.


This is utterly ridiculous. He is short, and he does have small arms, and neither of these things are anything to do with controlling distance. In fact, he NEEDS to have controlled distance well to have even got inside to land his shots against markedly bigger men. 


steviebruno said:


> The footwork was successful in the lower weights because he was big enough to be able to alternate between close and mid range. At the higher weights, he simply does not have the frame which allows him to operate consistently from midrange. He is a pocket fighter when it's all said and done, and it's bizarre to picture Manny Pacquiao just standing there confused, not tagging Loma with devastating straight lefts and looping rights as Vasyl turns and pivots to his heart's content, then steps in to land a punch or two.


Not really, because Pac is not anything like as tall or rangey as Linares or Pedraza. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Pac stands looking confused, I think he does what he has always done...marches forward throwing, but he has always done so in straight lines, and I believe he is simply countered and outpointed by the far superior footwork of Loma.

Pac has looked one dimensional even in fights he dominated like the Cotto one. The moment Cotto jabbed off the back foot, Pac had to reset himself, and just turned and went forward, stopped, turned and went forward, following Cotto around the ring, rather than stepping to the side or pivoting to cut off escape routes. This was sporadic, as for the most part he bossed it through pressure and output, and that's worked for him most of his career. He's a great fighter, but the PBF bout was a foregone conclusion at any stage, and yet PBF at his peak was backed up and run close by Castillo, but I knew he was going to outbox Pac.


steviebruno said:


> Pac has been outboxed before, but no one has ever gotten into the ring with him and come out thinking that they had an easy night. Pac would find him, in a way that Linares could only dream of, and eventually put the little tyke to sleep. You are welcome to disagree.


I just find the assertion that because Pedraza and Linares at 5ft 8" and with reaches of 71" and 69" respectively made it hard for Loma to get in and out easily, that therefore Pac would land even more, to be odd. Pedraza has 4" more reach than Pac...that's big. He's 2.5" taller. Linares (for the 1000th time) fought a Loma who had torn his shoulder in round 2. He faced a disabled fighter and still lost.


----------



## Strike

Pedderrs said:


> Sorry Strike, you're incorrect. Neither are 'outstanding wins'.


No, I'm not incorrect. It's entirely subjective. I put Rigo up there with something like the JMM win for PBF. It's still a great win, despite not being a peak version due to the nature of the win. To me, the fashion of the Rigo win makes it outstanding, as none of the advantages of size or age came into play...no overpowering, no bullying, no stamina issue...just out techniqued the most technical. I believe GRJ is a fantastic talent, unfortunately he seems committed to doing nothing to prove it, so yeah that one might need to be downgraded.


----------



## Dealt_with

steviebruno said:


> Those are older fights. Everyone except for Mikey Garcia is a stylistic nightmare for Vasyl Lomachenko these days according to you. Pedraza, Linares, Easter, etc.
> 
> Guess he's just getting old...


I said Linares was a risky fight, due to his size, combinations, speed, and Loma's first fight in the division. I said I expected it to be a tricky fight because of that, and it was.
I said Pedraza would be a difficult fight stylistically, and I actually expected him to have more success than he did.
I would never say that Easter would be tricky in anyway for Lomachenko.
Mikey is a straightforward and slow fighter, I've always known that's an easy fight for Lomachenko.
Fights are tougher for Lomachenko in general now because he is small at 135, and everyone is aiming for him. Size with a tricky style can cause problems. Note that he knocked out Linares, and dominated Pedraza, the two stylistic match ups that I thought would trouble Loma. And I do honestly believe that Linares and Pedraza could beat Mikey.


----------



## Dealt_with

Lester1583 said:


> It's obvious why this was a so-so performance by the Loma standards.
> 
> Bad injury - layoff - no warm-up - stylistic difficulties.
> 
> Pedraza is mediocre overall - but he's good at clean pure amateur-style boxing.
> 
> His size and style took away Loma's best asset - the gopak legs - it's hard to outpivot a rangy outboxer like Pedraza.
> 
> You should simply beat him down - or put him into a defensive shell at least/don't allow him to box comfortably.
> 
> Or - if you're feather fisted - outcounter/counterjab him.
> 
> What someone like Whitaker would've done.
> 
> But Vasya is heavily reliant on his movement - he's not as effective at the center-of-the-ring chessboxin' game - he had to rely on his pressure counterboxing - in exchange for taking glancing blows here and there.
> 
> And this was expectedly more than enough for Pedraza.
> 
> But this was Vasya's worst performance physically-wise.
> 
> No snap in his rarely used right hand - it even looked sloppy in that huge finishing flurry in the last rounds.
> 
> For the first time Loma didn't look light on his feet - flat-footed even at times by his own standards - which was the most worrying sign.
> 
> He looked like a fighter who had to work hard, to grind in the last two rounds - again never happened before.
> 
> Was it just ring rust or the start of Lomacho's decline due to injuries and a long career.
> 
> The next fight will tell us the truth.


Pedraza isn't mediocre overall, he was a champ who dominated another legitimate champ in his previous fight, in a fight he was expected to lose. Pedraza had one loss in a division he was drained, in a fight where he fought stupidly. Pedraza has been targeting Loma for a long time. I told people this would be a tough fight, as usual people should pay attention when I talk instead of projecting their biases onto me. I'm honest and I know what I'm talking about.

I thought it was obvious why Lomachenko wasn't moving as much, Pedraza with his wide stance and lateral movement negated the benefits gained from Loma's usual step around. Why do you think Loma was throwing his shots straight down the pipe, why do you think the straight left landed repeatedly? Lomachenko understands boxing, that's why he doesn't fight the same against everyone.
His punches lacked snap at that point because he had just fired off a 60 punch combination in round 11.


----------



## Dealt_with

Strike said:


> Fair post. I agree that it would have been nice to see him turn pro sooner, and he is likely to decline. I don't think someone of his size needs to be moving up through the weights much in order to be an ATG. Hagler never pushed on to a higher weight, Pep never did...in fact tons of ATG fighters never won titles in more than one weight class.
> 
> Someone of Loma's size should not be going any higher up, but there's fights to be made and the amateur record combined with the speed of winning a world title, combined with the nature of the wins and the pure eye test mean I am confident he will not be seen as some anomaly of 20 bouts who is not talked of as an ATG. I do think it's too late on for him to cement himself in general discussions about the greatest 10 p4p fighters etc.


Please, you only have to see him fight to know that he has cemented himself as one of the greatest p4p fighters of all time. There's a reason why Roy Jones and Teddy Atlas had him as pound for pound almost as soon as they witnessed him fight. 
He has set multiple records while moving up weight divisions, has been willing to fight anyone, has dominated undefeated champions and multiple gold medalists to the point they quit.
Anybody who knows boxing understands this an all time fighter we're watching, displaying skills and a complete game at a level we've never seen before. Put his game against anyone and he comes out on top.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> I have to keep reminding myself that the best opponent Lomachenko has defeated is Jorge Linares.


Do you also remind yourself that Mikey undisputedly ducked that same Jorge Linares? Do you remind yourself that Mikey' best win is his quit job against an even sized Salido that was starting to beat him up, all those years ago? 
And I would rank GRJ, Walters, and Rigo above Linares.


----------



## Strike

Dealt_with said:


> Please, you only have to see him fight to know that he has cemented himself as one of the greatest p4p fighters of all time. There's a reason why Roy Jones and Teddy Atlas had him as pound for pound almost as soon as they witnessed him fight.
> He has set multiple records while moving up weight divisions, has been willing to fight anyone, has dominated undefeated champions and multiple gold medalists to the point they quit.
> Anybody who knows boxing understands this an all time fighter we're watching, displaying skills and a complete game at a level we've never seen before. Put his game against anyone and he comes out on top.


Yeah, in terms of ability...he's as good as anyone I've seen. I just don't know if time and size will stop him getting the career defining bouts he needs to get wider recognition.


----------



## Dealt_with

Strike said:


> Yeah, in terms of ability...he's as good as anyone I've seen. I just don't know if time and size will stop him getting the career defining bouts he needs to get wider recognition.


I think he already has those fights, on top of his double gold medals. I mean who does Floyd have, Roy Jones have? There are asterisks against their biggest wins. GRJ and Rigo do it, then the manner he went up to 130 and 135 to knock out the champs in his first fights there, with no warm up for the weight division. In record time as well. Consensus P4p number one in record time as well. The fact you have people getting excited about a champion going the distance and winning a round against Lomachenko tells you how dominant we all know he is. You have people trying to keep consistency in their opinions, hence their stubborn refusal to be honest about this (largely) unexpected anomaly.


----------



## Strike

Dealt_with said:


> I think he already has those fights, on top of his double gold medals. I mean who does Floyd have, Roy Jones have? There are asterisks against their biggest wins. GRJ and Rigo do it, then the manner he went up to 130 and 135 to knock out the champs in his first fights there, with no warm up for the weight division. In record time as well. Consensus P4p number one in record time as well. The fact you have people getting excited about a champion going the distance and winning a round against Lomachenko tells you how dominant we all know he is. You have people trying to keep consistency in their opinions, hence their stubborn refusal to be honest about this (largely) unexpected anomaly.


Floyd doesn't have many standout wins, but he has the volume of good wins to make up for it. So you have Corrales, Hatton and Canelo as the 3 guys he took on who were unbeaten and dangerous at the time, then you have Castillo, JMM, and a ton of guys like Judah, Cotto, Pac, Mosley etc who were past their best and taken when they were either coming off losses or had been beaten by someone else before PBF...but there's just so many names on there that in 10 years time the record will look even better.

RJJ...he has Hopkins and Toney. Those alone are outstanding, and then you have the volume thing again, the step up to heavy and the manner of that win.

But Loma might retire with only 19-20 wins on his record as a pro, he needs more names. Garcia would be great, but we're hearing rumours of Crolla...please no, just totally pointless. I'd like to see Tank, as it is one that people will see as dangerous, he's unbeaten...a banger, and Loma will box rings round him. Garcia obviously...


----------



## Dealt_with

Strike said:


> Floyd doesn't have many standout wins, but he has the volume of good wins to make up for it. So you have Corrales, Hatton and Canelo as the 3 guys he took on who were unbeaten and dangerous at the time, then you have Castillo, JMM, and a ton of guys like Judah, Cotto, Pac, Mosley etc who were past their best and taken when they were either coming off losses or had been beaten by someone else before PBF...but there's just so many names on there that in 10 years time the record will look even better.
> 
> RJJ...he has Hopkins and Toney. Those alone are outstanding, and then you have the volume thing again, the step up to heavy and the manner of that win.
> 
> But Loma might retire with only 19-20 wins on his record as a pro, he needs more names. Garcia would be great, but we're hearing rumours of Crolla...please no, just totally pointless. I'd like to see Tank, as it is one that people will see as dangerous, he's unbeaten...a banger, and Loma will box rings round him. Garcia obviously...


The number of wins is irrelevant, he has names and champions from the start. Most other guys start after win 20 against no names. Lomachenko won gold medals and WSB fights instead of those bum fights.
Tank would be an entertaining fight, and a bigger challenge than Garcia. I don't think Garcia wants real fights, now he is fat and taking no pressure fights after dumping his paper title. He ducked Linares and Lomachenko when it was time, and who has he fought since Salido? I would love to see Lomachenko slice him up but I highly doubt he is going to seek out a challenge following the Spence loss.


----------



## steviebruno

Dealt_with said:


> Please, you only have to see him fight to know that he has cemented himself as one of the greatest p4p fighters of all time. There's a reason why Roy Jones and Teddy Atlas had him as pound for pound almost as soon as they witnessed him fight.
> He has set multiple records while moving up weight divisions, has been willing to fight anyone, has dominated undefeated champions and multiple gold medalists to the point they quit.
> Anybody who knows boxing understands this an all time fighter we're watching, displaying skills and a complete game at a level we've never seen before. Put his game against anyone and he comes out on top.


H.B.O


----------



## steviebruno

Strike said:


> No, I'm not incorrect. It's entirely subjective. I put Rigo up there with something like the JMM win for PBF. It's still a great win, despite not being a peak version due to the nature of the win. To me, the fashion of the Rigo win makes it outstanding, as none of the advantages of size or age came into play...no overpowering, no bullying, no stamina issue...just out techniqued the most technical. I believe GRJ is a fantastic talent, unfortunately he seems committed to doing nothing to prove it, so yeah that one might need to be downgraded.


Completely disagree about the Rigo fight. Rigo was spent, broke, and desperate and cashed himself out there ... brought absolutely nothing to the table and has not since proven that he can be effective at 130 or even 126, tbh.


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> Completely disagree about the Rigo fight. Rigo was spent, broke, and desperate and cashed himself out there ... brought absolutely nothing to the table and has not since proven that he can be effective at 130 or even 126, tbh.


I don't agree that he was spent, but for sure if he never fights again then it will be a mark against the win. As I said, the weight thing is not very relevant to me, because not one part of the victory came down to size, strength or fitness etc.


----------



## Lester1583




----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> He isn't controlling distance at 135. He's short and has t-rex arms. The footwork was successful in the lower weights because he was big enough to be able to alternate between close and mid range. At the higher weights, he simply does not have the frame which allows him to operate consistently from midrange. He is a pocket fighter when it's all said and done, and it's bizarre to picture Manny Pacquiao just standing there confused, not tagging Loma with devastating straight lefts and looping rights as Vasyl turns and pivots to his heart's content, then steps in to land a punch or two.
> 
> Pac has been outboxed before, but no one has ever gotten into the ring with him and come out thinking that they had an easy night. Pac would find him, in a way that Linares could only dream of, and eventually put the little tyke to sleep. You are welcome to disagree.


I disagree, i know the amateurs are different from pros, but he often fought bigger opponents. He feints like a mother fucker to close the distance and of course his pivots


----------



## Pedderrs

Strike said:


> No, I'm not incorrect. It's entirely subjective. I put Rigo up there with something like the JMM win for PBF. It's still a great win, despite not being a peak version due to the nature of the win. To me, the fashion of the Rigo win makes it outstanding, as none of the advantages of size or age came into play...no overpowering, no bullying, no stamina issue...just out techniqued the most technical. I believe GRJ is a fantastic talent, unfortunately he seems committed to doing nothing to prove it, so yeah that one might need to be downgraded.


The comparison would have worked if JMM quit in the 6th round against Floyd Mayweather and then faded into obscurity. Actually, he fought valiantly for the entire duration of the 12 rounds and then went on to secure his career best win by sparking out Manny Pacquio as a Welterweight. There's also the tiny detail of Floyd not having fought for almost a full 2 years prior to toying with JMM, one of the best fighters in the world at the time, albeit above his best weight. You're obviously entitled to your opinion, but for me the JMM win is infinitely more impressive for the reasons I've stated. It's not even a close run thing to be honest.


----------



## Strike

Pedderrs said:


> The comparison would have worked if JMM quit in the 6th round against Floyd Mayweather and then faded into obscurity. Actually, he fought valiantly for the entire duration of the 12 rounds and then went on to secure his career best win by sparking out Manny Pacquio as a Welterweight. There's also the tiny detail of Floyd not having fought for almost a full 2 years prior to toying with JMM, one of the best fighters in the world at the time, albeit above his best weight. You're obviously entitled to your opinion, but for me the JMM win is infinitely more impressive for the reasons I've stated. It's not even a close run thing to be honest.


That's an entirely separate point. I was addressing your point about it being an outstanding win. Overall...yeah the JMM win is better, but it was an off the top of the head comparison (hence the wording "up there with something like") of a win that is not elite but very good.


----------



## paloalto00

Lester1583 said:


>


Fucking beautiful. Since it's so subtle, people think he's getting hit when he's not


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> The comparison would have worked if JMM quit in the 6th round against Floyd Mayweather and then faded into obscurity. Actually, he fought valiantly for the entire duration of the 12 rounds and then went on to secure his career best win by sparking out Manny Pacquio as a Welterweight. There's also the tiny detail of Floyd not having fought for almost a full 2 years prior to toying with JMM, one of the best fighters in the world at the time, albeit above his best weight. You're obviously entitled to your opinion, but for me the JMM win is infinitely more impressive for the reasons I've stated. It's not even a close run thing to be honest.


My issue is, JMM moved up two weight classes to fight Floyd, and Floyd stop missed weight if my memory serves me correct. The size difference was very evident, and utilized. Loma on the ither hand, played chess with Rigo and still made him quit. I'm not saying size didn't play a role in tbe fight, but Loma fidnt bully him like he very well could have


----------



## REDC

delete


----------



## Pedderrs

Strike said:


> That's an entirely separate point. I was addressing your point about it being an outstanding win. Overall...yeah the JMM win is better, but it was an off the top of the head comparison (hence the wording "up there with something like") of a win that is not elite but very good.


If we're going through Floyd's wins and trying to think of one that would be comparable with Loma over Rigo in terms of quality, I think it would be something like...Shane Mosley. I think that's fair.


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> My issue is, JMM moved up two weight classes to fight Floyd, and Floyd stop missed weight if my memory serves me correct. The size difference was very evident, and utilized. Loma on the ither hand, played chess with Rigo and still made him quit. I'm not saying size didn't play a role in tbe fight, but Loma fidnt bully him like he very well could have


Floyd physically bullied JMM? I thought he stood him on his head in a boxing match. You also make no reference to Floyd being out of the ring for 2 years and JMM going on to prove himself to be a very very capable Welterweight.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> Floyd physically bullied JMM? I thought he stood him on his head in a boxing match. You also make no reference to Floyd being out of the ring for 2 years and JMM going on to prove himself to be a very very capable Welterweight.


Floyd was putting the heat on JMM and had him hurt a few times. JMM is a good,fighter, but he was not a welterweight.


----------



## REDC

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threa...-pedraza-fight-highlighted-this-again.620961/


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> Floyd was putting the heat on JMM and had him hurt a few times. JMM is a good,fighter, but he was not a welterweight.


He was a far far better Welterweight than Rigo was a Super Featherweight. A good enough Welterweight to have sparked Manny Pacquiao. A good enough Welterweight to have ran Bradley close.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> He was a far far better Welterweight than Rigo was a Super Featherweight. A good enough Welterweight to have sparked Manny Pacquiao. A good enough Welterweight to have ran Bradley close.


:uwot


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> :uwot


What are you disagreeing with exactly?


----------



## Sweet Pea

Seems to me he's just on the decline. Probably more due to the weight than age or ring rust (although probably a combination of both). He just isn't the same at 135. Watch his movement and reflexes from both of his fights at the weight and compare them to earlier performances. Lester was right. He looked downright flat-footed by his normal standards.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> He was a far far better Welterweight than Rigo was a Super Featherweight. A good enough Welterweight to have sparked Manny Pacquiao. A good enough Welterweight to have ran Bradley close.


He always had Manny's and arguably beat him a lot of the times. The Bradley about happened many many years later, and Bradley won very clearly


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> He always had Manny's and arguably beat him a lot of the times. The Bradley about happened many many years later, and Bradley won very clearly


And his most emphatic, dominating win was as a Welterweight? What's your point?

Do you know what you're arguing? I'm not sure you do buddy.


----------



## Dealt_with

Sweet Pea said:


> Seems to me he's just on the decline. Probably more due to the weight than age or ring rust (although probably a combination of both). He just isn't the same at 135. Watch his movement and reflexes from both of his fights at the weight and compare them to earlier performances. Lester was right. He looked downright flat-footed by his normal standards.


If you're fighting bigger guys you want to sit down on your punches. His opponent was more fleet footed than anyone he has fought, and more awkward than anyone he has fought. Constant movement, unorthodox punches and 1000 punches thrown. I really don't understand how people are this dumb, it's obviously relative to your opponent.


----------



## Sweet Pea

Dealt_with said:


> If you're fighting bigger guys you want to sit down on your punches. His opponent was more fleet footed than anyone he has fought, and more awkward than anyone he has fought. Constant movement, unorthodox punches and 1000 punches thrown. I really don't understand how people are this dumb, it's obviously relative to your opponent.


I think it's because Pedraza was better than Duran and a bad style matchup for him. Anyone he is actually going to face is a bad style for him, no matter how mediocre, but he would destroy any great from the past that he can't actually test himself against.


----------



## Dealt_with

Sweet Pea said:


> I think it's because Pedraza was better than Duran and a bad style matchup for him. Anyone he is actually going to face is a bad style for him, no matter how mediocre, but he would destroy any great from the past that he can't actually test himself against.


Styles you dumb fucker. Marriaga had moments and Rigo didn't.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> And his most emphatic, dominating win was as a Welterweight? What's your point?
> 
> Do you know what you're arguing? I'm not sure you do buddy.


3 years later against a guy he's beaten before. I'm not sure YOU understand what you're arguing.


----------



## steviebruno

paloalto00 said:


> 3 years later against a guy he's beaten before. I'm not sure YOU understand what you're arguing.


Did pretty well against Bradley at 147, aged 40. He'd also never officially beaten Pac in prior bouts, let alone as decisively as he did at 147.

Has Rigo even fought again, at 130 or otherwise?


----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> Did pretty well against Bradley at 147, aged 40. He'd also never officially beaten Pac in prior bouts, let alone as decisively as he did at 147.
> 
> Has Rigo even fought again, at 130 or otherwise?


Officially, but he definitely beat Pac before. Marquez also fought Bradley when he was filled in, Marquez had to jump two weight classes during his bout with Floyd.


----------



## steviebruno

paloalto00 said:


> Officially, but he definitely beat Pac before. Marquez also fought Bradley when he was filled in, Marquez had to jump two weight classes during his bout with Floyd.


Can't wait to see Rigo 'fill in' at 130.


----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> Can't wait to see Rigo 'fill in' at 130.


I wasn't disputing Rigo's size, the original argument was that Loma didn't use his size to beat him. A lot of people, including myself expected it to be a lot more competitive than what it was


----------



## steviebruno

paloalto00 said:


> I wasn't disputing Rigo's size, the original argument was that Loma didn't use his size to beat him. A lot of people, including myself expected it to be a lot more competitive than what it was


And you were all wrong for thinking that way. I called it a cashout as soon as I saw what weight the fight was at and it played out pretty much how I thought it would.

And you guys need to stop pretending that the size disparity had no effect on the fight. Rigo was slow, his punches had nothing on them, and Loma was literally stepping in and smothering him every chance he got. Why wouldn't the weight matter?

Weight classes exist for a reason.


----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> And you were all wrong for thinking that way. I called it a cashout as soon as I saw what weight the fight was at and it played out pretty much how I thought it would.
> 
> And you guys need to stop pretending that the size disparity had no effect on the fight. Rigo was slow, his punches had nothing on them, and Loma was literally stepping in and smothering him every chance he got. Why wouldn't the weight matter?
> 
> Weight classes exist for a reason.


There was no cash to be made, Rigo was the one pushing for the fight. Size always plays a role, but Loma outwitted him. Rigo couldn't even set up properly due to the movement


----------



## steviebruno

paloalto00 said:


> There was no cash to be made, Rigo was the one pushing for the fight. Size always plays a role, but Loma outwitted him. Rigo couldn't even set up properly due to the movement


He couldn't set up because he was stuck in cement, leaning over and freezing every time Loma threw a simple feint at him.

Credit to Vasyl Lomachenko. He tried to warn you guys that it wasn't a huge fight for him and you guys would not listen. After he won, he told you that Rigo was diminished and that it wasn't a big deal, and still you guys won't hear him.


----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> He couldn't set up because he was stuck in cement, leaning over and freezing every time Loma threw a simple feint at him.
> 
> Credit to Vasyl Lomachenko. He tried to warn you guys that it wasn't a huge fight for him and you guys would not listen. After he won, he told you that Rigo was diminished and that it wasn't a big deal, and still you guys won't hear him.


I never said it was a big deal? And he said Rigo was too small, nothing about him being diminished.


----------



## steviebruno

paloalto00 said:


> I never said it was a big deal? And he said Rigo was too small, nothing about him being diminished.


Did the size matter or not? Vasyl Lomachenko seems to think that it played a factor. I could say that Floyd didn't beat JMM with size, but I know better. The size disparity played a factor... maybe not in the outcome, but in how the fight played out.


----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> Did the size matter or not? Vasyl Lomachenko seems to think that it played a factor. I could say that Floyd didn't beat JMM with size, but I know better. The size disparity played a factor... maybe not in the outcome, but in how the fight played out.


Size of course matters, but you're again avoiding the fact that Loma made him quit due to shutting him down and not walking him down. Floyd was the aggressor and on the front foot against JMM, so you couldn't say that either way. It seems like you're just anti-loma rather than just speculative


----------



## steviebruno

paloalto00 said:


> Size of course matters, but you're again avoiding the fact that Loma made him quit due to shutting him down and not walking him down. Floyd was the aggressor and on the front foot against JMM, so you couldn't say that either way. It seems like you're just anti-loma rather than just speculative


Loma was in Rigo's chest all fight. Feinted, waited for Rigo to freeze and lean over, then step in and hit him in the face. Wash, rinse, repeat. Rigo did not have the mobility to properly react to Loma's feints (too heavy), nor the physicality to keep Loma off of him once Vasyl stepped in (too weak).

...Maybe watch the fight again?


----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> Loma was in Rigo's chest all fight. Feinted, waited for Rigo to freeze and lean over, then step in and hit him in the face. Wash, rinse, repeat. Rigo did not have the mobility to properly react to Loma's feints (too heavy), nor the physicality to keep Loma off of him once Vasyl stepped in (too weak).
> 
> ...Maybe watch the fight again?


Lol, are you implying Rigo was too heavy to move? Lmfao. So...because Loma used his foot movement and fought at mid-range like he normally does, that means he was using his size against Rigo? Ffs.


----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> Loma was in Rigo's chest all fight. *Feinted, waited for Rigo to freeze and lean over, then step in *and hit him in the face. Wash, rinse, repeat. Rigo did not have the mobility to properly react to Loma's feints (too heavy), nor the physicality to keep Loma off of him once Vasyl stepped in (too weak).
> 
> ...Maybe watch the fight again?


Say that again, slowly. You just admitted that Loma out-witted Rigo.


----------



## steviebruno

paloalto00 said:


> Say that again, slowly. You just admitted that Loma out-witted Rigo.


He didn't have to go very deep into his bag of tricks, now did he? Wonder why...


----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> He didn't have to go very deep into his bag of tricks, now did he? Wonder why...


Rigo's bag of tricks consist of bending at the waist and pivoting. You already said yourself why that didn't work, Loma waited and beat him to it.


----------



## steviebruno

paloalto00 said:


> Rigo's bag of tricks consist of bending at the waist and pivoting. You already said yourself why that didn't work, Loma waited and beat him to it.


A real chess match, eh? It should be common knowledge that a 37 year old bantemweight would give a poor account of himself at super featherweight, but I guess it isn't.


----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> A real chess match, eh? It should be common knowledge that a 37 year old bantemweight would give a poor account of himself at super featherweight, but I guess it isn't.


That 37 year old is the one who pushed for this fight and wanted to move up. Also, no one wanted to fight this 37 year old. Anyways, why are you so stuck on this fight anyway? Why are you so anti-loma? I noticed a large portion of the Black community hates the guy, despite his great performances


----------



## Pedderrs

And there it is...

Anyone who wants to deviate from the 'Loma is a demi-god' narrative eventually gets branded 'anti-loma'.


----------



## steviebruno

paloalto00 said:


> That 37 year old is the one who pushed for this fight and wanted to move up. Also, no one wanted to fight this 37 year old. Anyways, why are you so stuck on this fight anyway? Why are you so anti-loma? I noticed a large portion of the Black community hates the guy, despite his great performances


LOL. Race card played.

Guillermo.Rigondeaux did not want to move up. As you so brilliantly stated, no one else wanted to fight him. Rigo moved up for the payday and nothing more. He had, for years, refused to fight Loma at 126 and begged for a catchweight of 124. Then he turns 37 and all of a sudden wants to fight at 130? No sir.


----------



## steviebruno

Pedderrs said:


> And there it is...
> 
> Anyone who wants to deviate from the 'Loma is a demi-god' narrative eventually gets branded 'anti-loma'.


I was accused by @TFG of being racist against Anthony Joshua. Still laughing about that one.


----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> LOL. Race card played.
> 
> Guillermo.Rigondeaux did not want to move up. As you so brilliantly stated, no one else wanted to fight him. Rigo moved up for the payday and nothing more. He had, for years, refused to fight Loma at 126 and begged for a catchweight of 124. Then he turns 37 and all of a sudden wants to fight at 130? No sir.


It's been fairly accurate though, I think a lot of the hate for Loma is due to him being white.

There was no pay-day though, Rigo made 400k on that fight. He specifically said he'd go up 2 weight classes to fight Loma, this discussion all started after Loma started being touted as "the matrix." I'm not sure if you genuinely don't have your facts together or if you're purposely presenting false information.


----------



## steviebruno

paloalto00 said:


> It's been fairly accurate though, I think a lot of the hate for Loma is due to him being white.
> 
> There was no pay-day though, Rigo made 400k on that fight. He specifically said he'd go up 2 weight classes to fight Loma, this discussion all started after Loma started being touted as "the matrix." I'm not sure if you genuinely don't have your facts together or if you're purposely presenting false information.


SMH. The hate is because he is overhyped. He is a great fighter, but HBO, and by extension the media, continually try to pass him off as some instant legend of the sport. The truth is that he is in a very long list of great small fighters. Very, very long.

As for Rigo wanting to fight Loma because he wanted to enter the Matrix, well now you're just talking silly.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedrin1787 said:


> Rigo saying he'll fight Lomachenko at any weight.
> 
> Edit, this isn't an old interview, it was published yesterday.
> 
> He was saying this before and changed his mind once Loma's team tried to make the fight. Here he goes again.


@steviebruno You were saying?

How is he over-hyped? He is making guys quit, and look absolutely silly. No one has done this before. I'm not saying he's an ATG, but if you're saying he isn't P4P top 3, you're just hating.


----------



## steviebruno

paloalto00 said:


> @steviebruno You were saying?
> 
> How is he over-hyped? He is making guys quit, and look absolutely silly. No one has done this before. I'm not saying he's an ATG, but if you're saying he isn't P4P top 3, you're just hating.


Sounds alot different than when he was begging for a catchweight of 124, no? Why suddenly gung ho about fighting "anywhere Lomachenko wants", at age 37? It's really quite simple. Loma already explained it to you, but you don't want to listen to him. Maybe he's a self-hating racist, am I right?

He's top 3 p4p. Hell, he may be number one. But he fights in a barren era and ranks where he is by default... and the other guys don't receive nearly as much unwarranted hype as he does.


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> ... and the other guys don't receive nearly as much unwarranted hype as he does.


What other guys? He receives hype mainly due to 3 things...

1. The eye test. It is clear to anyone who knows the sport and has watched a lot of great fighters, that technically he is outstandingly good, and a rare level of talent. That's not shitting on Sugar Ray Robinson, SRL, Sweet Pea, PBF, Ali, RJJ, Armstrong or anyone else...it's just accepting that he is a talent that is rare, just like those other guys were.

2. Winning a world title in his 3rd pro bout after being cheated out of winning one in his 2nd. No more needs to be said on that as an achievement really.

3. Having 2 Olympic golds, 2 World golds and an amateur record of 396-1 with the one loss avenged twice.

If those three things combined don't make you sit up and want to watch every second of the journey before it comes to an end then I don't know what to say. To me, this sort of talent transcends my support of fellow Brits, just like RJJ did. I usually want British fighters to win, but when Woods faced RJJ...I wanted RJJ to win, because it felt a privilege to witness a once in a generation talent. Lomachenko is the same for me, and that's from someone who was initially sceptical/slightly irritated by the hype of him turning pro.


----------



## steviebruno

Strike said:


> What other guys? He receives hype mainly due to 3 things...
> 
> 1. The eye test. It is clear to anyone who knows the sport and has watched a lot of great fighters, that technically he is outstandingly good, and a rare level of talent. That's not shitting on Sugar Ray Robison, SRL, Sweet Pea, PBF, Ali, RJJ, Armstrong or anyone else...it's just accepting that he is a talent that is rare, just like those other guys were.
> 
> 2. Winning a world title in his 3rd pro bout after being cheated out of winning one in his 2nd. No more needs to be said on that as an achievement really.
> 
> 3. Having 2 Olympic golds, 2 World golds and an amateur record of 396-1 with the one loss avenged twice.
> 
> If those three things combined don't make you sit up and want to watch every second of the journey before it comes to an end then I don't know what to say. To me, this sort of talent transcends my support of fellow Brits, just like RJJ did. I usually want British fighters to win, but when Woods faced RJJ...I wanted RJJ to win, because it felt a privilege to witness a once in a generation talent. Lomachenko is the same for me, and that's from someone who was initially sceptical/slightly irritated by the hype of him turning pro.


I don't fenel that he's a once in a generation talent any more than MAB, EM, or JMM were his overall PROFESSIONAL resum may well fall.short. He was the greatest amateur in history, and entered the pro ranks more prepared and hyoed than anyone has ever been, and received more opportunities than any neophyte ever has. Immediate HBO dates. Immediate title shots. Immediate rematch, after failing to win the title the first time. It should have been of no surprise that he defeated the weak titlests that inhabited his division. The shock was in him losing.

I mean, he's not my cup of tea. But to each his own. I'm not the one that has to explain away his lackluster performances.


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> I don't fenel that he's a once in a generation talent any more than MAB, EM, or JMM were his overall PROFESSIONAL resum may well fall.short. He was the greatest amateur in history, and entered the pro ranks more prepared and hyoed than anyone has ever been, and received more opportunities than any neophyte ever has. Immediate HBO dates. Immediate title shots. Immediate rematch, after failing to win the title the first time. It should have been of no surprise that he defeated the weak titlests that inhabited his division. The shock was in him losing.
> 
> I mean, he's not my cup of tea. But to each his own. I'm not the one that has to explain away his lackluster performances.


I find your bias ridiculous frankly. Lacklustre performances in which he is dwarfed by a much bigger opponent and controls the fight and wins it convincingly? MAB, EM and JMM are recognised as ATG fighters, however if you don't think he is technically better than EM or that his footwork is clearly superior to all 3 then I'm at a loss for words.


----------



## steviebruno

Strike said:


> I find your bias ridiculous frankly. Lacklustre performances in which he is dwarfed by a much bigger opponent and controls the fight and wins it convincingly? MAB, EM and JMM are recognised as ATG fighters, however if you don't think he is technically better than EM or that his footwork is clearly superior to all 3 then I'm at a loss for words.


There's more to being a technical fighter than pivoting and feinting. Does he throw a better technical left hook than MAB? Does he throw straights and jab more technically than Morales? Is he more masterful at countering in combination than JMM? Every great fighter has their own technical attributes that they excel at more than most.


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> There's more to being a technical fighter than pivoting and feinting. Does he throw a better technical left hook than MAB? Does he throw straights and jab more technically than Morales? Is he more masterful at countering in combination than JMM? Every great fighter has their own technical attributes that they excel at more than most.


His jab is technically as good as Morales' yes. Is he as good at combination counters as JMM? Yes. He doesn't need to be better in every area, if he is pretty much equal in most areas and then clearly above in others. I find it bizarre that his footwork is being simplified to "pivots". I am not even talking about the eye catching, jump around to the side move when attacking, every element of his footwork is outstanding.

He takes half steps in and out to draw shots that he then narrowly evades, but which leaves openings for counters. He cuts off the ring with small steps to the side when attacking, and moves to the side of the opponent to blindside them. He almost always gets his lead foot on the outside of orthodox opponents' lead to nullify their power hand, while giving him room for the left. On the back foot he is also outstanding, he turns opponents, he uses their own body when in close to control their position and allow him to move around them.

And then yeah, you have the ridiculous feints, the dummy steps that mean opponents are constantly seeing movement and second guessing themselves. This is a guy who is small with short arms, he has no right to be at this weight and is hugely disadvantaged in reach and height against people like Linares and Pedraza. The only thing he really lacks is major power, although most of the shots he throws are not sat down on, if he had natural KO power like Inoue or a guy like Hamed had...fuck me, he'd be unbeatable.


----------



## paloalto00

steviebruno said:


> There's more to being a technical fighter than pivoting and feinting. Does he throw a better technical left hook than MAB? Does he throw straights and jab more technically than Morales? Is he more masterful at countering in combination than JMM? Every great fighter has their own technical attributes that they excel at more than most.


He's a southpaw, so no, he does not throw technical LEFT hooks. A lot of his "piddy pat shots" are to set something else up. His defense is phenomenal, is blocking and slipping shots while still coming at you. You're faulting this guy for his resume, yet no one wants to fight him. Who else (not Duran) is making CHAMPIONS quit from being outclassed


----------



## Pedderrs

What does JMM do better than Loma @Strike? Who wins in a H2H at 126-130?


----------



## Strike

Pedderrs said:


> What does JMM do better than Loma @Strike? Who wins in a H2H at 126-130?


He hits harder, and his jab as a weapon rather than a decoy/range finder is better. He also maintains a higher output. Loma wins on points.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> What does JMM do better than Loma @Strike? Who wins in a H2H at 126-130?


I hate to say it man, but H2H I don't see JMM beating him at that weight. The people who have the most success against him were lanky guys that could fight on the outside. Jose Ramirez actually did well against him in the amateurs


----------



## Strike

I should add, that just because someone fights more in a given style does not mean they are fundamentally better at that thing. JMM was more of a counter puncher than Loma...but just because he is the classic counter puncher and was great at it, does not mean I am going to say "he was a better counter puncher" as I don't think he is, I just think that stylistically that was more how he fought, whereas Loma likes to press more.

PBF was actually an excellent inside fighter who controlled people in the clinch, worked them with short shots and protected himself while tiring and scoring on anyone who got inside...but we would not think of him as being an inside fighter as that's not where he chose to operate and do his best work most of the time.


----------



## paloalto00

Strike said:


> I should add, that just because someone fights more in a given style does not mean they are fundamentally better at that thing. JMM was more of a counter puncher than Loma...but just because he is the classic counter puncher and was great at it, does not mean I am going to say "he was a better counter puncher" as I don't think he is, I just think that stylistically that was more how he fought, whereas Loma likes to press more.
> 
> *PBF was actually an excellent inside fighter who controlled people in the clinch*, worked them with short shots and protected himself while tiring and scoring on anyone who got inside...but we would not think of him as being an inside fighter as that's not where he chose to operate and do his best work most of the time.


He was actually in the dominant position anytime he and Mcgregor clinched, Mcgregor even said he was surprised by his head position, frame, and strength in the clinch


----------



## Strike

paloalto00 said:


> He was actually in the dominant position anytime he and Mcgregor clinched, Mcgregor even said he was surprised by his head position, frame, and strength in the clinch


Likewise with Hatton who really was an inside fighter, even though he had an underrated jab and could box more static guys like Tackie. Mayweather nullified most of Hatton's inside work...it's an overlooked area of his game (by many but obviously not all).


----------



## TFG

Pedderrs said:


> What does JMM do better than Loma @Strike? Who wins in a H2H at 126-130?


His defense is markedly better, he is a better combination puncher due to his volume and variety, his jab is better and so is his footwork both offensively and defensively.

Prime for prime he beats Marquez on points.


----------



## paloalto00

Does anyone feel like the pro game is hurting Loma? I know that sounds stupid, but hear me out. In the amateurs, he had to consistently fight the top guys. He was much more mobile, and was aggressive on working to get on the inside. Now these guys are levels below him, and I can see he's not as sharp. Look at the GRJ fight, he was sharp and very on the ball, now he looks lazy


----------



## steviebruno

Well then I can see why you all have him ranked so highly; you already have him winning hypothetical matchups against proven legends, based on an eye test vs second rate opposition. I can't really argue with that.

You guys just don't understand how great fighters often nullify and limit each other's strengths.


----------



## REDC




----------



## REDC

paloalto00 said:


> Does anyone feel like the pro game is hurting Loma? I know that sounds stupid, but hear me out. In the amateurs, he had to consistently fight the top guys. He was much more mobile, and was aggressive on working to get on the inside. Now these guys are levels below him, and I can see he's not as sharp. Look at the GRJ fight, he was sharp and very on the ball, now he looks lazy


I agree although I'm not sure lazy is the right word. I think he looked fresher vs GRJ? As technical/tactically sound as he is he does take plenty of punches by making a fight. 10 years in the ams is like 5 in the pro's. It seems like it takes him more effort? I dunno. It's interesting for sure.


----------



## Zopilote

Strike said:


> He hits harder, and his jab as a weapon rather than a decoy/range finder is better. He also maintains a higher output. Loma wins on points.


Won't argue about the jab and output, but Loma hits harder? I don't think I agree on that one.

Loma is an excellent combination puncher but I think JMM was better in that department. Dude was crazy with the combinations. I think JMM fought much better under pressure, while Loma handles boxers better. I think Juan was the better counter puncher overall. Footwork without a doubt goes to Loma, dudes footwork is insane.


----------



## REDC

__
http://instagr.am/p/BrOSWUUAEha/


----------



## Strike

Zopilote said:


> Won't argue about the jab and output, but Loma hits harder? I don't think I agree on that one.
> 
> Loma is an excellent combination puncher but I think JMM was better in that department. Dude was crazy with the combinations. I think JMM fought much better under pressure, while Loma handles boxers better. I think Juan was the better counter puncher overall. Footwork without a doubt goes to Loma, dudes footwork is insane.


I meant JMM hits harder. Pedders asked me what does JMM do better. I said he hits harder, his jab as a weapon rather than a decoy/range finder is also better and you could argue output too. Loma starts slowly at times, as does Usyk...I presume it is part of the system, and does not always turn it up until later. JMM would open up when opportunities were there and be less likely to coast.


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> Well then I can see why you all have him ranked so highly; you already have him winning hypothetical matchups against proven legends, based on an eye test vs second rate opposition. I can't really argue with that.
> 
> You guys just don't understand how great fighters often nullify and limit each other's strengths.


That's all you can ever do if people don't exist in the same eras. If someone had said Clay beats Liston when Clay had just been dropped by Cooper, they would have been laughed at by most fight fans. When Pac got stopped on body shots by a flyweight, if you'd then shown someone footage of Hatton from the future, busting up Tszyu, stopping Castillo and so on, and said "Pac starches that guy up at 140"...what would you expect the reaction to be?

I can watch footage of Morales and JMM and clearly see that Loma is FAR superior in his defence, has markedly better offensive footwork, more variety in his attacks and say I think a time machine putting them prime vs prime sees Loma win. I don't state it as a fact, but to imply it's based off nothing is wrong. Continually dismissing all his opp as "second rate" is disingenuous too. MAB got battered by Junior Jones, dropped by McKinney and was in a close battle until the 12th round stoppage...but so what? He is still a legend, but he struggled with "second rate" fighters on more than one occasion if all of Loma's wins are second rate.

I know that MAB, Morales and JMM have never fought anyone who moves like Loma. MAB and Morales were generally not hard to hit, which is why they were in so many exciting fights. I have no issue with someone picking all three of those guys over Loma, they're legends in the sport and I'm not going to start trying to pick them apart to criticise them, but I think Loma's movement, judgement of space and ability to adapt to multiple styles would see him beat them on points. It's not based on seeing a highlight reel of him jumping around the side of an opponent while some cool music plays in the video.


----------



## Zopilote

Strike said:


> I meant JMM hits harder. Pedders asked me what does JMM do better. I said he hits harder, his jab as a weapon rather than a decoy/range finder is also better and you could argue output too. Loma starts slowly at times, as does Usyk...I presume it is part of the system, and does not always turn it up until later. JMM would open up when opportunities were there and be less likely to coast.


Ah okay, misunderstood your post at first :good


----------



## steviebruno

Strike said:


> That's all you can ever do if people don't exist in the same eras. If someone had said Clay beats Liston when Clay had just been dropped by Cooper, they would have been laughed at by most fight fans. When Pac got stopped on body shots by a flyweight, if you'd then shown someone footage of Hatton from the future, busting up Tszyu, stopping Castillo and so on, and said "Pac starches that guy up at 140"...what would you expect the reaction to be?
> 
> I can watch footage of Morales and JMM and clearly see that Loma is FAR superior in his defence, has markedly better offensive footwork, more variety in his attacks and say I think a time machine putting them prime vs prime sees Loma win. I don't state it as a fact, but to imply it's based off nothing is wrong. Continually dismissing all his opp as "second rate" is disingenuous too. MAB got battered by Junior Jones, dropped by McKinney and was in a close battle until the 12th round stoppage...but so what? He is still a legend, but he struggled with "second rate" fighters on more than one occasion if all of Loma's wins are second rate.
> 
> I know that MAB, Morales and JMM have never fought anyone who moves like Loma. MAB and Morales were generally not hard to hit, which is why they were in so many exciting fights. I have no issue with someone picking all three of those guys over Loma, they're legends in the sport and I'm not going to start trying to pick them apart to criticise them, but I think Loma's movement, judgement of space and ability to adapt to multiple styles would see him beat them on points. It's not based on seeing a highlight reel of him jumping around the side of an opponent while some cool music plays in the video.


I'm pretty sure MAB's historical standing would have taken a massive hit had he not recovered from Jones and Mckinney and actually PROVEN himself against someone like a Morales, or even a Hamed on a smaller scale. No one was going to say, 'yeah, he lost to Jones and all, but the eye test! Look at that left hook and those combinations!'. That's not exactly how ranking ATG fighters works. The eye test is for contemporary viewing. When it comes to history, people are going to want to see who you fought, who you beat, and how you beat them. It would also help to have more than 20 fights.

I don't know whg you think these guys wouldn't have a plan to deal with his movement. If JMM wants you to move to your left, he'll dig his left hook into your right cup repeatedly. Barrera will do the same thing, and might have the accuracy to clip his liver a couple of times in the process. EM will try to keep him at the end of his jab and stab him in the gut with rights to the body. There are nuanced things that experienced fighters do marginalize someone's strengths. They wouldn't be out there trying to have a dance contest with the guy. Maybe Loma's skill would win out, maybe it wouldn't. But he'd have a hell of a lot to deal with, and half of that shadow boxing shyt he pulls wouldn't even work against the very best in history.


----------



## tommygun711

personally I still find it silly that people think he would beat marquez, barrera and morales. These 3 fighters simply have more volume and depth than Loma does to the point that I find it hard to compare them to Loma. While people say those 3 fighters never fought anyone like Loma, the opposite is even more true, Loma will never get tested by someone the caliber of those 3 fighters. I think Barrera in particular with his pressure and body work would have a lot of success vs Loma. There's also really no one in this era that can truly push him to the limit outside of potentially Mikey Garcia and _maybe _Crawford at a catchweight (which is a tough proposition anyway given the size difference)


Strike said:


> . MAB got dropped by McKinney and was in a close battle until the 12th round stoppage....


Agree with a lot of the post, but I wouldnt really say he was in a close battle with McKinney. Aside from McKinney's knockdown, Barrera battered him all over the ring and scored multiple knockdowns. It wasn't too competitive


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> I'm pretty sure MAB's historical standing would have taken a massive hit had he not recovered from Jones and Mckinney and actually PROVEN himself against someone like a Morales, or even a Hamed on a smaller scale. No one was going to say, 'yeah, he lost to Jones and all, but the eye test! Look at that left hook and those combinations!'. That's not exactly how ranking ATG fighters works. The eye test is for contemporary viewing. When it comes to history, people are going to see who you fought, who you beat, and how you beat them. It would also help to have more than 20 fights.


Of course, but I am not asking anyone to rank Loma as the top of the pile on record, I am talking solely about hypothetical fights. As for the "more than 20 fights"...what does it matter if you have 40 fights and 25 of them are way below world title level?

Take someone like Joe Frazier. At most, he had 17 fights at world title level, and his record was 13-4 at that level. He is an ATG. He was an Olympic gold medal winner. If Loma retires, at say, 20-1 with 20 of those bouts at world title level...why would that preclude him from an ATG discussion? It wouldn't. JMM has 25 fights for or at world title level (including interim titles, guys like Peden who were not for a title but in eliminators etc). His record in those is 18-6-1.

You cannot compare these careers directly of course, because Loma came in with more experience and got a shot crazy early due to backing. But by the same token, you cannot just hold up X amount of wins as some symbol of greatness, when a ton of those early wins for any top fighter tend to be guys with no chance and no tools capable of making it a tough fight.



steviebruno said:


> I don't know whg you think these guys wouldn't have a plan to deal with his movement. If JMM wants you to move to your left, he'll dig his left hook into your right cup repeatedly. Barrera will do the same thing, and might have the accuracy to clip his liver a couple of times in the process. EM will try to keep him at the end of his jab and stab him in the gut with rights to the body. There are nuanced things that experienced fighters do marginalize someone's strengths. They wouldn't be out there trying to have a dance contest with the guy. Maybe Loma's skill would win out, maybe it wouldn't. But he'd have a hell of a lot to deal with, and half of that shadow boxing shyt he pulls wouldn't even work against the very best in history.


I am not saying they wouldn't have a plan, I am saying they never faced anyone even remotely like him in terms of movement, skill and variation of attack and defence. The Morales-Raheem fight has already been posted...he didn't keep Raheem on the end of his jab or take him to war, he struggled with the movement and boxing. Now, Morales was on the downward slide, BUT he was 29 and had just beaten Pac. This was not some shot Morales, just not him at his best, but yes I see movement from someone who is constantly changing angles as being something he would not find comfortable.

At the end of the day, I agree that a lack of top opponents will cost him on his all time standing, but in terms of how I rate his ability and what I think he would do against the best..that's different. I agree that he needs some better names to cement himself, but I don't agree that he needs to have had over 20 fights to do so. If he beat Tank, Garcia, Valdez for example and then moved up and beat Crawford (not suggesting this happens)...then it would not really matter than he would have less than 20 fights would it?


----------



## Strike

tommygun711 said:


> Agree with a lot of the post, but I wouldnt really say he was in a close battle with McKinney. Aside from McKinney's knockdown, Barrera battered him all over the ring and scored multiple knockdowns. It wasn't too competitive


I would have to rewatch the whole thing, but I don't remember him being miles ahead on the cards...just ahead.


----------



## Zopilote

REDC said:


> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BrOSWUUAEha/


The legend of Salido continues to grow!


----------



## Pedderrs

TFG said:


> His defense is markedly better, he is a better combination puncher due to his volume and variety, his jab is better and so is his footwork both offensively and defensively.
> 
> Prime for prime he beats Marquez on points.


:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## REDC

TFG said:


> His defense is markedly better, he is a better combination puncher due to his volume and variety, his jab is better and so is his footwork both offensively and defensively.
> 
> Prime for prime he beats Marquez on points.


Bigger fan of JMM than Loma but I agree.


----------



## TFG

Pedderrs said:


> :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


Oh dear.

You need to watch more boxing Pedro.

Actually nah, you just clearly dislike Loma :lol:


----------



## TFG

REDC said:


> Bigger fan of JMM than Loma but I agree.


Yeah same, JMM is one of my favourite fighters ever.

Lomachenko is visibly better in a lot of areas though.


----------



## steviebruno

Strike said:


> Of course, but I am not asking anyone to rank Loma as the top of the pile on record, I am talking solely about hypothetical fights. As for the "more than 20 fights"...what does it matter if you have 40 fights and 25 of them are way below world title level?
> 
> Take someone like Joe Frazier. At most, he had 17 fights at world title level, and his record was 13-4 at that level. He is an ATG. He was an Olympic gold medal winner. If Loma retires, at say, 20-1 with 20 of those bouts at world title level...why would that preclude him from an ATG discussion? It wouldn't. JMM has 25 fights for or at world title level (including interim titles, guys like Peden who were not for a title but in eliminators etc). His record in those is 18-6-1.
> 
> You cannot compare these careers directly of course, because Loma came in with more experience and got a shot crazy early due to backing. But by the same token, you cannot just hold up X amount of wins as some symbol of greatness, when a ton of those early wins for any top fighter tend to be guys with no chance and no tools capable of making it a tough fight.
> 
> I am not saying they wouldn't have a plan, I am saying they never faced anyone even remotely like him in terms of movement, skill and variation of attack and defence. The Morales-Raheem fight has already been posted...he didn't keep Raheem on the end of his jab or take him to war, he struggled with the movement and boxing. Now, Morales was on the downward slide, BUT he was 29 and had just beaten Pac. This was not some shot Morales, just not him at his best, but yes I see movement from someone who is constantly changing angles as being something he would not find comfortable.
> 
> At the end of the day, I agree that a lack of top opponents will cost him on his all time standing, but in terms of how I rate his ability and what I think he would do against the best..that's different. I agree that he needs some better names to cement himself, but I don't agree that he needs to have had over 20 fights to do so. If he beat Tank, Garcia, Valdez for example and then moved up and beat Crawford (not suggesting this happens)...then it would not really matter than he would have less than 20 fights would it?


C'mon man, Erik Morales was pretty far gone against Zahir Raheem, was the smaller man, and had never fought at 135 prior to that IIRC. His conditioning was pretty poor for that fight.

Joe Frazier needed that victory over Muhammad Ali, and the resulting trilogy, to cement himself as an ATG. He was an estsblished champ, but his resume needed that icing. There are no Alis around anymore, so someone like a Loma would need the volume that people like Quarry, Chuvalo, Bonavena, Ellis, Jones, etc. added to Joe's resume, AND he'd need a win over a Mikey Garcia and a Terrance Crawford to make himself comparable.


----------



## ChampionsForever

Morales had just beaten Pac and was about 28 years old when he lost to Raheem wasn’t he?


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> C'mon man, Erik Morales was pretty far gone against Zahir Raheem, was the smaller man, and had never fought at 135 prior to that IIRC. His conditioning was pretty poor for that fight.


Eh? Morales is 5ft 8" with a reach of 72". Raheem is 5ft 6" with a reach of 70". Morales had a 2 inch advantage on both height and reach. He was not the smaller man bar (at a push) frame....and the difference is MILES off that of Loma and the lightweights. For sure, I agree...Morales was not peak when he lost to Raheem...but let's not pretend he was shot. He had just beaten Manny. That's Manny 4 years before he iced Hatton. He had lost a close battle with MAB only 10 months before. Not peak Morales at all...but way off being some shot version.



steviebruno said:


> Joe Frazier needed that victory over Muhammad Ali, and the resulting trilogy, to cement himself as an ATG. He was an estsblished champ, but his resume needed that icing. There are no Alis around anymore, so someone like a Loma would need the volume that people like Quarry, Chuvalo, Bonavena, Ellis, Jones, etc. added to Joe's resume, AND he'd need a win over a Mikey Garcia and a Terrance Crawford to make himself comparable.


I sort of agree. My point is that not everyone can have the luxury of great opponents. Tyson, Lewis and Wlad never had what Ali, Frazier and Foreman had, but we can still place them based off various factors. Of course comp matters....and it will and should downgrade Loma's all time ranking in years to come, that alters nothing about what I the think of him in terms of H2H.

I think Lewis smashes the shit of Louis in most H2H fights...I rank Louis above Lewis in my all time heavies. That's just the nature of sports and rankings.


----------



## steviebruno

Strike said:


> Eh? Morales is 5ft 8" with a reach of 72". Raheem is 5ft 6" with a reach of 70". Morales had a 2 inch advantage on both height and reach. He was not the smaller man bar (at a push) frame....and the difference is MILES off that of Loma and the lightweights. For sure, I agree...Morales was not peak when he lost to Raheem...but let's not pretend he was shot. He had just beaten Manny. That's Manny 4 years before he iced Hatton. He had lost a close battle with MAB only 10 months before. Not peak Morales at all...but way off being some shot version.
> [QUOTE="steviebruno, post: 3599328, member: 2194"
> Joe Frazier needed that victory over Muhammad Ali, and the resulting trilogy, to cement himself as an ATG. He was an estsblished champ, but his resume needed that icing. There are no Alis around anymore, so someone like a Loma would need the volume that people like Quarry, Chuvalo, Bonavena, Ellis, Jones, etc. added to Joe's resume, AND he'd need a win over a Mikey Garcia and a Terrance Crawford to make himself comparable.





> I sort of agree. My point is that not everyone can have the luxury of great opponents. Tyson, Lewis and Wlad never had what Ali, Frazier and Foreman had, but we can still place them based off various factors. Of course comp matters....and it will and should downgrade Loma's all time ranking in years to come, that alters nothing about what I the think of him in terms of H2H.
> 
> I think Lewis smashes the shit of Louis in most H2H fights...I rank Louis above Lewis in my all time heavies. That's just the nature of sports and rankings.


To say that Morales had just finished a fight with Barrera ignores the toll that such a fight takes on a guy. Joe Frazier 'just finished' the Thrilla in Manilla with Ali... and he was completely done immediately after that.

That Rahim fight was the first of four consecutive losses by Erik Morales, culminating with a loss to David Diaz. EM spent the remainder of his career carefully selecting opponents based upon style and was never elite again.

... And so I'd like to have seen what Loma would have left after THREE Barrera fights, a fight with Manny Pacquiao, Jesus Chavez, Carlos Hernandez, etc. but I never will... although he already appears to be slipping even within his own limited pool of opposition.

You are right about Lewis beating Louis, but he is essentially a completely different weight class from historical heavies. It is much harder to use your argument when you choose guys of comparable sizes.


----------



## Zopilote

Regarding Loma vs JMM...at 126lbs I see it as 50/50. I’d slightly favor Loma at 130lbs, and would favor JMM at 135lbs. All on points, in very close and very likely controversial fights.


----------



## rjjfan

REDC said:


> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BrOSWUUAEha/


Yeah come in 25kg overweight, rehydrate another 10kg and punch the balls like a speed bag. Dats sum boolsheet. @Zopilote


----------



## Zopilote

rjjfan said:


> Yeah come in 25kg overweight, rehydrate another 10kg and punch the balls like a speed bag. Dats sum boolsheet. @Zopilote


Salido W12 Loma baybay!


----------



## Pedderrs

Zopilote said:


> Regarding Loma vs JMM...at 126lbs I see it as 50/50. I'd slightly favor Loma at 130lbs, and would favor JMM at 135lbs. All on points, in very close and very likely controversial fights.


I honestly see no basis to favour Loma against MAB or JMM. I'm surprised you do. So far the reasoning seems to amount to citing both men at their worst during professional careers that spanned three decades. That's a disingenuous way to argue. 'MAB struggled with Mckinney'. Mckinney was a good fighter and MAB won the majority of the rounds all except for a handful. He was also a 22 year old making no less than 5 world title defenses a year. No, you take both guys at their best. At his best, MAB was outboxing Naseem Hamed and out-fighting Erik Morales. At Lomachenko's best, he was outboxing Gary Russell and outfighting Jorge Linares. I don't actually make a prediction here. Because it's largely pointless. No, I'll wait for Lomachenko to fight an A level opponent first.

Let's face it, if Garcia beats Loma (and he could), then everyone here changes their prediction to JMM KO.


----------



## Strike

Pedderrs said:


> At his best, MAB was outboxing Naseem Hamed and out-fighting Erik Morales. At Lomachenko's best, he was outboxing Gary Russell and outfighting Jorge Linares.


Outboxing GRJ is far more impressive than outboxing the, post Brendan Ingle, Hamed who just looked to land a bomb. Hamed was abandoning his boxing more and more as he progressed through his career, and the guy who won the European title off Belcastro was long gone by even the time he faced Kelley. He was not throwing fast punches in bunches, he was lunging and winging haymakers.

Look how sloppy he looked in numerous fights before. Sanchez, Soto, P. Ingle and Kelley. He just always had the get out with his power. But yes, MAB boxed beautifully that night, but it was nothing like as testing as having someone throw very fast, technically sound punches in the way GRJ throws. That isn't to say GRJ ranks above Hamed on an all time list...clearly not.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> I honestly see no basis to favour Loma against MAB or JMM. I'm surprised you do. So far the reasoning seems to amount to citing both men at their worst during professional careers that spanned three decades. That's a disingenuous way to argue. 'MAB struggled with Mckinney'. Mckinney was a good fighter and MAB won the majority of the rounds all except for a handful. He was also a 22 year old making no less than 5 world title defenses a year. No, you take both guys at their best. At his best, MAB was outboxing Naseem Hamed and out-fighting Erik Morales. At Lomachenko's best, he was outboxing Gary Russell and outfighting Jorge Linares. I don't actually make a prediction here. Because it's largely pointless. No, I'll wait for Lomachenko to fight an A level opponent first.
> 
> Let's face it, if Garcia beats Loma (and he could), then everyone here changes their prediction to JMM KO.


:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl


----------



## Zopilote

Pedderrs said:


> I honestly see no basis to favour Loma against MAB or JMM. I'm surprised you do. So far the reasoning seems to amount to citing both men at their worst during professional careers that spanned three decades. That's a disingenuous way to argue. 'MAB struggled with Mckinney'. Mckinney was a good fighter and MAB won the majority of the rounds all except for a handful. He was also a 22 year old making no less than 5 world title defenses a year. No, you take both guys at their best. At his best, MAB was outboxing Naseem Hamed and out-fighting Erik Morales. At Lomachenko's best, he was outboxing Gary Russell and outfighting Jorge Linares. I don't actually make a prediction here. Because it's largely pointless. No, I'll wait for Lomachenko to fight an A level opponent first.
> 
> Let's face it, if Garcia beats Loma (and he could), then everyone here changes their prediction to JMM KO.


I actually think Barrera had the style to deal with Loma better than Marquez would.

You're right about Garcia though, if he were to fight and beat Loma I'd then favor Marquez, cuz then I'll have more an idea on how Loma would deal with a style similar to his.


----------



## tommygun711

Strike said:


> Outboxing GRJ is far more impressive than outboxing the, post Brendan Ingle, Hamed who just looked to land a bomb.


Like fuck it is :lol:


----------



## Strike

tommygun711 said:


> Like fuck it is :lol:


It simply is. And I was a MASSIVE Hamed fan. But by the time he got in the ring with MAB all he did was throw single power shots and flick out a lazy jab. He got busted up by Augie fucking Sanchez before his sickening power saved him. He was getting tagged over and over by simple, straight shots from Kelley as he lunged around the ring off balance. He got backed up and taken into the trenches by Paul Ingle...before once more his power ended it.

Hamed was a massive talent, but he gradually abandoned all his skills because he fell in love with his KO's and just relied on one landing. GRJ has FAR faster hands than Hamed, throws bunches of tight shots that are technically excellent. Hamed was winging haymakers and falling over himself in multiple fights leading up to the MAB loss. He was then pretty poor in his comeback fight too.

I predicted Hamed to KO MAB. I thought MAB would come to go to war and stand with him. He was smart, didn't do that and just boxed him. But Hamed made it very easy to do so because he just didn't throw combinations much any more. He constantly fell forwards over his front foot and left his chin hanging out in the air, which is why he got tagged so consistently by Kelley and Sanchez.


----------



## rossco

Loma vs Sal Sanchez ?


----------



## steviebruno

Strike said:


> It simply is. And I was a MASSIVE Hamed fan. But by the time he got in the ring with MAB all he did was throw single power shots and flick out a lazy jab. He got busted up by Augie fucking Sanchez before his sickening power saved him. He was getting tagged over and over by simple, straight shots from Kelley as he lunged around the ring off balance. He got backed up and taken into the trenches by Paul Ingle...before once more his power ended it.
> 
> Hamed was a massive talent, but he gradually abandoned all his skills because he fell in love with his KO's and just relied on one landing. GRJ has FAR faster hands than Hamed, throws bunches of tight shots that are technically excellent. Hamed was winging haymakers and falling over himself in multiple fights leading up to the MAB loss. He was then pretty poor in his comeback fight too.
> 
> I predicted Hamed to KO MAB. I thought MAB would come to go to war and stand with him. He was smart, didn't do that and just boxed him. But Hamed made it very easy to do so because he just didn't throw combinations much any more. He constantly fell forwards over his front foot and left his chin hanging out in the air, which is why he got tagged so consistently by Kelley and Sanchez.


Are you sure you were a Hamed fan? It sounds like you're saying that GRJ is a better fighter. The irony of your argument is that GRJ is likely no better than Kevin Kelley to begin with.


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> Are you sure you were a Hamed fan? It sounds like you're saying that GRJ is a better fighter. The irony of your argument is that GRJ is likely no better than Kevin Kelley to begin with.


Yes I was a huge Hamed fan. And no, I am not saying GRJ is better, I am saying that Hamed deteriorated and let himself down. And being a fighter is more than just technical ability...which is why Marciano beat Walcott, why Wilder nearly beat Fury and why I don't object to you or Pedders thinking MAB or Morales beat Loma. Hamed was awkward as fuck with insane power, so was always a danger and at his best he also boxed very very well. The man who turned up to fight MAB had become a one trick pony who was still a huge threat and very exciting to watch, but he limited himself.


----------



## Pedderrs

Strike said:


> Yes I was a huge Hamed fan. And no, I am not saying GRJ is better, I am saying that Hamed deteriorated and let himself down. And being a fighter is more than just technical ability...which is why Marciano beat Walcott, why Wilder nearly beat Fury and why I don't object to you or Pedders thinking MAB or Morales beat Loma. Hamed was awkward as fuck with insane power, so was always a danger and at his best he also boxed very very well. The man who turned up to fight MAB had become a one trick pony who was still a huge threat and very exciting to watch, but he limited himself.


If you can point me to an example of Naseem Hamed hitting whilst not getting hit against a fighter as good as Kevin Kelley, I will grant you this argument. You suggest Hamed fell in love with his power and declined as a fighter before Kelley. Who did he display this otherworldly ability against to suggest to you that Hamed was ever capable of going better than 4-8 against '01 MAB?

I don't think MAB beats Loma. How can I have a concrete opinion on that hypothetical if Lomachenko's best opponent is Jorge Linares? It's pointless. He's not earned the right to be in the discussion. Basically, I think there is a direct correlation between level of opponent and level of performance. Some here obviously don't.


----------



## Pedderrs

This is how you make your reputation. Perhaps a couple of years later than it should have been but still a majestic fight. JMM won by at least two rounds tbh.


----------



## REDC

__
http://instagr.am/p/BrJ8cFQg_qy/


----------



## TFG

REDC said:


> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BrJ8cFQg_qy/


Best combination puncher in the sport


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BrJ8cFQg_qy/


Beautiful work.


----------



## REDC

TFG said:


> Best combination puncher in the sport


Anyone with a functioning eye (yes a single eye would suffice) and technical/tactical knowledge of the sport can see that Loma would give MAB/EM/JMM one helluva headache - win or lose. 
Of course pedders DKSAB so even if he had 3 pairs of eyes it wouldn't matter as he has non-existent technical/tactical analysis skills.


----------



## REDC

TFG said:


> Best combination puncher in the sport


I mean he just punches non-stop to the extent that it almost becomes monotonous. It's like one huge combination for 3 minutes :rofl
It's nuts. Still I enjoy watching DLH, SRL, RJJ or JMM more when they rip their combos into someone. At least they have a clearly defined start and end lol.


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> Anyone with a functioning eye (yes a single eye would suffice) and technical/tactical knowledge of the sport can see that Loma would give MAB/EM/JMM one helluva headache - win or lose.
> Of course pedders DKSAB so even if he had 3 pairs of eyes it wouldn't matter as he has non-existent technical/tactical analysis skills.


What points do you think we disagree on, REDC?


----------



## steviebruno

REDC said:


> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BrJ8cFQg_qy/


Impressive flurry of punches, no question. Watched it about five times in a row. He'd need to be prepared to do that for 12 rounds against the guys mentioned.


----------



## Pedderrs

steviebruno said:


> Impressive flurry of punches, no question. Watched it about five times in a row. He'd need to be prepared to do that for 12 rounds against the guys mentioned.


Doubt he would be moving like that in the 11th having taken 10 rounds of MAB's body punches or JMM's sharp counters.


----------



## REDC

steviebruno said:


> Impressive flurry of punches, no question. Watched it about five times in a row. *He'd need to be prepared to do that for 12 rounds against the guys mentioned.*


I'm not sure that would be the best approach vs MAB and EM. Both were amazing body punchers (especially MAB) and very skilled and eager at that (close) distance. Although I don't think they'd be able to (really) hurt Loma - even welterweight Salido couldn't and he threw everything at Loma but the kitchen sink (above _and_ below the belt) - they'd surely would rake in points with crisp combo's to head and body.


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> I'm not sure that would be the best approach vs MAB and EM. Both were amazing body punchers (especially MAB) and very skilled and eager at that (close) distance. Although I don't think they'd be able to (really) hurt Loma - even welterweight Salido couldn't and he threw everything at Loma but the kitchen sink (above _and_ below the belt) - they'd surely would rake in points with crisp combo's to head and body.


JMM and MAB cannot hurt Loma? That's insane.


----------



## Strike

Pedderrs said:


> If you can point me to an example of Naseem Hamed hitting whilst not getting hit against a fighter as good as Kevin Kelley, I will grant you this argument. You suggest Hamed fell in love with his power and declined as a fighter before Kelley. Who did he display this otherworldly ability against to suggest to you that Hamed was ever capable of going better than 4-8 against '01 MAB?


If you don't see a difference in how he approached fights, then I don't know what to tell you. 


Pedderrs said:


> I don't think MAB beats Loma. How can I have a concrete opinion on that hypothetical if Lomachenko's best opponent is Jorge Linares? It's pointless. He's not earned the right to be in the discussion.


What a pointless comment. You felt Eubank Jr would beat Groves despite fighting nobody remotely near that level...how on earth did you manage to form an opinion without seeing him fight other guys who had operated at world level? Linares...the fight where Loma had one arm for 10.5 rounds right? You quite clearly do think MAB would beat him, but chose to just use a snide "it's pointless" line.


----------



## tommygun711

rossco said:


> Loma vs Sal Sanchez ?


Sanchez batters him


----------



## Pedderrs

Strike said:


> If you don't see a difference in how he approached fights, then I don't know what to tell you.


It stands to reason that Hamed would look worse in against MAB, a fighter who will be jabbing, moving laterally, offering feints and who can rattle off 3-4 punch combinations to both head and body in a seamless, textbook fashion. Hamed hadn't been near anything like it in his life. If Hamed was a horribly regressed talent, you'll have to explain to me how he was able to put on a tremendous display against Bungu only 12 months before the fight with MAB. That fight aside, there seems to be a fairly clear correlation between Hamed's performances becoming increasingly more lackluster as he moved through the different levels of opposition.

But I'm open to have my mind changed. I just need to see Hamed looking imperious against a world level opponent his own size. Link me up.



> What a pointless comment. You felt Eubank Jr would beat Groves despite fighting nobody remotely near that level...how on earth did you manage to form an opinion without seeing him fight other guys who had operated at world level? Linares...the fight where Loma had one arm for 10.5 rounds right? You quite clearly do think MAB would beat him, but chose to just use a snide "it's pointless" line.


Not that I think it's a comparable example with George Groves being a B level fighter at best whose best win was against James DeGale (a fight I thought he lost), but Christopher did fight BJS to a split decision loss much earlier in his career. George also looked incredibly beatable in against Chudinov and Cox, two fighters not many people would have favoured to beat Christopher. We're also presumably taking the best versions of both guys when discussing fantasy match ups. Quire different then to predicting a young Christopher with no miles on the clock beats a battle weary Groves. So there was enough basis to favour the younger man in that match up. Although I ultimately got it wrong. Badly wrong.

Asking me if Loma beats MAB is like asking me if Errol Spence beats Felix Trinidad. I have no desire to subject these guys to hypotheticals against modern greats 5-6 years in to their careers. It's fucking pointless, sorry you feel differently.


----------



## onourway

Pedderrs said:


> It stands to reason that Hamed would look worse in against MAB, a fighter who will be jabbing, moving laterally, offering feints and who can rattle off 3-4 punch combinations to both head and body in a seamless, textbook fashion. Hamed hadn't been near anything like it in his life. If Hamed was a horribly regressed talent, you'll have to explain to me how he was able to put on a tremendous display against Bungu only 12 months before the fight with MAB. That fight aside, there seems to be a fairly clear correlation between Hamed's performances becoming increasingly more lackluster as he moved through the different levels of opposition.
> 
> But I'm open to have my mind changed. I just need to see Hamed looking imperious against a world level opponent his own size. Link me up.
> 
> Not that I think it's a comparable example with George Groves being a B level fighter at best whose best win was against James DeGale (a fight I thought he lost), but Christopher did fight BJS to a split decision loss much earlier in his career. George also looked incredibly beatable in against Chudinov and Cox, two fighters not many people would have favoured to beat Christopher. We're also presumably taking the best versions of both guys when discussing fantasy match ups. Quire different then to predicting a young Christopher with no miles on the clock beats a battle weary Groves. So there was enough basis to favour the younger man in that match up. Although I ultimately got it wrong. Badly wrong.
> 
> Asking me if Loma beats MAB is like asking me if Errol Spence beats Felix Trinidad. I have no desire to subject these guys to hypotheticals against modern greats 5-6 years in to their careers. It's fucking pointless, sorry you feel differently.


Have you ever seen the documentary which followed Naz before his fight against MAB?


----------



## Pedderrs

onourway said:


> Have you ever seen the documentary which followed Naz before his fight against MAB?


The documentary that was filmed before the fight but edited after?

Have you seen this?


----------



## onourway

Pedderrs said:


> The documentary that was filmed before the fight but edited after?


So have you watched it?


----------



## Pedderrs

onourway said:


> So have you watched it?


I have watched it yes. It's clearly pushing a certain agenda.

Was MAB leagues above any fighter Hamed had ever been close to a ring with prior to 2001?


----------



## onourway

Pedderrs said:


> I have watched it yes. It's clearly pushing a certain agenda.


So when you say it got edited afterwards - are you saying they re-filmed scenes to show Hamed clearly wasn't preparing properly?


----------



## Pedderrs

onourway said:


> So when you say it got edited afterwards - are you saying they re-filmed scenes to show Hamed clearly wasn't preparing properly?


No, I'm suggesting Hamed had good and bad days during that training camp, just like he did in every single training camp of his career. By his own admission.


----------



## rossco

tommygun711 said:


> Sanchez batters him


I agree.

Loma vs Saldivar ?


----------



## Zopilote

rossco said:


> I agree.
> 
> Loma vs Saldivar ?


Saldivar is a worse match up for Loma. Think a more skilled, more relentless southpaw Salido with a seemingly infinite engine.


----------



## rossco

Zopilote said:


> Saldivar is a worse match up for Loma. Think a more skilled, more relentless southpaw Salido with a seemingly infinite engine.


He aint performing a Nomaschenko on a force of nature like Saldivar that's for sure.

Loma vs Ike Williams ?


----------



## Pedderrs

rossco said:


> He aint performing a Nomaschenko on a force of nature like Saldivar that's for sure.
> 
> Loma vs Ike Williams ?


Loma on points via eye test.


----------



## rossco

Pedderrs said:


> Loma on points via eye test.


:lol:


----------



## Pedrin1787

REDC said:


> I'm not sure that would be the best approach vs MAB and EM. Both were amazing body punchers (especially MAB) and very skilled and eager at that (close) distance. *Although I don't think they'd be able to (really) hurt Loma* - even welterweight Salido couldn't and he threw everything at Loma but the kitchen sink (above _and_ below the belt) - they'd surely would rake in points with crisp combo's to head and body.


LOL


----------



## REDC

Pedrin1787 said:


> LOL


 So sensitive :lol::rofl


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> So sensitive :lol::rofl


Nah brah.

He's just calling you out on a ridiculous comment. It discredits you.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> Nah brah.
> 
> He's just calling you out on a ridiculous comment. It discredits you.


Sure, an ad hominem response discredits _me_ :rofl:lol:

It was an opinion and I gave my reasoning. I'm not a dogmatic person - If you don't agree convince me otherwise and/or share your opinion along with your reasoning.

There, I took the bait. Waiting for you two to come with another ad hominem response instead of an actual opinion (that debunks my reasoning) :yep


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> Sure, an ad hominem response discredits _me_:rofl:lol:
> 
> It was an opinion and I gave my reasoning. I'm not a dogmatic person - If you don't agree convince me otherwise and/or share your opinion along with your reasoning.
> 
> There, I took the bait. Waiting for you two to come with another ad hominem response instead of an actual opinion (that debunks my reasoning) :yep


Explain how you came to the conclusion that JMM and MAB could not hurt Lomachenko.

Thank you please.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> Explain how you came to the conclusion that JMM and MAB could not hurt Lomachenko.
> 
> Thank you please.


Read my post - and read it properly because I didn't even mention JMM nor did I really ''conclude'' anything.


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> Read my post - and read it properly because I didn't even mention JMM nor did I really ''conclude'' anything.


Explain why you don't think MAB or EM can (really) hurt Loma.

Thank you please.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> Explain why you don't think MAB or EM can (really) hurt Loma.
> 
> Thank you please.


Already did. 
Do you think there's zero chance they won't be able to hurt him?


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> Already did.
> Do you think there's zero chance they won't be able to hurt him?


You don't think MAB and EM would be capable of hurting Lomachenko because Salido didn't in the 12 rounds they fought?

It's conceivable that they wouldn't hurt Loma if they fought, but not being 'able' to? A very different thing entirely.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> You don't think MAB and EM would be capable of hurting Lomachenko because Salido didn't in the 12 rounds they fought?
> 
> It's conceivable that they wouldn't hurt Loma if they fought, but not being 'able' to? A very different thing entirely.


Of course they _can/could, _I just don't think they would. No need for anyone to get their knickers in a bunch.


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> Of course they _can/could, _I just don't think they would. No need for anyone to get their knickers in a bunch.


You need to stop trying to shame people for having the audacity to challenge your views. You are on a boxing forum. You felt comfortable enough to suggest MAB and EM would not be able to hurt Loma. Patently wrong. You must own it.

I appreciate that you've retracted that and clarified a more reasonable position.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> You need to stop trying to shame people for having the audacity to challenge your views. You are on a boxing forum. You felt comfortable enough to suggest MAB and EM would not be able to hurt Loma. Patently wrong. You must own it.





Pedderrs said:


> a ridiculous comment





Pedderrs said:


> that's insane


How are those comments challenging anything? If anything it looks like the pot calling the..



Pedderrs said:


> I appreciate that you've retracted that and clarified a more reasonable position.


No worries, all good.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> You need to stop trying to shame people for having the audacity to challenge your views. You are on a boxing forum. You felt comfortable enough to suggest MAB and EM would not be able to hurt Loma. Patently wrong. You must own it.
> 
> I appreciate that you've retracted that and clarified a more reasonable position.


Why is it wrong to suggest that MAB and EM would not be able to hurt Loma? Your vagina gets so violently hurt whenever you're reminded how YDKSAB, and how you were so wrong about Lomachenko. Even now you still try to downplay everything Lomachenko does, it really pains you that now the majority say things about him that only I was saying at first. 
You should have kept my quote in your profile of me saying that he would be pound for pound within ten fights, that you thought was ridiculous. You're still in denial about it. Lomachenko loses a round against a tricky, well prepared champion and you're quick to say "See, he's not that great. I wasn't wrong I wasn't wrong I wasn't wrong".


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> Why is it wrong to suggest that MAB and EM would not be able to hurt Loma?


Because I think the men who were powerful enough to hurt Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez respectively would also be physically capable of hurting this man.








> Your vagina gets so violently hurt whenever you're reminded how YDKSAB, and how you were so wrong about Lomachenko.


No, I was wrong about Lomachenko and I own that. It's not a problem for me at all. I'm wrong a lot.



> Even now you still try to downplay everything Lomachenko does, it really pains you that now the majority say things about him that only I was saying at first.


No, I give him credit where he deserves it.



> You should have kept my quote in your profile of me saying that he would be pound for pound within ten fights, that you thought was ridiculous.


Practically unheard of. Not many thought he would be a candidate for P4P 1 after only 10 fights. I was not alone in this thinking.



> You're still in denial about it. Lomachenko loses a round against a tricky, well prepared champion and you're quick to say "See, he's not that great. I wasn't wrong I wasn't wrong I wasn't wrong".


Nope, I have freely admitted on numerous occasions that he is a good pick for P4P 1.

He lost three rounds against Linares and was dropped. I think that's fine, not a big deal, but it doesn't help strengthen some people's argument that he is the most skilled fighter to ever live and H2H as good as we've ever seen. That's all.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Because I think the men who were powerful enough to hurt Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez respectively would also be physically capable of hurting this man.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, I was wrong about Lomachenko and I own that. It's not a problem for me at all. I'm wrong a lot.
> 
> No, I give him credit where he deserves it.
> 
> Practically unheard of. Not many thought he would be a candidate for P4P 1 after only 10 fights. I was not alone in this thinking.
> 
> Nope, I have freely admitted on numerous occasions that he is a good pick for P4P 1.
> 
> He lost three rounds against Linares and was dropped. I think that's fine, not a big deal, but it doesn't help strengthen some people's argument that he is the most skilled fighter to ever live and H2H as good as we've ever seen. That's all.


Linares is bigger, faster and more powerful than MAB and Morales. And was Lomachenko really hurt? We haven't seen Lomachenko hurt. And we've barely seen him hit. He is also far more elusive than the names you mention. So it certainly isn't an unreasonable thing to say.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> Linares is bigger, faster and more powerful than MAB and Morales. And was Lomachenko really hurt? We haven't seen Lomachenko hurt. And we've barely seen him hit. He is also far more elusive than the names you mention. So it certainly isn't an unreasonable thing to say.


MAB and EM are infinitely more accomplished as Professionals than Lomachenko is. They started their careers as teenagers and were at the top for the best part of two decades. Both have fought and defeated much better fighters than Russell Jr and Jorge Linares. So yes, I think it's unreasonable to suggest these respectable hitters would not be physically capable of hurting Lomachenko, a man who was dropped from one of the few flush solid punches he failed to avoid. These Mexicans would be touching Lomachenko an awful lot, especially MAB.


----------



## steviebruno

Pedderrs said:


> MAB and EM are infinitely more accomplished as Professionals than Lomachenko is. They started their careers as teenagers and were at the top for the best part of two decades. Both have fought and defeated much better fighters than Russell Jr and Jorge Linares. So yes, I think it's unreasonable to suggest these respectable hitters would not be physically capable of hurting Lomachenko, a man who was dropped from one of the few flush solid punches he failed to avoid. These Mexicans would be touching Lomachenko an awful lot, especially MAB.


He looked like Rocky after a fight with Apollo from mixing with Pedraza, but MAB and Morales would have trouble touching him.


----------



## paloalto00

I think we're downplaying Loma's opponents a bit too much due to how easy he makes it look. Walter's got a lot of credit for beating Donaire, GRJ also steam rolled through Gonzalez, and Linares is definitely no slouch. He DOMINATED these guys.


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> I think we're downplaying Loma's opponents a bit too much due to how easy he makes it look. Walter's got a lot of credit for beating Donaire, GRJ also steam rolled through Gonzalez, and Linares is definitely no slouch. He DOMINATED these guys.


Walters had not fought for a year, GRJ had not fought anyone with a pulse and was ridiculed by everyone here at the time, and Linares is Linares. The so-so guy. It's a good record but not that of the GOAT. Every man mentioned in here would have sliced through Loma's opponents with the same disconcerting ease.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> Walters had not fought for a year, GRJ had not fought anyone with a pulse and was ridiculed by everyone here at the time, and Linares is Linares. The so-so guy. It's a good record but not that of the GOAT. Every man mentioned in here would have sliced through Loma's opponents with the same disconcerting ease.


Walters was undefeated, how many times has Floyd taken a long hiatus? GRJ has gone on to stop 3/5 of his opponenets, Linares' last loss was 6 years prior. No one you listed would our class these guys the way loma did.


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> Walters was undefeated, how many times has Floyd taken a long hiatus? GRJ has gone on to stop 3/5 of his opponenets, Linares' last loss was 6 years prior. No one you listed would our class these guys the way loma did.


Barrera wouldn't have outclassed GRJ, Linares and Walters? Right.....


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> Barrera wouldn't have outclassed GRJ, Linares and Walters? Right.....


Barrera wouldn't make Walters quit on his stool, or make GRJ look like ana amateur. It's very easy to overestimate fighters of past.


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> Barrera wouldn't make Walters quit on his stool, or make GRJ look like ana amateur. It's very easy to overestimate fighters of past.


Or in this case, underestimate them.

None of Loma's opponents have anything for the ATGs we're discussing.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Walters had not fought for a year, GRJ had not fought anyone with a pulse and was ridiculed by everyone here at the time, and Linares is Linares. The so-so guy. It's a good record but not that of the GOAT. Every man mentioned in here would have sliced through Loma's opponents with the same disconcerting ease.


Yet Garcia blatantly ducked Linares...
So what do you call Garcia's record then?


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Barrera wouldn't have outclassed GRJ, Linares and Walters? Right.....


Lucky Loma isn't around in the times of all time great Junior Jones. Or Raheem. YDKSAB. Stop talking about Lomachenko, your bias is ridiculous. You've got a hard on for these guys who are in reality nothing compared to what we are seeing with Lomachenko.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> Yet Garcia blatantly ducked Linares...
> So what do you call Garcia's record then?


Nobody wanted to see that fight because they knew it was a wash. Remember the outrage? No, me neither. That said, Garcia IS ducking Loma. Nobody condones that.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Nobody wanted to see that fight because they knew it was a wash. Remember the outrage? No, me neither. That said, Garcia IS ducking Loma. Nobody condones that.


YOU think it was a wash. Myself and others who know something about boxing thought it would at least be a very difficult fight for Garcia. Considering that Garcia hasn't fought anybody on that level and Linares was THE champ in the division at the time.. it was a disgraceful duck by Garcia. And yes, real boxing fans were outraged at that duck.


----------



## steviebruno

Pedderrs said:


> Nobody wanted to see that fight because they knew it was a wash. Remember the outrage? No, me neither. That said, Garcia IS ducking Loma. Nobody condones that.


Can't say I really understand the thought process of letting Spence beat the living hell out of him instead of challenging himself against Vasyl Lomachenko. What is he even trying to protect? No one has him rated higher than Loma p4p in the first place.

Maybe he's too fat and lazy to boil himself down?


----------



## Dealt_with

steviebruno said:


> Can't say I really understand the thought process of letting Spence beat the living hell out of him instead of challenging himself against Vasyl Lomachenko. What is he even trying to protect? No one has him rated higher than Loma p4p in the first place.
> 
> Maybe he's too fat and lazy to boil himself down?


He's expected to lose against Spence, so his stock doesn't take the same hit it does losing to Lomachenko. When has Garcia shown signs that he's interested in challenging himself?

I think he is too fat and lazy to take boxing seriously. I thought he could potentially do well against Spence if he trained like an athlete before his boxing camp. Then the video came out of him looking like his brother, and moving terribly.


----------



## steviebruno

Dealt_with said:


> He's expected to lose against Spence, so his stock doesn't take the same hit it does losing to Lomachenko. When has Garcia shown signs that he's interested in challenging himself?
> 
> I think he is too fat and lazy to take boxing seriously. I thought he could potentially do well against Spence if he trained like an athlete before his boxing camp. Then the video came out of him looking like his brother, and moving terribly.


He really doesn't have that high of a stock to protect, though; he's barely top 10 p4p and isn't box office, anyway. It would sort of make sense if he was the one ranked higher than Lomachenko, but this I don't understand.

He might not recover from the beating Errol Jr. is gonna put on him. If he went down to 135 and lost a decision to Loma, he could at least make the excuse that he struggled making weight and come out physically unscathed.

He does look like hell, btw. I wouldn't be surprised if he claims injury and backs out.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> YOU think it was a wash. Myself and others who know something about boxing thought it would at least be a very difficult fight for Garcia. Considering that Garcia hasn't fought anybody on that level and Linares was THE champ in the division at the time.. it was a disgraceful duck by Garcia. And yes, real boxing fans were outraged at that duck.


This is simply not true pal. What real boxing fans were outraged? Link me to the outrage. Very few people thought Linares could beat Garcia. The general feeling was he wouldn't be able to take the firepower. They were correct. It would have been a terrible beating.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> This is simply not true pal. What real boxing fans were outraged? Like me to the outrage. Very few people thought Linares could beat Garcia. The general feeling was he wouldn't be able to take the firepower. They were correct. It would have been a terrible beating.


It was 50/50 in my eyes, if Linares skin held up. What will your down play be if loma ends up beating Mikey in the same style he did the rest?


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> It was 50/50 in my eyes, if Linares skin held up. What will your down play be if loma ends up beating Mikey in the same style he did the rest?


If you thought Garcia/Linares was 50/50 then we cannot have a reasonable discussion. Sorry Pal.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> If you thought Garcia/Linares was 50/50 then we cannot have a reasonable discussion. Sorry Pal.


Answer my question, how will you discount a Loma win over Garcia?


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> Answer my question, how will you discount a Loma win over Garcia?


I wouldn't need to. It would be Loma's greatest win by a considerable margin. Nothing would come remotely close.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> This is simply not true pal. What real boxing fans were outraged? Link me to the outrage. Very few people thought Linares could beat Garcia. The general feeling was he wouldn't be able to take the firepower. They were correct. It would have been a terrible beating.


On boxing forums where people talk boxing you can find it. Stop talking about what would have happened, Linares is more proven than Garcia.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> If you thought Garcia/Linares was 50/50 then we cannot have a reasonable discussion. Sorry Pal.


A hypothetical fight with an athletic champ who hadn't been defeated in many years versus a hyped fighter who has shown a reluctance to step up? You're right, Garcia shouldn't be given a 50% chance in that fight. Probably why he ducked Linares.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> On boxing forums where people talk boxing you can find it. Stop talking about what would have happened, Linares is more proven than Garcia.


This is an assertion you made, so the onus is on you to provide evidence.

Let me see the outrage from 'real boxing fans'.



Dealt_with said:


> A hypothetical fight with an athletic champ who hadn't been defeated in many years versus a hyped fighter who has shown a reluctance to step up? You're right, Garcia shouldn't be given a 50% chance in that fight. Probably why he ducked Linares.


Hilarious framing.

You note Linares win streak but forget to mention that Garcia is undefeated his whole career.

You describe Linares as 'athletic' which implies that this man is not...



















You suggest Garcia has a reluctance to step up and yet he has literally stepped up several divisions in the last few years. Regardless of what you and I believe his motive to have been, if Garcia pulls of a miraculous win against Spence then that will be one of the greatest wins of this decade. A step up? Of course it is.

I will never understand the logic behind playing down a potential opponent of this caliber. Unnecessary and counter-productive. Because you've said Garcia isn't very good, you won't be in a position to attribute much credit to Lomachenko if he was to beat him. Very silly.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> I think it's unreasonable to suggest these respectable hitters would not be physically capable of hurting Lomachenko, a man who was dropped from one of the few flush solid punches he failed to avoid. These Mexicans would be touching Lomachenko an awful lot, especially MAB.


Touching him or hurting him? Which is it? Huge difference.
What was MAB best weight according to you? Was he a big puncher at that weight? What does Linares weigh during fight time? MAB hurt Pacquiao? When?

It's funny because when I said the following you called it ''insane'' and ''ridiculous'' and went on how I ''lost credibility'' without any non-ad hominem reply. You're quite the glass-half-empty pedantic aren't you? Extrapolating what's conventient for you to disagree with yet ignoring the rest that you do agree with. All for the sake of what, you enjoy ridiculing people?



REDC said:


> I'm not sure that would be the best approach vs MAB and EM. *Both were amazing body punchers (especially MAB) and very skilled and eager at that (close) distance*. Although I don't think they'd be able to (really) hurt Loma - even welterweight Salido couldn't and he threw everything at Loma but the kitchen sink (above _and_ below the belt) -* they'd surely would rake in points with crisp combo's to head and body.*


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> Touching him or hurting him? Which is it? Huge difference.


MAB was a two-fisted fighter, never content with being hit without reply, so couple that with his impeccable technique and above average speed, I'd expect him to be landing with enough regularity to eventually be hurting Lomacheko as the fight wore on.



> What was MAB best weight according to you?


He was most complete at 126lbs in my estimation. He had developed a pretty commanding right hand in addition to a consistent left jab. Perhaps he wasn't physically in his prime, but he was just lot smarter and with greater weapons compared to the 122lbs version.

He was still world class at 130lbs though, good enough to secure his most commanding win over Morales, a guy who would go on to beat Pacquiao.



> Was he a big puncher at that weight?


He was a big enough puncher to hurt Hamed at 126lbs multiple times, and big enough a hitter to drop Juan Manuel Marquez and hurt Morales up at 130lbs. It wouldn't be the single shot power from MAB that Lomachenko would have to worry about, he was just incredibly accurate and punched in bunches. There is absolutely no question whatsoever that he would be hit more frequently against MAB than against any of his opponents to date. No question at all, really.



> What does Linares weigh during fight time?


I have no idea, but I do know he's made relatively hard work of Kevin Mitchell, Anthony Crolla and Luke Campbell in recent years. I mean, MAB would obviously not be struggling with that type of company. Obviously.



> MAB hurt Pacquiao?


I didn't say MAB had hurt Pacquiao, I said MAB had hurt Marquez.



> it's funny because when I said the following you called it ''insane'' and ''ridiculous'' and went on how I ''lost credibility'' without any non-ad hominem reply. You're quite the glass-half-empty pedantic aren't you? Extrapolating what's conventient for you to disagree with yet ignoring the rest that you do agree with. All for the sake of what, you enjoy ridiculing people?


I'm going to ignore this word salad. I just want to talk about boxing.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> This is an assertion you made, so the onus is on you to provide evidence.
> 
> Let me see the outrage from 'real boxing fans'.
> 
> Hilarious framing.
> 
> You note Linares win streak but forget to mention that Garcia is undefeated his whole career.
> 
> You describe Linares as 'athletic' which implies that this man is not...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You suggest Garcia has a reluctance to step up and yet he has literally stepped up several divisions in the last few years. Regardless of what you and I believe his motive to have been, if Garcia pulls of a miraculous win against Spence then that will be one of the greatest wins of this decade. A step up? Of course it is.
> 
> I will never understand the logic behind playing down a potential opponent of this caliber. Unnecessary and counter-productive. Because you've said Garcia isn't very good, you won't be in a position to attribute much credit to Lomachenko if he was to beat him. Very silly.


I'm not allowed to post links to other forums am I?

Absolutely Garcia isn't athletic. He is slow in his optimal weight division. You see him now as a fat man getting ready for Spence. He's a good (not great) technician due to his family upbringing. He has stepped up weight divisions against paper people we've never heard of, because he's too undisciplined to make weight. He still hasn't stepped up since Salido, and that was a fight that showed he's not a true fighter.

See you project your intentions and thoughts onto others. I'm honest, that's it. I don't care in what way what I say affects people's opinions on Lomachenko on here or anywhere else. I thought I would've made it pretty clear by now that I back my own opinion, especially to do with Lomachenko as the evidence shows I'm clearly seeing him more for what he is than someone like you for example. I won't give him any credit for beating Garcia (not that Garcia would ever fight him), and if someone like Garcia can take rounds off Lomachenko then I can say that I was wrong about Lomachenko. Garcia is the perfect style for Lomachenko to win every second against. I would rate that Lomachenko win behind Linares, Walters, GRJ, Pedraza, Rigo. It would be on par with the Martinez win. It's a non-competitive fight, and the only reason I wanted to see it was to laugh at people who think Garcia is an elite fighter. Now if it happened it would be after the Spence loss, so there is going to be a lot of what-ifs when Lomachenko beats him.
I actually expect Garcia to retire after the Spence loss, he's never really been committed to boxing and he's not a fighter. I think he's been taking soft fights and calling out everyone because he wants a nice payday to retire on.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> I'm not allowed to post links to other forums am I?
> 
> Absolutely Garcia isn't athletic. He is slow in his optimal weight division. You see him now as a fat man getting ready for Spence. He's a good (not great) technician due to his family upbringing. He has stepped up weight divisions against paper people we've never heard of, because he's too undisciplined to make weight. He still hasn't stepped up since Salido, and that was a fight that showed he's not a true fighter.
> 
> See you project your intentions and thoughts onto others. I'm honest, that's it. I don't care in what way what I say affects people's opinions on Lomachenko on here or anywhere else. I thought I would've made it pretty clear by now that I back my own opinion, especially to do with Lomachenko as the evidence shows I'm clearly seeing him more for what he is than someone like you for example. I won't give him any credit for beating Garcia (not that Garcia would ever fight him), and if someone like Garcia can take rounds off Lomachenko then I can say that I was wrong about Lomachenko. Garcia is the perfect style for Lomachenko to win every second against. I would rate that Lomachenko win behind Linares, Walters, GRJ, Pedraza, Rigo. It would be on par with the Martinez win. It's a non-competitive fight, and the only reason I wanted to see it was to laugh at people who think Garcia is an elite fighter. Now if it happened it would be after the Spence loss, so there is going to be a lot of what-ifs when Lomachenko beats him.
> I actually expect Garcia to retire after the Spence loss, he's never really been committed to boxing and he's not a fighter. I think he's been taking soft fights and calling out everyone because he wants a nice payday to retire on.


Okay, I'll make a mental note of the highlighted.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> This is an assertion you made, so the onus is on you to provide evidence.
> 
> Let me see the outrage from 'real boxing fans'.
> 
> Hilarious framing.
> 
> You note Linares win streak but forget to mention that Garcia is undefeated his whole career.
> 
> You describe Linares as 'athletic' which implies that this man is not...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You suggest Garcia has a reluctance to step up and yet he has literally stepped up several divisions in the last few years. Regardless of what you and I believe his motive to have been, if Garcia pulls of a miraculous win against Spence then that will be one of the greatest wins of this decade. A step up? Of course it is.
> 
> I will never understand the logic behind playing down a potential opponent of this caliber. Unnecessary and counter-productive. Because you've said Garcia isn't very good, you won't be in a position to attribute much credit to Lomachenko if he was to beat him. Very silly.


Garcia has some solid wins with Easter or and Broker, but to say his career hasn't been mostly stagnant is a lie


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> MAB was a two-fisted fighter, never content with being hit without reply, so couple that with his impeccable technique and above average speed, I'd expect him to be landing with enough regularity to eventually be hurting Lomacheko as the fight wore on.
> 
> He was most complete at 126lbs in my estimation. He had developed a pretty commanding right hand in addition to a consistent left jab. Perhaps he wasn't physically in his prime, but he was just lot smarter and with greater weapons compared to the 122lbs version.
> 
> He was still world class at 130lbs though, good enough to secure his most commanding win over Morales, a guy who would go on to beat Pacquiao.
> 
> He was a big enough puncher to hurt Hamed at 126lbs multiple times, and big enough a hitter to drop Juan Manuel Marquez and hurt Morales up at 130lbs. It wouldn't be the single shot power from MAB that Lomachenko would have to worry about, he was just incredibly accurate and punched in bunches. There is absolutely no question whatsoever that he would be hit more frequently against MAB than against any of his opponents to date. No question at all, really.
> 
> I have no idea, but I do know he's made relatively hard work of Kevin Mitchell, Anthony Crolla and Luke Campbell in recent years. I mean, MAB would obviously not be struggling with that type of company. Obviously.
> 
> I didn't say MAB had hurt Pacquiao, I said MAB had hurt Marquez.
> 
> I'm going to ignore this word salad. I just want to talk about boxing.


MAB obviously wouldn't be struggling with the likes of Junior Jones. A natural 126lb fighter would obviously be punching harder and faster than Linares who is big at 135. MAB would obviously land combinations on Lomachenko, because Lomachenko often gets hit with consecutive punches, and has no experience against orthodox, technical boxers like MAB.
You just say things without thinking, you take an irrational position and say that it's obvious to avoid having to explain yourself.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Okay, I'll make a mental note of the highlighted.


Why don't you make it your signature, like that time you ridiculed me for saying Lomachenko will be pound for pound within ten fights?


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> MAB obviously wouldn't be struggling with the likes of Junior Jones.


I don't know why you continue to make reference to a 22 year old MAB fighting at 122. It really has no relevance here.



> A natural 126lb fighter would obviously be punching harder and faster than Linares who is big at 135.


MAB is a much better fighter. He would be landing with more regularity than Linares, who actually doesn't react very well to being pressured. But yes, I believe MAB had faster hands comparatively to Linares. There's really not a lot in it when discussing single shot power either, not enough to make a real difference here in any case.



> MAB would obviously land combinations on Lomachenko, because Lomachenko often gets hit with consecutive punches, and has no experience against orthodox, technical boxers like MAB.


MAB managed to land combinations on every single fighter he faced. There's really not a lot you can do about it unless you are a Manny Pacquiao and Lomachenko is a million miles away from that man. What experience does Lomachenko have against a fighter of MAB's caliber and skill set as a Pro?



> You just say things without thinking, you take an irrational position and say that it's obvious to avoid having to explain yourself.


This is superfluous. It adds nothing to the discussion.


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> Garcia has some solid wins with Easter or and Broker, but to say his career hasn't been mostly stagnant is a lie


Mikey's career has not been a seamless experience, of course not, but he's fought plenty of solid guys and is currently preparing to fight a tougher opponent than even Lomachenko can claim to have been. Again, I question his motives and I don't think he will win it, but the fight is taking place so we take it on face value for now.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> I don't know why you continue to make reference to a 22 year old MAB fighting at 122. It really has no relevance here.
> 
> MAB is a much better fighter. He would be landing with more regularity than Linares, who actually doesn't react very well to being pressured. But yes, I believe MAB had faster hands comparatively to Linares. There's really not a lot in it when discussing single shot power either, not enough to make a real difference here in any case.
> 
> MAB managed to land combinations on every single fighter he faced. There's really not a lot you can do about it unless you are a Manny Pacquiao and Lomachenko is a million miles away from that man. What experience does Lomachenko have against a fighter of MAB's caliber and skill set as a Pro?
> 
> This is superfluous. It adds nothing to the discussion.


You obviously don't understand how much bigger Linares is than Barrera.
Lomachenko is in a different league than Pac in basically every aspect of boxing. If you think Pac's boxing brain, defense and skill set is even on the same planet as Lomachenko then that's just further evidence that you don't know anything about the sport.


----------



## Pedderrs

I mean it's hard for me to have an intelligent boxing discussion with someone who thinks Lomachenko is a league above Manny Pacquaio as a professional. 

Where do I even go with that?


----------



## TFG

@Pedderrs is the @Haggis of the boxing circles :lol:


----------



## Pedderrs

TFG said:


> @Pedderrs is the @Haggis of the boxing circles :lol:


This is not an argument.


----------



## TFG

Pedderrs said:


> This is not an argument.


Correct, it's a statement.


----------



## Pedderrs

TFG said:


> Correct, it's a statement.


Thanks for your input, buddy. :yep


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> I mean it's hard for me to have an intelligent boxing discussion with someone who thinks Lomachenko is a league above Manny Pacquaio as a professional.
> 
> Where do I even go with that?


From a technical aspect, he is. Pacquio's success mostly stemmed from his volume of punches, unorthodox punches, and his demon left hand. His balance was often terrible, he moved in straight lines, and didn't fare well against counter punchers


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> From a technical aspect, he is. Pacquio's success mostly stemmed from his volume of punches, unorthodox punches, and his demon left hand. His balance was often terrible, he moved in straight lines, and didn't fare well against counter punchers


Fascinating but this isn't the argument that was put fourth.

Dealt With believes that Lomachenko, as a fighter, is a league ahead of any version of Manny Pacquiao.

You agree?


----------



## Pedderrs

@paloalto00

Looking forward to your reply.

Thank you, please.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> I just want to talk about boxing.


You don't talk about boxing. You talk about fighters. @Bogotazo talks about boxing.


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> You don't talk about boxing. You talk about fighters. @Bogotazo talks about boxing.


And you called me pedantic? Holy fucking shit.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> And you called me pedantic? Holy fucking shit.


Huge difference. Not being pedantic.


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> Huge difference. Not being pedantic.


You're a strange fella.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> You describe Linares as 'athletic' which implies that this man is not...


You think that looks athletic? :lol:

A friggin scarecrow has more fluidity than that :lol:


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> You think that looks athletic? :lol:
> 
> A friggin scarecrow has more fluidity than that :lol:


I don't think you know what athletic means.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> You're a strange fella.





Pedderrs said:


> I don't think you know what athletic means.


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


>


You think athletic means fluid do you buddy? :lol:

Bless you.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> You think athletic means fluid do you buddy? :lol:
> 
> Bless you.


Fluidity, agility, speed. All parts of athleticism Einstein :lol:

What movement did you see Garcia do in that GIF that is so athletic according to you? Break that GIF and his movement down for us mr sport scientist.

Looking forward to your answer :yep (and don't beat around the bushes now)


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> Fluidity, agility, speed. All parts of athleticism Einstein :lol:
> 
> What movement did you see Garcia do in that GIF that is so athletic according to you? Break that GIF and his movement down for us mr sport scientist.
> 
> Looking forward to your answer :yep (and don't beat around the bushes now)


You're arguing on a boxing forum, presumably as someone who has watched a boxing match before, that Mikey Garcia is not athletic?

I just want to be clear on your position before we go any further. Your position is that Mikey Garcia is NOT an athletic guy?


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> You're arguing on a boxing forum, presumably as someone who has watched a boxing match before, that Mikey Garcia is not athletic?
> 
> I just want to be clear on your position before we go any further. Your position is that Mikey Garcia is NOT an athletic guy?


Beating around the bush :yep

Answer the question. Go on, I won't bite.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> @paloalto00
> 
> Looking forward to your reply.
> 
> Thank you, please.


Hard to say considering Pacquiao made most of his noise coming at WW. I answered the question, Lomachenko is far more technically superior. You're asking for a comparison between a future HOFer and someone with less than 15 pro bouts. Good try.


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> Hard to say considering Pacquiao made most of his noise coming at WW. I answered the question, Lomachenko is far more technically superior. You're asking for a comparison between a future HOFer and someone with less than 15 pro bouts. Good try.


And now you get it.

I know this absolutely pains you to the absolute core of your being, but you agree with me. Apologies for the inconvenience.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> And now you get it.
> 
> I know this absolutely pains you to the absolute core of your being, but you agree with me. Apologies for the inconvenience.


No, you're asking for a compariaon between someone very new into their career and someone at the end of theirs. If you're asking who would win H2H at 135, lomachenko, definitely


----------



## Pedrin1787

paloalto00 said:


> From a technical aspect, he is. Pacquio's success mostly stemmed from his volume of punches, unorthodox punches, and his demon left hand. His balance was often terrible, he moved in straight lines, and didn't fare well against counter punchers


Whoa, I usually disagree with peds and Stevie on Lomachenko threads but you guys are outta control.

"GRJ win is better than Hamed win"
"MAB and Morales can't hurt Loma"
"Loma is a league above Pacquiao"

I expect and actually enjoy hearing retarded shit like this from @Dealt_with but most of you are sound posters.


----------



## steviebruno

Pedrin1787 said:


> Whoa, I usually disagree with peds and Stevie on Lomachenko threads but you guys are outta control.
> 
> "GRJ win is better than Hamed win"
> "MAB and Morales can't hurt Loma"
> "Loma is a league above Pacquiao"
> 
> I expect and actually enjoy hearing retarded shit like this from @Dealt_with but most of you are sound posters.


This is how cancers normally work.


----------



## Pedderrs

Pedrin1787 said:


> Whoa, I usually disagree with peds and Stevie on Lomachenko threads but you guys are outta control.
> 
> "GRJ win is better than Hamed win"
> "MAB and Morales can't hurt Loma"
> "Loma is a league above Pacquiao"
> 
> I expect and actually enjoy hearing retarded shit like this from @Dealt_with but most of you are sound posters.


I was honestly starting to question my own sanity.

For some absurd reason these boys seem more concerned with disagreeing with me than actually pursuing anything close to the truth. Weird as fuck.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> You're arguing on a boxing forum, presumably as someone who has watched a boxing match before, that Mikey Garcia is not athletic?
> 
> I just want to be clear on your position before we go any further. Your position is that Mikey Garcia is NOT an athletic guy?


He's clearly not an athletic guy. You can see that in his slow movement, the fact he gets fat easily and that out of training camp he looks like his brother.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedrin1787 said:


> Whoa, I usually disagree with peds and Stevie on Lomachenko threads but you guys are outta control.
> 
> "GRJ win is better than Hamed win"
> "MAB and Morales can't hurt Loma"
> "Loma is a league above Pacquiao"
> 
> I expect and actually enjoy hearing retarded shit like this from @Dealt_with but most of you are sound posters.


You'll hear more of that talk in the future, when more and more people understand what they're looking at with Lomachenko. You're a bit slow, that's okay.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> I was honestly starting to question my own sanity.
> 
> For some absurd reason these boys seem more concerned with disagreeing with me than actually pursuing anything close to the truth. Weird as fuck.


Err... that's precisely what you're doing? I've pointed to the facts and probability, you've just said "Whoa that's crazy" (just like when you laughed at my prediction about Lomachenko being p4p within ten fights) and then continued to say nothing, while thanking others who are as blind/biased/ignorant as you are.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> I mean it's hard for me to have an intelligent boxing discussion with someone who thinks Lomachenko is a league above Manny Pacquaio as a professional.
> 
> Where do I even go with that?


How about the facts, breaking down different aspects of boxing while having an honest and open mind? If you do that then you'd come to the same conclusion. Maybe you could make an argument for prime Pac in hand speed and power, but every other aspect of boxing Lomachenko is ahead, and mostly by a large margin.
Then when it comes down to resume you need to ask yourself why you give Pac a pass for his losses and struggles, while you discount Lomachenko and his potential due to the Salido fight.
You realise that fighters from the past aren't unbeatable, religious figures to worship right?


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> This is not an argument.


Where are your arguments for anything you've claimed is so obvious?


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Fascinating but this isn't the argument that was put fourth.
> 
> Dealt With believes that Lomachenko, as a fighter, is a league ahead of any version of Manny Pacquiao.
> 
> You agree?


Define what you mean by fighter, and we'll break it down. If you disagree, then you have to explain why rather than saying "OMG guys, it's THE Pac/MAB".


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> @paloalto00
> 
> Looking forward to your reply.
> 
> Thank you, please.


Looking forward to your reply.

Thank you, please.


----------



## Dealt_with

REDC said:


> You don't talk about boxing. You talk about fighters. @Bogotazo talks about boxing.


Exactly, I've never heard Pedders say anything that isn't an appeal to authority/reputation or about resume. I'm not sure if he even watches any boxing or knows anything about it as a sport.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> And now you get it.
> 
> I know this absolutely pains you to the absolute core of your being, but you agree with me. Apologies for the inconvenience.


So your implication is that nothing you see in the boxing ring matters, we judge the quality of a fighter purely based on how his resume reads on boxrec? Right....


----------



## Pedderrs

Starting to feel bad for the guy to be honest.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> How about the facts, breaking down different aspects of boxing while having an honest and open mind? If you do that then you'd come to the same conclusion. Maybe you could make an argument for prime Pac in hand speed and power, but every other aspect of boxing Lomachenko is ahead, and mostly by a large margin.
> Then when it comes down to resume you need to ask yourself why you give Pac a pass for his losses and struggles, while you discount Lomachenko and his potential due to the Salido fight.
> You realise that fighters from the past aren't unbeatable, religious figures to worship right?


Maybe.

Maybe we could make an argument for Manny in hand speed and power.

:shifty


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Maybe.
> 
> Maybe we could make an argument for Manny in hand speed and power.
> 
> :shifty


How are we measuring? What punches and what distance covered? How do we define the initiation and conclusion of the punch? How do we measure power? Again what punches and how do we weigh up the relative resistance of the opponent in the right context?
The fact you think that it isn't even a maybe, shows how clueless you are. I actually feel sorry for you.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Starting to feel bad for the guy to be honest.


Don't feel sorry for me. I'm not 5'6, built like a 12 year old girl, and I know at least something about boxing.


----------



## Dealt_with

Still waiting for all these apparently obvious arguments....


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> How are we measuring? What punches and what distance covered? How do we define the initiation and conclusion of the punch? How do we measure power? Again what punches and how do we weigh up the relative resistance of the opponent in the right context?
> The fact you think that it isn't even a maybe, shows how clueless you are. I actually feel sorry for you.


Start a poll and let's get a consensus.

Does prime Pacquiao hit harder than Lomachenko? Yes, no or maybe.

Go.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Start a poll and let's get a consensus.
> 
> Does prime Pacquiao hit harder than Lomachenko? Yes, no or maybe.
> 
> Go.


Instead of appealing to authority or consensus, how about you finally put forward some ideas and thoughts of your own to explain your position? You know if you took the time to explain your point of view you wouldn't have to waste all this time posting and saying nothing, we could agree/disagree and move on. Is there any thought or substance in that head of yours? Show some evidence.

If we took a poll on what Lomachenko was going to be after ten fights then I'd be the only one to say something different most likely, so don't be that dumb. And we know we can't measure power objectively, we have to estimate based on an almost infinite number of variables. So have a point/argument, and back up your claims you silly little boy.


----------



## uraharakisuke

Lomachenko
-better footwork
-overall boxing skill
-ring iq
-better defence


Manny
-faster footwork
-faster hands
-more power
-better output
-more proven/better resume (obviously)
-the power is important as it helped him move up in weight, Loma won't be able to replicate to such an extent
-unorthodox, in a good way
-i'd say overall better offence

Tbh I only read the last 2 pages so we seem to by arguing who's better out of the two? In that case it's the Asian midget. And I fully expect the same result at the end of Loma's career, he just doesn't have the level of opposition on hand to prove his level of, quite extraordinary, skill. And he's not moving up to beat Spence and all.


----------



## Pedrin1787

uraharakisuke said:


> Lomachenko
> -better footwork
> -overall boxing skill
> -ring iq
> -better defence
> 
> Manny
> -faster footwork
> -faster hands
> -more power
> -better output
> -more proven/better resume (obviously)
> -the power is important as it helped him move up in weight, Loma won't be able to replicate to such an extent
> -unorthodox, in a good way
> -i'd say overall better offence
> 
> Tbh I only read the last 2 pages so we seem to by arguing who's better out of the two? In that case it's the Asian midget. And I fully expect the same result at the end of Loma's career, he just doesn't have the level of opposition on hand to prove his level of, quite extraordinary, skill. And he's not moving up to beat Spence and all.


I would add "chin\ability to take punishment" to that. Pac (especially pre Marquez KO) took a lot of flush shots from elite fighters and was rarely in real trouble. He was a little freak of nature.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedrin1787 said:


> Whoa, I usually disagree with peds and Stevie on Lomachenko threads but you guys are outta control.
> 
> "GRJ win is better than Hamed win"
> "MAB and Morales can't hurt Loma"
> "Loma is a league above Pacquiao"
> 
> I expect and actually enjoy hearing retarded shit like this from @Dealt_with but most of you are sound posters.


I never said any of Loma's opponenets were better than MAB or Barrera, but at 135 I would say Loma is better than Pac. Pacquiao didn't start looking like a freak of nature until he moved up


----------



## Pedrin1787

paloalto00 said:


> I never said any of Loma's opponenets were better than MAB or Barrera, but at 135 I would say Loma is better than Pac. Pacquiao didn't start looking like a freak of nature until he moved up


Till he moved up to which weight?


----------



## Pedderrs

Manny at 135






Loma at 135


----------



## paloalto00

Pedrin1787 said:


> Till he moved up to which weight?


Welterweight


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Manny at 135
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loma at 135


Err.. exactly? I remember Pac looking better than that against Diaz, it seemed a lot more impressive at the time when I watched it live. Have a look at Pac's plodding footwork, predictable punches, lack of right hand. Then compare it to the Lomachenko in that video. Not to mention Pedraza is better than Diaz, far more active and tricky than basic Diaz. You just don't understand boxing, so maybe stop talking about it?


----------



## steviebruno

Pedderrs said:


> Manny at 135
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loma at 135


...You mean to tell Manny Pacquiao is just as hard to hit cleanly as 'defensive wizard' Lomachenko? How can this be?


----------



## Dealt_with

uraharakisuke said:


> Lomachenko
> -better footwork
> -overall boxing skill
> -ring iq
> -better defence
> 
> Manny
> -faster footwork
> -faster hands
> -more power
> -better output
> -more proven/better resume (obviously)
> -the power is important as it helped him move up in weight, Loma won't be able to replicate to such an extent
> -unorthodox, in a good way
> -i'd say overall better offence
> 
> Tbh I only read the last 2 pages so we seem to by arguing who's better out of the two? In that case it's the Asian midget. And I fully expect the same result at the end of Loma's career, he just doesn't have the level of opposition on hand to prove his level of, quite extraordinary, skill. And he's not moving up to beat Spence and all.


The things you've mentioned with Pac are all disputable other than resume. You're putting unorthodox in a good way as criteria? You're saying Pac has better punch selection? That's something you simply can't argue for a straight line simple fighter like Pac who never really developed his right hand.
It's hard to respond to what you've written because it's clearly biased and poorly thought out.


----------



## Pedderrs

steviebruno said:


> ...You mean to tell Manny Pacquiao is just as hard to hit cleanly as 'defensive wizard' Lomachenko? How can this be?












Impossible to hit.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedrin1787 said:


> I would add "chin\ability to take punishment" to that. Pac (especially pre Marquez KO) took a lot of flush shots from elite fighters and was rarely in real trouble. He was a little freak of nature.


The guy who has been stopped multiple times throughout his career has a better chin than a guy who has suffered a flash knockdown? I'm sure if Lomachenko blocked more punches with his face you'd see how good his chin is.


----------



## Dealt_with

steviebruno said:


> ...You mean to tell Manny Pacquiao is just as hard to hit cleanly as 'defensive wizard' Lomachenko? How can this be?


Lol what? Pac gets hit regularly in that fight.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Impossible to hit.


Pedders, never boxed or been around boxing. Some guys mark up when their own glove touches their face while blocking, especially Eastern Euros with certain bone structure around their eyes. When you're a fighter who stays on the inside to block, parry and slip while being an offensive fighter you get damage without being hit cleanly. Again you'd know this if you understood anything about boxing.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt With thinks Lomachenko might hit harder than Manny Pacquiao.

Dealt With thinks Lomachenko's face marked up against Pedraza 'cus of how well he was blocking. 

Dealt With is Dealt With.


----------



## Dealt_with

The revisionist history here is hilarious. Was anybody here watching boxing when Pac was coming up? He was always seen as a limited but exciting fighter, who likely had a short shelf life because of the way he fought. It wasn’t until the DLH, Hatton, Cotto fights that he was thought about as an all time great. And we’re going to sit here and pretend that Pac was a master boxer? He was always criticised for his straight line boxing, his limited arsenal of punches, his lack of a right hand, and how many punches he took. Even us who didn’t like Floyd knew he would always beat Pac due to his style, due to his counter punching.
Now we want to pretend that he is on Lomachenko’s level as a boxer? Hilarious, and dweeb Pedders agenda is clear as always. Suck off anybody from the past, idealise them as an untouchable religious figure, while downplaying clearly the most skilled boxer to ever have lived.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Dealt With thinks Lomachenko might hit harder than Manny Pacquiao.
> 
> Dealt With thinks Lomachenko's face marked up against Pedraza 'cus of how well he was blocking.
> 
> Dealt With is Dealt With.


Pedders, can't argue anything. Pedders, built like a 12 year old lesbian. Pedders, acts all indignant and shocked about debatable points so he doesn't have to engage and reveal how little he actually knows about boxing.
Pedders is Pedders.

Dealt With has a long documented history of being spot on about Lomachenko, while clowning and proving Pedders wrong.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> Pedders, can't argue anything. Pedders, built like a 12 year old lesbian. Pedders, acts all indignant and shocked about debatable points so he doesn't have to engage and reveal how little he actually knows about boxing.
> Pedders is Pedders.
> 
> Dealt With has a long documented history of being spot on about Lomachenko, while clowning and proving Pedders wrong.


:lol: C'mon dude, just a bit of fun.

Although you don't half come out with some shit when it comes to Loma. You don't seriously think Lomachenko might hit harder than Manny? Manny was knocking out fully fledged Welterweights.


----------



## Zopilote

Looking at that David Diaz fight, Manny’s right hand was ridiculously on point in that fight.


----------



## Pedderrs

Dealt_with said:


> The revisionist history here is hilarious. Was anybody here watching boxing when Pac was coming up? He was always seen as a limited but exciting fighter, who likely had a short shelf life because of the way he fought. It wasn't until the DLH, Hatton, Cotto fights that he was thought about as an all time great. And we're going to sit here and pretend that Pac was a master boxer? He was always criticised for his straight line boxing, his limited arsenal of punches, his lack of a right hand, and how many punches he took. Even us who didn't like Floyd knew he would always beat Pac due to his style, due to his counter punching.
> Now we want to pretend that he is on Lomachenko's level as a boxer? Hilarious, and dweeb Pedders agenda is clear as always. Suck off anybody from the past, idealise them as an untouchable religious figure, while downplaying clearly the most skilled boxer to ever have lived.


Manny was ranked P4P #2 by Ring Magazine as early as 2006. Manny didn't fight DLH til a couple of years later.


----------



## uraharakisuke

Dealt_with said:


> Pedders, can't argue anything. Pedders, built like a 12 year old lesbian. Pedders, acts all indignant and shocked about debatable points so he doesn't have to engage and reveal how little he actually knows about boxing.
> Pedders is Pedders.
> 
> Dealt With has a long documented history of being spot on about Lomachenko, while clowning and proving Pedders wrong.


----------



## Pedderrs

'Fuck me those splits are symmetrical'. 

:lol: FFS.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> Manny at 135
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loma at 135


Come on lad, his first fight after a major surgery. Even you can do better than that


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> Come on lad, his first fight after a major surgery. Even you can do better than that


Well there's only two fights to choose from. We can go with Linares if you want, point remains.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> Well there's only two fights to choose from. We can go with Linares if you want, point remains.


Sure, an awesome display either way. Then your grasp at straws goes out the window


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> Sure, an awesome display either way. Then your grasp at straws goes out the window


I didn't think the Linares display was awesome. It was competent, quite good actually, but being someone who never considered Linares to be an elite fighter it really wasn't all that fabulous.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> I didn't think the Linares display was awesome. It was competent, quite good actually, but being someone who never considered Linares to be an elite fighter it really wasn't all that fabulous.


Linares hasn't lost in 6 years, and those last two were from cuts and the last was a stoppage by a Mexican ring doc.

Lomachenko also injured his shoulder in this fight. It's okay not to be sold on Lomachenko, but you're simply just hating.


----------



## Zopilote

paloalto00 said:


> Linares hasn't lost in 6 years, and those last two were from cuts and the last was a stoppage by a Mexican ring doc.
> 
> Lomachenko also injured his shoulder in this fight. It's okay not to be sold on Lomachenko, but you're simply just hating.


Linares losing, in any way barring a Freak accident or blatant robbery, which neither of those were, against scrubs like Demarco and Thompson is quite alarming to say the least. Especially for a so called "elite fighter".


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> Linares hasn't lost in 6 years, and those last two were from cuts and the last was a stoppage by a Mexican ring doc.
> 
> Lomachenko also injured his shoulder in this fight. It's okay not to be sold on Lomachenko, but you're simply just hating.


I consider Lomachenko a good candidate for P4P 1, freely admit that his resume considering the circumstances is fantastic and that he would undeniably be a threat to many past greats in a H2H sense.

But you consider me a hater because I don't subscribe to the belief that he hits harder than Manny Pacquiao and because I don't think his performance against Linares was masterful.

I'm not going to win with you no matter what I say. Your mind is made up.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> I consider Lomachenko a good candidate for P4P 1, freely admit that his resume considering the circumstances is fantastic and that he would undeniably be a threat to many past greats in a H2H sense.
> 
> But you consider me a hater because I don't subscribe to the belief that he hits harder than Manny Pacquiao and because I don't think his performance against Linares was masterful.
> 
> I'm not going to win with you no matter what I say. Your mind is made up.


I never said he hits harder than Pacquiao, are argument was that he was more skillfully sound. Loma's shots are a mix of pitty pats in between harder shots. My beef is the downplay of what he's done so far in under 15 fights, the easier he puts someone away the more we take away from him.


----------



## paloalto00

Zopilote said:


> Linares losing, in any way barring a Freak accident or blatant robbery, which neither of those were, against scrubs like Demarco and Thompson is quite alarming to say the least. Especially for a so called "elite fighter".


If we were to use the same logic with Pacquiao who was stopped by nobodies before he went on his Mexican onslaught.


----------



## Zopilote

paloalto00 said:


> If we were to use the same logic with Pacquiao who was stopped by nobodies before he went on his Mexican onslaught.


Dumb comparison.

Pacquiao was very early into his career and wasn't anywhere near to being the elite fighter he would eventually become.

Linares on the other hand, was in the middle of his career, even with Freddie Roach in his corner. It's safe to say that it was at the very peak of his career when those losses happened.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> :lol: C'mon dude, just a bit of fun.
> 
> Although you don't half come out with some shit when it comes to Loma. You don't seriously think Lomachenko might hit harder than Manny? Manny was knocking out fully fledged Welterweights.


Manny knocked out Hatton who was a 140 pound fighter. What full fledged Welterweights did he knock out? He generally stopped bigger guys due to an accumulation of damage. Lomachenko knocked out better fighters at 130 and 135 so to claim that it's not even a maybe that Lomachenko might hit harder just shows your ridiculous bias.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedderrs said:


> Manny was ranked P4P #2 by Ring Magazine as early as 2006. Manny didn't fight DLH til a couple of years later.


Stop looking at numbers you imbecile. I know how he was regarded at the time, I watched him as he moved up and I was a fan. Nobody ever thought he was some unbeatable, ultra skilled fighter. The general consensus was that he was limited boxing wise but was special in terms of offensive output with very good power, and that he was in entertaining fights. You're making the claim that he's some Uber-skilled boxer when the view was always that his athleticism and power helped him to win some close decisions against his more skilled contemporaries at the time.
He started to appear more skilled when he moved up and fought bigger, slower guys. It was the DLH fight that put Pac into the elite category, and we know what DLH's condition was for that fight. I admit that I picked DLH at the time. It was that fight, Hatton, Cotto and Margarito that put him into the view that we have of him now. At the lower weights he wasn't considered ATG and a skilled boxer. He was nothing close to the level of Lomachenko, and you saying otherwise is either your bs bias or you simply didn't watch boxing at the time.


----------



## Dealt_with

Zopilote said:


> Dumb comparison.
> 
> Pacquiao was very early into his career and wasn't anywhere near to being the elite fighter he would eventually become.
> 
> Linares on the other hand, was in the middle of his career, even with Freddie Roach in his corner. It's safe to say that it was at the very peak of his career when those losses happened.


Nonsense, Linares was going to retire then rejuvenated his career by going on a long undefeated streak. Mikey ducked then Lomachenko caught prime Linares at his peak.


----------



## Zopilote

Dealt_with said:


> Lomachenko knocked out better fighters at 130 and 135


Morales >>>>>>>>> anyone Loma has ever faced.

Most guys that Loma stopped at 130lbs quit. Only a damaged goods Martinez at 130lbs and never known for his durability Linares at 135lbs were legitimately KOd.


Dealt_with said:


> Nonsense, Linares was going to retire then rejuvenated his career by going on a long undefeated streak. Mikey ducked then Lomachenko caught prime Linares at his peak.


Based on what exactly? By going life and death against ATGs like Mitchell, Crolla, and Campbell???


----------



## Pedrin1787

paloalto00 said:


> If we were to use the same logic with Pacquiao who was stopped by nobodies before he went on his Mexican onslaught.


Sad.


----------



## Dealt_with

Zopilote said:


> Morales >>>>>>>>> anyone Loma has ever faced.
> 
> Most guys that Loma stopped at 130lbs quit. Only a damaged goods Martinez at 130lbs and never known for his durability Linares at 135lbs were legitimately KOd.
> 
> Based on what exactly? By going life and death against ATGs like Mitchell, Crolla, and Campbell???


Morales that had just been beaten by Raheem? When they were both prime Morales beat Pac.

Based on the fact that he was undefeated in a long time after taking his career seriously, and being THE champ at 135. There's a reason why Mikey's vagina started flapping when that fight was offered.


----------



## Dealt_with

Pedrin1787 said:


> Sad.


But true.


----------



## Zopilote

Dealt_with said:


> Morales that had just been beaten by Raheem? When they were both prime Morales beat Pac.
> 
> Based on the fact that he was undefeated in a long time after taking his career seriously, and being THE champ at 135. There's a reason why Mikey's vagina started flapping when that fight was offered.


Even Morales at that stage was far better than anyone Loma has beaten. He was one of the most durable fighters of the last 20+ years and Manny was the first guy to stop him.

Of course Linares was undefeated for a long time when the best opponents he was facing were guys like Campbell, Mitchell, and Crolla.


----------



## uraharakisuke

Dealt_with said:


> The things you've mentioned with Pac are all disputable other than resume. You're putting unorthodox in a good way as criteria? You're saying Pac has better punch selection? That's something you simply can't argue for a straight line simple fighter like Pac who never really developed his right hand.
> It's hard to respond to what you've written because it's clearly biased and poorly thought out.


No never said he had better punch selection, just better overall offence, all things considered. Yes Pac's unorthodox style helped him in many ways, everyone knows this. A bit more at the lower weights I'd say.

It's hard to understand this response of yours as it's clearly biased and poorly thought out.

My simple breakdown of the two was quite reasonable, actually.


----------



## paloalto00

Zopilote said:


> Dumb comparison.
> 
> Pacquiao was very early into his career and wasn't anywhere near to being the elite fighter he would eventually become.
> 
> Linares on the other hand, was in the middle of his career, even with Freddie Roach in his corner. It's safe to say that it was at the very peak of his career when those losses happened.


Linares was on his 33-34th fight, Pacquiao was on his 28th. How the fuck is that early in your career? Linares was developing under Teiken.


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> Linares was on his 33-34th fight, Pacquiao was on his 28th. How the fuck is that early in your career? Linares was developing under Teiken.


Manny started as a Pro at the age of 16 and had fought 10 times in his first year...

You see where I'm going with this pal?

Linares had been a Pro for 10 years when he was stopped by Thompson, Manny had been a pro for...err.. 4 years.


----------



## paloalto00

Pedderrs said:


> Manny started as a Pro at the age of 16 and had fought 10 times in his first year...
> 
> You see where I'm going with this pal?
> 
> Linares had been a Pro for 10 years when he was stopped by Thompson, Manny had been a pro for...err.. 4 years.


My point is Linares has improved aince then, and so has Manny. You can't discredit Linares.


----------



## Pedderrs

paloalto00 said:


> My point is Linares has improved aince then, and so has Manny. You can't discredit Linares.


No, you were trying to suggest that both Manny and Linares were at a similar stage of development when they both lost to lesser talents, and they clearly weren't.

Linares has been proven to be a good fighter down the years and a decent champion, but he was nothing overly special. I mean someone like MAB has been mentioned several times in this thread already. Linares obviously wasn't that level of fighter. I honestly don't recall too many serious boxing people thinking a fight between him and Mikey Garcia was a 50/50 either. If you could direct me to some sources to suggest otherwise I'd definitely be willing to have a little look though.


----------



## Zopilote

Pedderrs said:


> Manny started as a Pro at the age of 16 and had fought 10 times in his first year...
> 
> You see where I'm going with this pal?
> 
> Linares had been a Pro for 10 years when he was stopped by Thompson, Manny had been a pro for...err.. 4 years.


This.

Plus Manny was a malnourished Flyweight at the time and Linares was at his comfortable weight. Same weight he has stayed in for this whole time.


----------



## steviebruno

Pedderrs said:


> Dealt With thinks Lomachenko might hit harder than Manny Pacquiao.
> 
> Dealt With thinks Lomachenko's face marked up against Pedraza 'cus of how well he was blocking.
> 
> Dealt With is Dealt With.


Vasyl Lomachenko is so good, he beat the hell out of himself AND Pedraza at the same damn time.

GOAT.


----------



## Pedderrs

steviebruno said:


> Vasyl Lomachenko is so good, he beat the hell out of himself AND Pedraza at the same damn time.
> 
> GOAT.


The GOAT is rumoured to be fighting Anthony Crolla next.


----------



## steviebruno

Pedderrs said:


> The GOAT is rumoured to be fighting Anthony Crolla next.


Crolla passed the eye test against Linares, and I'm sure @Dealt_with has him as a stylistic nightmare for the GOAT.


----------



## Pedderrs

steviebruno said:


> Crolla passed the eye test against Linares, and I'm sure @Dealt_with has him as a stylistic nightmare for the GOAT.


:lol:


----------



## REDC

steviebruno said:


> Vasyl Lomachenko is so good, he beat the hell out of himself AND Pedraza at the same damn time.
> 
> GOAT.


:lol::lol: Tears my man, tears!


----------



## PistolPat

The thread that just keeps on giving.


----------



## REDC

Zopilote said:


> Dumb comparison.
> 
> Pacquiao was very early into his career and wasn't anywhere near to being the elite fighter he would eventually become.
> 
> Linares on the other hand, was in the middle of his career, even with Freddie Roach in his corner. It's safe to say that it was at the very peak of his career when those losses happened.


I disagree with that last sentence. An athlete is as good as his/her last perform3ance and Linares looks like he's on top of his game right now.
Also if you have watched those 2 losses in a row (and I'm sure you haven't because why would you, it's not that interesting) then you can't but applaud Linares for his grit. His injury wasn't healed properly which contributed to that 2nd loss in a row. There's more than meets the eye at first (boxrec) glance.


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> I disagree with that last sentence. An athlete is as good as his/her last performance and Linares looks like he's on top of his game right now.


What do you believe are Linares' most impressive recent wins?


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> What do you believe are Linares' most imprevious recent wins?


Sorry I was still editing my post when you replied because I wasn't done and accidentally clicked post.

To answer your question: I don't know. But how relevant is it? An athlete can look pretty bad and win or have an excellent performance with no excuses whatsoever and lose. I.e. it's how an athlete loses or wins. Point in case: he lost against Loma but put in an excellent performance.


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> Sorry I was still editing my post when you replied because I wasn't done and accidentally clicked post.
> 
> To answer your question: I don't know. But how relevant is it? An athlete can look pretty bad and win or have an excellent performance with no excuses whatsoever and lose. I.e. it's how an athlete loses or wins. Point in case: he lost against Loma but put in an excellent performance.


I agree with you in that Linares is probably as good now as he's ever been. I don't think he was ever all that good though. Credit to him for remaining unbeaten for so long, but you only have to look at his recent level of opposition to know that it does flatter him somewhat. Luke Campbell? Anthony Crolla? These are European level fighters at best. You can go a little further back to another Brit, Kevin Mitchell. European level too, but he actually went and life in that one. I take no satisfaction in knocking down a professional fighter, Linares has had a good career and he's a very good fighter, but he was never going to be good enough to beat Lomachenko. He was never going to be good enough to beat a Mikey Garcia either. He has never come close to reaching these heights in a long, long career.

Back to the original question, Linares was obviously a more developed Professional when he sustained his early losses compared to Manny Pacquiao. It's what we could call a false equivalency.


----------



## REDC

Pedderrs said:


> I agree with you in that Linares is probably as good now as he's ever been. I don't think he was ever all that good though. Credit to him for remaining unbeaten for so long, but you only have to look at his recent level of opposition to know that it does flatter him somewhat. Luke Campbell? Anthony Crolla? These are European level fighters at best. You can go a little further back to another Brit, Kevin Mitchell. European level too, but he actually went and life in that one. I take no satisfaction in knocking down a professional fighter, Linares has had a good career and he's a very good fighter, but he was never going to be good enough to beat Lomachenko. He was never going to be good enough to beat a Mikey Garcia either. He has never come close to reaching these heights in a long, long career.
> 
> Back to the original question, Linares was obviously a more developed Professional when he sustained his early losses compared to Manny Pacquiao. It's what we could call a false equivalency.


Can't disagree with anything said here.

Was a fan of Kevin back in the day.


----------



## Pedderrs

REDC said:


> Can't disagree with anything said here.
> 
> Was a fan of Kevin back in the day.


Yeah I liked Kevin too. He was sublime combination puncher. I expected him to beat Katsidis and make a few sounds at world level. It wasn't to be.


----------



## Zopilote

Linares elite....:rofl


----------



## Pedrin1787

Zopilote said:


> Linares elite....:rofl


P4P I don't see a prime Morales or Barrera making a dent in this version of Cano.


----------



## PistolPat

Pedrin1787 said:


> P4P I don't see a prime Morales or Barrera making a dent in this version of Cano.


To be fair, this was post rejuvenated prime Linares, and he lost to a stylistic nightmare in Cano. The prime Cano who became rejuvenated after a stint of losses, including losses to "still fighting due to divorce Shane" and "dad bod Morales on his farewell tour".


----------



## Pedderrs

How did Loma's best win get on last night boys?


----------



## PistolPat

Pedderrs said:


> How did Loma's best win get on last night boys?


----------



## PistolPat

whoops double post


----------



## REDC

Classy, guys. Personally I feel for Linares as he's a humble, likable and classy enough guy.

Any athlete can have an off night and if you compete often (which he did btw, maybe a bit too often?) you lose from time to time.
This result also once more proves that styles make fights.

Having said that he looked fragile as _hell_.

And I got to say very nice job by the referee!!


----------



## Pedrin1787

PistolPat said:


>


:lol:


----------



## REDC

https://www.boxingscene.com/linares-cano-surprised-me-i-felt-better-135-hard-make-it--135537


----------



## Lester1583




----------



## Strike

Loma is pissing his career away and is ruining any chance at building an elite legacy. Fighting Crolla is an absolute disgrace. Nothing short. It is up there with the most pointless, pathetic fights from an elite champion in living memory. When he walks through that fight, he will be fighting the winner of Commey-Chaniev. What will that add to his legacy? Fuck all. He does not need titles, he needs names and fights that capture the imagination of the fans. It is January 2019, and we can already write off the whole year pretty much. He rarely fights more than twice a year, so this might be the sum of his 2019. Abject.


----------



## Pedderrs

Strike said:


> Loma is pissing his career away and is ruining any chance at building an elite legacy. Fighting Crolla is an absolute disgrace. Nothing short. It is up there with the most pointless, pathetic fights from an elite champion in living memory. When he walks through that fight, he will be fighting the winner of Commey-Chaniev. What will that add to his legacy? Fuck all. He does not need titles, he needs names and fights that capture the imagination of the fans. It is January 2019, and we can already write off the whole year pretty much. He rarely fights more than twice a year, so this might be the sum of his 2019. Abject.


Thank you for telling it like it is.


----------



## Strike

Pedderrs said:


> Thank you for telling it like it is.


I always do. I am not biased, and if I feel myself becoming biased on a topic, I do my best to address it. I stand by what I have said about Loma's ability, but I am not going to make excuses for shit fights and pretend that he is building a legacy. I find it baffling too, as I am sure he is totally confident in his ability, so I just cannot fathom the thinking behind these bouts.


----------



## steviebruno

Strike said:


> Loma is pissing his career away and is ruining any chance at building an elite legacy. Fighting Crolla is an absolute disgrace. Nothing short. It is up there with the most pointless, pathetic fights from an elite champion in living memory. When he walks through that fight, he will be fighting the winner of Commey-Chaniev. What will that add to his legacy? Fuck all. He does not need titles, he needs names and fights that capture the imagination of the fans. It is January 2019, and we can already write off the whole year pretty much. He rarely fights more than twice a year, so this might be the sum of his 2019. Abject.


I agree, but who is he supposed to be fighting right now?


----------



## Pedderrs

steviebruno said:


> I agree, but who is he supposed to be fighting right now?


Berchelt murders Crolla.


----------



## Pedderrs

Strike said:


> I always do. I am not biased, and if I feel myself becoming biased on a topic, I do my best to address it. I stand by what I have said about Loma's ability, but I am not going to make excuses for shit fights and pretend that he is building a legacy. I find it baffling too, as I am sure he is totally confident in his ability, so I just cannot fathom the thinking behind these bouts.


I guarantee the media will give him a free pass and pretend like him dominating Crolla is something special.


----------



## steviebruno

Pedderrs said:


> Berchelt murders Crolla.


Probably. Is he moving up to lightweight after his next fight?


----------



## Pedderrs

steviebruno said:


> Probably. Is he moving up to lightweight after his next fight?


He might have to. There is nobody else? And there is no probably about it. Crolla is a domestic level fighter. The most talented fighter in history is fighting Anthony Crolla when his second ever Pro fight was against Salido.


----------



## steviebruno

Pedderrs said:


> He might have to. There is nobody else? And there is no probably about it. Crolla is a domestic level fighter. The most talented fighter in history is fighting Anthony Crolla when his second ever Pro fight was against Salido.


He's definitely in no man's land. Not fighting the best opposition, and also not popular enough to get big money fighting cupcakes.

This shyt is fizzling out just like I said it would. A 20 fight anomaly... a footnote. Even his record as the quickest to thw title will be held under a microscope, when you factor in that he was 25 and people like Wilfredo Benitez had world titles at 17.


----------



## thegee

@Pedderrs, where do you get the most talented fighter in history from? He is at least a street behind Sugar Ray Robinson. Regards Mervyn The Gee


----------



## Pedderrs

thegee said:


> @Pedderrs, where do you get the most talented fighter in history from? He is at least a street behind Sugar Ray Robinson. Regards Mervyn The Gee


I was being sarcastic. Some actually think he is...when his best win got smashed to pieces the other week.


----------



## Strike

steviebruno said:


> I agree, but who is he supposed to be fighting right now?


I don't know, but he could move down in weight and find a better opponent. They should have made the Tank fight, they could have got Berchelt...much better than Crolla. Shit, he would have been better moving down two divisions (he's not a natural lightweight anyway) and trying to get a fight with Santa Cruz or Valdez.


----------



## Strike

Pedderrs said:


> I was being sarcastic. Some actually think he is...when his best win got smashed to pieces the other week.


This is when you expose your bias again. Never mind that he had a torn shoulder in round 2 eh? Never mind that he does not belong at lightweight...just pretend that his other wins were well below Linares level and Linares is not very good.


----------



## steviebruno

Strike said:


> I don't know, but he could move down in weight and find a better opponent. They should have made the Tank fight, they could have got Berchelt...much better than Crolla. Shit, he would have been better moving down two divisions (he's not a natural lightweight anyway) and trying to get a fight with Santa Cruz or Valdez.


I agree that he should move back down, absolutely. Still, even Berchelt isn't enough to place him into ATG status.


----------



## Pedderrs

Strike said:


> This is when you expose your bias again. Never mind that he had a torn shoulder in round 2 eh? Never mind that he does not belong at lightweight...just pretend that his other wins were well below Linares level and Linares is not very good.


None of the above changes the complexion of my argument at all. Yes, it's likely that Lomachenko torn his shoulder in round 2 against Linares. Yes, I would agree that he is better suited to 130lbs than he is 135lbs. So what? A fighter should have a murderer's row of wins before we start crediting them as being an all time great or one of the most talented fighters of all time. The wins aren't there, Strike. It's brutally simple. Not that I expect to find common ground on this issue when you contend that beating Gary Russell Jr in 2014 is more impressive than beating Naseem Hamed in 2001.

People think I harbour resentment towards Lomachenko and to a certain extent I do, but if he was actually beat a top fighter. A fighter of Mikey Garcia's quality, then I would be the first to fall in line and say this guy has that kind of potential. He might just finish his career as an all time great. I'm not ignoring the evidence, it just isn't there.


----------



## paloalto00

You guys don't kniw shit, Linares only lost because of that god awful bun


----------



## Pedrin1787

Where the fuck is my mate @Dealt_with?


----------



## Pedderrs

Pedrin1787 said:


> Where the fuck is my mate @Dealt_with?


He'll be in here soon breaking down Crolla, the stylistic nightmare, and suggesting it will be a better win that Mikey Garcia.


----------

