# Prime Naseem Hamed vs Lomachenko



## rjjfan (May 17, 2013)

How would today's Lomachenko deal with prime Naz's speed, power and unorthodox style?

I'll post the responses for @The Undefeated Gaul and @Dealt_with below:

-You are an absolute fuckwit RJJFan. Lomachenko KO1 Naz


----------



## Kid Cubano (Jun 5, 2013)

any fight vs Hammed has a question mark. The guy had an awkward style with lethal power. Lomachenko still hasn't show his full potential at pro level.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

i think hamed is terribly overrated. that said, lomachenko hasnt achieved anything yet. he has one pro fight! i cant really say yet.


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> i think hamed is terribly overrated. that said, lomachenko hasnt achieved anything yet. he has one pro fight! i cant really say yet.


this


----------



## SimplyTuck (Jun 4, 2013)

Loma U/D


----------



## Eoghan (Jun 6, 2013)

rjjfan said:


> How would today's Lomachenko deal with prime Naz's speed, power and unorthodox style?
> Funny you should say that, I believe TUG's fave of all time is Naz
> 
> I'll post the responses for @The Undefeated Gaul and @Dealt_with below:
> ...


----------



## nvs (May 16, 2013)

Kid Cubanos avi cracks me up everytime :lol:


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

how can anyone reasonably pick Loma when we haven't seen him in the pro ranks yet against someone like Naz


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

rjjfan said:


> How would today's Lomachenko deal with prime Naz's speed, power and unorthodox style?
> 
> I'll post the responses for @The Undefeated Gaul and @Dealt_with below:
> 
> -You are an absolute fuckwit RJJFan. Lomachenko KO1 Naz


Lomachenko is way too technically proficient, if MAB could neutralise him then Loma would have no problems. Naseem would have a punchers chance, as he did against any top class competition.


----------



## chibelle (Jun 5, 2013)

LOL -
How did I know that Loma will be equated to a true ATG like MAB?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

chibelle said:


> LOL -
> How did I know that Loma will be equated to a true ATG like MAB?


Lomachenko is already far more advanced than MAB. Such disrespect shown to Lomachenko out of ignorance.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> how can anyone reasonably pick Loma when we haven't seen him in the pro ranks yet against someone like Naz


How can we reasonably pick Naz when we've never seen him against someone like Lomachenko?


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Lomachenko is already far more advanced than MAB. Such disrespect shown to Lomachenko out of ignorance.


u cant be serious. u must be trolling.


----------



## godsavethequeen (Jun 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> How can we reasonably pick Naz when we've never seen him against someone like Lomachenko?


Troll


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> u cant be serious. u must be trolling.


Not in the slightest. Only people who don't follow amateur boxing doubt Lomachenko's greatness (which happens to be most of this forum).


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

rjjfan said:


> How would today's Lomachenko deal with prime Naz's speed, power and unorthodox style?
> 
> I'll post the responses for @The Undefeated Gaul and @Dealt_with below:
> 
> -You are an absolute fuckwit RJJFan. Lomachenko KO1 Naz





Eoghan said:


> Funny you should say that, I believe TUG's fave of all time is Naz


:lol: RJJ

Eoghan, you know me well man! Naseem Hamed is my favourite fighter of all time.

Shocking newsflash: I would *support* Naseem if this fight went down, but my soul would cry. It's 1. Hamed 2. Ali 3. Morales. I'd support Lomachenko over Morales.

It's very sad that people genuinely don't know how good Vasyl Lomachenko is and are naively boxing him up with any other top amateur who's crossing over.

This is not a good matchup for Hamed. 
If Naz goes for the attack, he better land otherwise he's landed himself in the oblivion honestly. I remember Lomachenko vs awkward fighters, hes fought a fair share. A lot of the time when they come in, they are left having been hit with a 4 punch combination lol Loma will just time, adjust his right foot and bang, be ready to use his right foot to escape the attack for when Naseem tries to fight back, Lomachenko's already got dis as he is the counterpuncher now.

Lomachenko's punch accuracy and timing and speed together will actually knock Hamed down a few times - if I was a betting man I'd bet serious moneys on that. Vasyl will routinely catch Hamed off balance - He sets up traps which really isn't what Hamed in particular will want.

*Honestly guys, why don't you actually watch his amateur and WSB fights, properly? :conf Do you think we're playing up for a laugh? I really don't get it lol *

It always pains me to say when I think Prince would lose, but you know what, Prince can lights out anybody and surprise anybody..he knows how to pull it out of the bag and you can't jusge him as a fighter from just that one fight with an ATG in Barrera. Barrera wasn't caught that night but I'm sure Naz would put to sleep a fair share of top 126lbers.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Not in the slightest. Only people who don't follow amateur boxing doubt Lomachenko's greatness (which happens to be most of this forum).


I'm not gonna lie and say I know a lot about his background, but i do know about Barrera's. Barrera is one of the most complete fighters of all time. You need to accomplish something as a pro before your name can mentioned in the same breath as his.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> I'm not gonna lie and say I know a lot about his background, but i do know about Barrera's. Barrera is one of the most complete fighters of all time. You need to accomplish something as a pro before your name can mentioned in the breath as his.


I honestly don't believe MAB can be mentioned in the same breath as Lomachenko, he isn't in that league. I respect accomplishments in the pro game less than accomplishments in the amateur game. Titles in the pro game are a dime a dozen and the best rarely fight the best.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> I'm not gonna lie and say I know a lot about his background, but i do know about Barrera's. Barrera is one of the most complete fighters of all time. You need to accomplish something as a pro before your name can mentioned in the same breath as his.


I'm making a big point here, read this guys: I feel like for certain fighters, for certain raw special talents you should be able to move beyond this. A recent thread on Loma made me realise..Fidel LaBarba the one time gold medalist drew and beat 2 ATG's in his first 9 fights. He proved that you don't 'need' to accomplish shit. You should also think about the pros of the past who won world titles in like 3-7th fights. None of these fighters were as special as Loma, and it turns out that Loma is more complete than Barrera, BUT you would have had to watch the amateurs and WSB, properly, to realise that. Also have a good think about Rigondeaux pre-Donaire. He learned virtually nothing since turning pro. Was it a crime for people to forward-think and believe he'd beat Donaire?

There's been too much of a focus on the failures of Olympic medalists in boxing fans collective consciousness and this has unfairly clouded successes.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> I honestly don't believe MAB can be mentioned in the same breath as Lomachenko, he isn't in that league. I respect accomplishments in the pro game less than accomplishments in the amateur game. Titles in the pro game are a dime a dozen and the best rarely fight the best.


Man, if Lomachenko loses in the near future you're going to feel like an absolute idiot. This is next-level dick riding.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I'm making a big point here, read this guys: I feel like for certain fighters, for certain raw special talents you should be able to move beyond this. A recent thread on Loma made me realise..Fidel LaBarba the one time gold medalist drew and beat 2 ATG's in his first 9 fights. He proved that you don't 'need' to accomplish shit. You should also think about the pros of the past who won world titles in like 3-7th fights. None of these fighters were as special as Loma, and it turns out that Loma is more complete than Barrera, BUT you would have had to watch the amateurs and WSB, properly, to realise that. Also have a good think about Rigondeaux pre-Donaire. He learned virtually nothing since turning pro. Was it a crime for people to forward-think and believe he'd beat Donaire?
> 
> There's been too much of a focus on the failures of Olympic medalists in boxing fans collective consciousness and this has unfairly clouded successes.


I'm not saying he s not talented. He s very good. He just hasn't accomplished anything as a pro yet. To say he's already better than Barrera is ridiculous. It's beyond ridiculous.


----------



## Bjj_Boxer (Jun 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Lomachenko is already far more advanced than MAB. Such disrespect shown to Lomachenko out of ignorance.


You're a moron...


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> I'm not saying he s not talented. He s very good. He just hasn't accomplished anything as a pro yet. To say he's already better than Barrera is ridiculous. It's beyond ridiculous.


He is better than MAB, you'll be seeing it in the pro game soon enough. He's a complete fighter.


----------



## chibelle (Jun 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> How can we reasonably pick Naz when we've never seen him against someone like Lomachenko?


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH...... hahahahhahahah.OMG!!!!


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> I honestly don't believe MAB can be mentioned in the same breath as Lomachenko, he isn't in that league. I respect accomplishments in the pro game less than accomplishments in the amateur game. Titles in the pro game are a dime a dozen and the best rarely fight the best.


Oh fuck outta here, theres no evidence to suggest LOMA should be suggested in the same breath as Barrera. He hasnt done shit in the pro game yet. Let him breath. Stop overrating.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> He is better than MAB, you'll be seeing it in the pro game soon enough. He's a complete fighter.


Do you really know who Barrera is? Emmanuel Steward said he was the most complete fighter he'd ever seen.


----------



## godsavethequeen (Jun 12, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> Do you really know who Barrera is? Emmanuel Steward said he was the most complete fighter he'd ever seen.


You should of just stopped with him and his ALT at the point where you said he was trolling lol. Which is exactly what he did, this guy is as bad as the worst floyd and Pac fan FACT...


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

godsavethequeen said:


> You should of just stopped with him and his ALT at the point where you said he was trolling lol. Which is exactly what he did, this guy is as bad as the worst floyd and Pac fan FACT...


U know what, man? I don't think he's trolling. He's just as bad as those guys. He might actually be worse when you consider the fact that Pacquiao and Mayweather are battle-tested professionals who have won titles in multiple weight classes.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

chibelle said:


> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH...... hahahahhahahah.OMG!!!!





tommygun711 said:


> Oh fuck outta here, theres no evidence to suggest LOMA should be suggested in the same breath as Barrera. He hasnt done shit in the pro game yet. Let him breath. Stop overrating.





Trash Bags said:


> U know what, man? I don't think he's trolling. He's just as bad as those guys. He might actually be worse when you consider the fact that Pacquiao and Mayweather are battle-tested professionals who have won titles in multiple weight classes.


Okay, wait and see. Your lack of interest in the most pure version of the sport impairs your ability to see right now. In time you'll recognise the truth about Lomachenko.


----------



## rjjfan (May 17, 2013)

Perhaps but I believe Gaul is entranced by Lomachenko and I'm afraid Naz is not looking his best lately.


----------



## rjjfan (May 17, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> :lol: RJJ
> 
> Eoghan, you know me well man! Naseem Hamed is my favourite fighter of all time.
> 
> ...


From what I've seen of Loma in the pros, his best punch is the bodyshot. Because Naz is built low and often leans over to invite headshots, he's not too easy to hit with a bodyshot.

The Naz that fought Jose Badillo would give anyone trouble IMO, if not outright beat the best.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

:lol:


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Unawares of Lomachenko's chin. Could be fine china. He needs to face a puncher before I can make my decision. Would be a very interesting style clash, a guy with a very amateur fighting style vs the crazy, unorthodox, athletic style of Naz.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> *Lomachenko is already far more advanced than MAB*. Such disrespect shown to Lomachenko out of ignorance.


LOL!


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Unawares of Lomachenko's chin. Could be fine china. He needs to face a puncher before I can make my decision. Would be a very interesting style clash, a guy with a very amateur fighting style vs the crazy, unorthodox, athletic style of Naz.


Very amateur fighting style? :rofl Humour me, what's amateurish about Lomachenko? If he takes flush punches from Salido does that qualify as facing a puncher?


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

You are an absolute fuckwit RJJFan. Lomachenko KO1 Naz.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Very amateur fighting style? :rofl Humour me, what's amateurish about Lomachenko? If he takes flush punches from Salido does that qualify as facing a puncher?


In the sense he fights like he's still in the amateurs. He could've finished Ramirez earlier but he did a combo on him and instead of pressuring him he moved away and let Ramirez reciprocate. If you're going to reply with he wanted to get rounds in the bank from the mouth of Lomachenko "I don't need to be built" and taking on a guy like Salido in his second fight doesn't seem like he cares about getting in rounds.

No Salido does have some pop but he's no puncher. Particularly given Naz is one of the hardest punchers ever at Feather, as well as very fast and very unorthodox. Salido isn't a measuring stick for Naz.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

rjjfan said:


> Perhaps but I believe Gaul is entranced by Lomachenko and I'm afraid Naz is not looking his best lately.


Dude, that was in 2009. Unfortunately I think he's even fatter now. 





Yeah, Barrera certainly didn't beat the best Naz. Hand problems + Destructive ego. Ingle, Naz's former trainer at least contained Naz's ego somewhat, but even Naz had an ego that was getting in his way and let me tell you that it was the reason why I became a HUGE fan of Mayweather growing up...because Mayweather although no way near as witty/good trash talker like Naz, his ego wouldn't get in his own way in the ring.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> In the sense he fights like he's still in the amateurs. He could've finished Ramirez earlier but he did a combo on him and instead of pressuring him he moved away and let Ramirez reciprocate. If you're going to reply with he wanted to get rounds in the bank from the mouth of Lomachenko "I don't need to be built" and taking on a guy like Salido in his second fight doesn't seem like he cares about getting in rounds.
> .


But you haven't seen anything of Lomachenko, along with most people on the forum. They can talk about the dude but they don't realy know anything. It's just ignorance. Since when did people like you become someone who can hold an intelligent view of Loma? 'He has an amateur style' = 'He fights like he's still in the amateurs' atsch you don't even know how he fights, especially to say that as thre's something huge you're missing in understanding Loma, in saying that.

'I don't need to be built' is a completely different thing to him wanting to get rounds in. If you're fighting and for any amateur going pro there's the pacing that you must understand, as well as any other advantage from having a first pro fight rather than going straight into a world title fight, then surely you want to make the most of it. He cares more about making history hence why he wanted to fight Salido in his first fight.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> But you haven't seen anything of Lomachenko, along with most people on the forum. They can talk about the dude but they don't realy know anything. It's just ignorance. Since when did people like you become someone who can hold an intelligent view of Loma?
> 
> 'I don't need to be built' is a completely different thing to him wanting to get rounds in. If you're fighting and for any amateur going pro there's the pacing that you must understand, as well as any other advantage from having a first pro fight rather than going straight into a world title fight, then surely you want to make the most of it. He cares more about making history hence why he wanted to fight Salido in his first fight.


Getting rounds in means getting experience. He says he doesn't need to be built on 6-8 rounders so he's saying he doesn't need the experience. Nobody fights a guy like Salido their second fight unless they're sure their level of experience is adequate. I guess he believes sparring can compensate. Which it doesn't.

I've known of Lomachenko and have seen him since 2008. I have his 2012 gold medal performance and 3 fights prior to that in the Olympics on DVD (Taped it), have seen all his fights in the WSB and saw his first pro fight. Probably haven't seen as much as you but I've seen a lot of him particularly recent performances which is the most relevant. You shouldn't speculate unless you know.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Getting rounds in means getting experience. He says he doesn't need to be built on 6-8 rounders so he's saying he doesn't need the experience. Nobody fights a guy like Salido their second fight unless they're sure their level of experience is adequate. I guess he believes sparring can compensate. Which it doesn't.
> 
> I've known of Lomachenko and have seen him since 2008. I have his 2012 gold medal performance and 3 fights prior to that in the Olympics on DVD (Taped it), have seen all his fights in the WSB and saw his first pro fight. Probably haven't seen as much as you but I've seen a lot of him particularly recent performances which is the most relevant. You shouldn't speculate unless you know.


lol or they're just up there on youtube atsch Ok since you're online, you have 5 minutes to break down what you saw in those four fights. Let's see ya knowledge.
Getting in rounds is not the ends, it's the means to having your understanding of pacing. 
Technically Lomachenko has 6 wins already, against top amateurs, all skilled, they all look to be crossing over well as pros, some being undefeated if you don't include the Loma loss. By no means would I say his recent performances are the most relevant as his opponents had drastically different styles. Given that you say he 'has an amateur style' and then backed off saying 'he fights like an amateur', I fear that you haven't actually watched properly.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

This was posted on his fake twitter, thought it was a cool picture..it was addressing the prospects of the year he was up against.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Okay, wait and see. Your lack of interest in the most pure version of the sport impairs your ability to see right now. In time you'll recognise the truth about Lomachenko.


i know he's very good. i know this. but to say that a man with one professional fight is better than barrera is excessive to the say the least. he might very well be, but dont you think he should prove it in the ring? youre belittling barrera and all the great fighters he faced.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Well, I've never seen this fight with Wellington Arias as I could never find it until today which is the first fight in this link, so I'm going to give it a watch. I've only seen Arias vs Verdejo where Arias is concerned.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Dude, that was in 2009. Unfortunately I think he's even fatter now.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You always make excuses for fighters you like, man. How do you know everything was fine and dandy is Barrera's life? How do you know his wife wasn't fuckin the neighbor? Hamed looked like he always did in the Barrera fight. Barrera just exposed his style for what it really was: a circus act.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

I can see this giving Loma problems:


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Loma KO's Ali with a body shot in the 5th, why would anyone think Naz stands a chance.


----------



## Berliner (Jun 6, 2013)

Naz has no Chance against future ATG Lomachenko. Shit thread!!!!1111


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Awful thread really.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Oh fuck outta here, theres no evidence to suggest LOMA should be suggested in the same breath as Barrera. He hasnt done shit in the pro game yet. Let him breath. Stop overrating.


What do you see in Kavaliauskas? I like the guy but when I see him I see a guy that's going to get KTFO at the top level.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> You always make excuses for fighters you like, man. How do you know everything was fine and dandy is Barrera's life? *How do you know his wife wasn't fuckin the neighbor?* Hamed looked like he always did in the Barrera fight. Barrera just exposed his style for what it really was: a circus act.


:eye what the hell...we were still looking at a prime Barrera though.
--
tbh people do consider Naz as not the same Naz as he was. He was spiralling out of control and Emmanuel Steward said he had very, very bad problems with his hands. As he was stepping up in competition, fights were getting more difficult but Naz himself was getting more difficult for himself and people around him. Barrera certainly did put on a clinic.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> In the sense he fights like he's still in the amateurs. He could've finished Ramirez earlier but he did a combo on him and instead of pressuring him he moved away and let Ramirez reciprocate. If you're going to reply with he wanted to get rounds in the bank from the mouth of Lomachenko "I don't need to be built" and taking on a guy like Salido in his second fight doesn't seem like he cares about getting in rounds.
> 
> No Salido does have some pop but he's no puncher. Particularly given Naz is one of the hardest punchers ever at Feather, as well as very fast and very unorthodox. Salido isn't a measuring stick for Naz.


So are you saying he didn't understand that Ramirez was hurt? What does the fact that he doesn't need to be built have to do with getting rounds in? His motivation for it going longer could've been one of a million things, the fact is that he visibly took it easy on Ramirez after the knockdown. Look at Lomachenko's gold medal performance if you want to see Lomachenko with the smell of blood. Since when is it an 'amateur' thing to back off when you have someone hurt anyway?
And we're not talking about as a measuring stick for Naz, we're talking about the durability of Lomachenko's chin (is it china or not). So Salido isn't a puncher, he can land flush shots and we'll still have questions about Lomachenko's chin. Gotcha.
You really need to think through things a bit more.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> i know he's very good. i know this. but to say that a man with one professional fight is better than barrera is excessive to the say the least. he might very well be, but dont you think he should prove it in the ring? youre belittling barrera and all the great fighters he faced.


He has proven it in the ring, with his two olympic golds and two world golds. He has an unparalleled record, he didn't even have to turn pro to be considered one of the greatest of all time.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> He has proven it in the ring, with his two olympic golds and two world golds. He has an unparalleled record, he didn't even have to turn pro to be considered one of the greatest of all time.


sure, he's an atg amateur boxer. i dont think anyone refutes that. however, the pro boxing game is different. some very good amateur boxers are but mere journeymen in the pro ranks.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

This hype will turn a lot of people against Lomachenko.


----------



## Danimal (Oct 9, 2013)

I think a motivated and prime Naz easily KO's current Loma. But who knows how good prime Loma will be.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> sure, he's an atg amateur boxer. i dont think anyone refutes that. however, the pro boxing game is different. some very good amateur boxers are but mere journeymen in the pro ranks.


Lomachenko isn't anywhere near a 'very good amateur', he's an ATG. This isn't Amir Khan or Antonio Tarver, this is a once in a lifetime guy.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> This hype will turn a lot of people against Lomachenko.


I would have tried to have people be on the same page in terms of appreciation of Loma rather than be militant lol but for self-amusement reasons, this never happened. It's too late now..Loma is CHB's darling really.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

I think I'll trial-run being a nice Lomatard like I originally wanted to. Let's see how that goes.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> So are you saying he didn't understand that Ramirez was hurt? What does the fact that he doesn't need to be built have to do with getting rounds in? His motivation for it going longer could've been one of a million things, the fact is that he visibly took it easy on Ramirez after the knockdown. Look at Lomachenko's gold medal performance if you want to see Lomachenko with the smell of blood. Since when is it an 'amateur' thing to back off when you have someone hurt anyway?
> And we're not talking about as a measuring stick for Naz, we're talking about the durability of Lomachenko's chin (is it china or not). So Salido isn't a puncher, he can land flush shots and we'll still have questions about Lomachenko's chin. Gotcha.
> You really need to think through things a bit more.


I'm saying his instinct wasn't to finish him. He landed like a 6 punch combo on him and what did he do? Move away then clinch not long after. As if he was the one who was hurt. Many fighters will capitalize on this fault.

Getting rounds in = Experience

If you don't need fights against journeymen AKA GETTING IN ROUNDS then you don't need the experience or feel as tho you do. For a guy who has a degree and trains professional athletes you sure have a hard time putting 2 and 2 together.

I need to think things through? Are you literally retarded? We're talking about whether a guy can withstand the punches of perhaps the hardest puncher at the weight ever and you think flush shots from Salido would be able to tell us this? You yourself said he has only KO'd chinny guys so if Lomachenko does survive it would tell us nothing more than he doesn't have a purely glass chin. Salido's game is wear a guy down with constant punching and a good body attack, not giving his opponent chances to breath and set things up. Naz's only game was to get a KO. Not only were they different levels of power but completely different styles and delivery of punches. His chin doesn't need to be china to be cracked by the likes of Naz.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I would have tried to have people be on the same page in terms of appreciation of Loma rather than be militant lol but for self-amusement reasons, this never happened. It's too late now..Loma is CHB's darling really.


Stfu nobody believes your self amusement bullshit. You get ripped to shreds by all you come into contact with on this site and play it off in order to save your embarrassment.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Stfu nobody believes your self amusement bullshit. You get ripped to shreds by all you come into contact with on this site and play it off in order to save your embarrassment.


 :deal quoted for truth.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I think I'll trial-run being a nice Lomatard like I originally wanted to. Let's see how that goes.


what are you going to say if salido stops lomachenko? salido's no joke, man. he's a seasoned veteran. i'm really curious. what will you say?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> I'm saying his instinct wasn't to finish him. He landed like a 6 punch combo on him and what did he do? Move away then clinch not long after. As if he was the one who was hurt. Many fighters will capitalize on this fault.
> 
> Getting rounds in = Experience
> 
> ...


Dude I don't give a shit about the fantasy match up of Naz vs Loma, I was talking in regards to if Loma was china chinned or not and if Salido could shed any light on that.
And are you saying he lost the killer instinct he had in jumping on his French opponent in the gold medal match of 2008 when he had him hurt? He saw that he was hurt and kept throwing combinations until the ref stepped in to stop it in round 1. Are you saying he has lost that and he doesn't understand when a guy is hurt now? :lol:atsch
He didn't land a 6 punch combo either, it was a counter body shot. He purposely stepped back in order to keep the fight going you tool. Maybe he wanted to enjoy the occasion for longer? Maybe he wanted to try something else out? Maybe he wanted to feel how the pro fight gloves felt? Maybe his dad told him to back off (Loma looked at his corner and shrugged his shoulders after the knockdown)? As I said there are a million possible reasons for Lomachenko stepping back. Getting rounds in isn't the equivalent of getting experience either you fucking moron. When Floyd or Pac comes back after a layoff are they getting rounds in for 'experience'? When a fighter is getting rounds in during sparring (which is what Ramirez was for Lomachenko) is that for 'experience'? Every fighter is always working on something, if they're not then they're losing something. I honestly think you might be literally retarded, some people aren't too clued up on one subject but it appears to be endless with you.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Stfu nobody believes your self amusement bullshit. You get ripped to shreds by all you come into contact with on this site and play it off in order to save your embarrassment.


Ok so you've ripped me to shreds in Lomachenko topics..? :lol: just like when people 'ripped me to shreds' when I informed the moderators about racism right, so that CHB won't become the ESB trash? atsch I've never seen a single post from you/or at least haven't been bothered paying attention to which demonstrates you know anything about boxing and all you do is bark :conf


----------



## jamestoney89 (Oct 11, 2013)

A year ago I'd have said this is ridiculous to ask if a guy with as little pro experience as Loma could beat somebody like Naz but after seeing what Rigo done to Donaire...new found respect for what these top amatures can do very early on in their pro career


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> what are you going to say if salido stops lomachenko? salido's no joke, man. he's a seasoned veteran. i'm really curious. what will you say?


I have a month ban bet with MadcapMaxie. I already answered this many times over. 
Lomachenko clearly struggled with pacing, and it really is something he needs to sort out. Once he is SETTLED in the pro ranks, he'll be the ATG in full form like I knew he'd be. Losing to Salido does nothing to his legacy, it just gives Lomachenko an understanding of what needs to be sorted first. A settled Loma would KO Salido.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

jamestoney89 said:


> A year ago I'd have said this is ridiculous to ask if a guy with as little pro experience as Loma could beat somebody like Naz but after seeing what Rigo done to Donaire...new found respect for what these top amatures can do very early on in their pro career


:deal

I've never heard anyone on this forum of the Lomadoubters who have actually responded to this point. It's always 'How can you support a guy who's only had 1 pro fight?'. In the light of everything I know about Loma, it's very simplistic and naive.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I have a month ban bet with MadcapMaxie. I already answered this many times over.
> Lomachenko clearly struggled with pacing, and it really is something he needs to sort out. Once he is SETTLED in the pro ranks, he'll be the ATG in full form like I knew he'd be. Losing to Salido does nothing to his legacy, it just gives Lomachenko an understanding of what needs to be sorted first. A settled Loma would KO Salido.


he has no legacy in the pro ranks. none. it wont hurt his amateur legacy, but it would definitely stunt his growth as a pro boxer. you're nuts, man. youre so arrogant.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> he has no legacy in the pro ranks. none. it wont hurt his amateur legacy, but it would definitely stunt his growth as a pro boxer. you're nuts, man. youre so arrogant.


lolz He has started an ATG legacy already tbh. International Featherweight titleholder in his first fight in one of the ATG debut wins. He also has those 6 fights at WSB which if held in America would be considered pro. So you can say for the sake of argument he's 7-0, against some very good opposition too. Better than the sort of rubbish that Rigondeaux faced. Lomachenko's WSB opponents TKO6 Rigondeaux's pre-Donaire opponents too.

Cos Rigondeaux learned so much about himself in the KO1 of Willie Casey, right?

+ Cos Rigo learned so much leading to that, right? Even though he decided to stick to his amateur style rather than try new things. Rigo is a die hard amateur through and through. That realisation is ALL Rigo learned, and that lesson came when he fought Cordoba.

Listen from 1 minute 36 seconds to 2 minutes 25 seconds - They share the same view as me and dealt.





Lomachenko = 34 rounds fought currently
Rigondeaux = 35 rounds fought at the start of this fight - note that some stayed in the ring for longer i.e 7 rounds, just so they can survive - we saw this same phenomenon with Agbeko.

- Cos Rigo really learned so much about the pros from this world championship fight, didn't he? 
- Would you laugh at someone for thinking Rigondeaux of this fight beats Donaire?

P.S Edit:
It would only 'stunt' his growth by about 3-4 fights. He'll then make a lot of noise and retire Salido. But this is imagining the worst, something which isn't Lomachenko's mind.

This post TKO6 'He's only had one pro fight :jay ' comments.


----------



## Berliner (Jun 6, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> lolz He has started an ATG legacy already tbh. International Featherweight titleholder in his first fight in one of the ATG debut wins.
> 
> .


Is this a joke or are you serious? Anyway. I had a good laugh.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Berliner said:


> Is this a joke or are you serious? Anyway. I had a good laugh.


Key word... *started*


----------



## Berliner (Jun 6, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Key word... *started*


? I can read. Still funny as fuck. I am sure many fans will remember that victory after Lomochenko retired. 
lol


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> lolz He has started an ATG legacy already tbh. International Featherweight titleholder in his first fight in one of the ATG debut wins. He also has those 6 fights at WSB which if held in America would be considered pro. So you can say for the sake of argument he's 7-0, against some very good opposition too. Better than the sort of rubbish that Rigondeaux faced. Lomachenko's WSB opponents TKO6 Rigondeaux's pre-Donaire opponents too.
> 
> Cos Rigondeaux learned so much about himself in the KO1 of Willie Casey, right?
> 
> ...


you make me want to pull my hair out. you dont know what the future holds for that man. if he gets knocked out in his next three fights, no one will ever consider him an atg. when floyd made his professional debut, he started an atg legacy. when manny made his pro debut, he also started an atg legacy, but no one knew it at the time. no one could've predicted it at the time. we can sit here and speculate all day, but the fact is, it must be proven in the ring. i agree wholeheartedly that lomachenko looks the part, but he has to prove it against dangerous opponents, against good opponents. after one fight you're not an atg. no one considers him an atg. this is all in your mind. sure, he's an excellent prospect. he has a lot of potential, but we just dont know what's gonna happen down the road.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Berliner said:


> ? I can read. Still funny as fuck. I am sure many fans will remember that victory after Lomochenko retired.
> lol


lol yeah true..semantics. 
But still, it's hard not to forget this..Maybe Salido can roll out of the ring.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> you make me want to pull my hair out. you dont know what the future holds for that man. if he gets knocked out in his next three fights, no one will ever consider him an atg. when floyd made his professional debut, he started an atg legacy. when manny made his pro debut, he also started an atg legacy, but no one knew it at the time. no one could've predicted it at the time. we can sit here and speculate all day, but the fact is, it must be proven in the ring. i agree wholeheartedly that lomachenko looks the part, but he has to prove it against dangerous opponents, against good opponents. after one fight you're not an atg. no one considers him an atg. this is all in your mind. sure, he's an excellent prospect. he has a lot of potential, but we just dont know what's gonna happen down the road.


Well I've only made judgements about Loma's power, Loma's chin and minimal Gasnelo-ism based on his amateur and WSB fights. Headguard and without. People were saying Lomachenko has no punching power when they watched one or two fights of his, but what they didn't realise is that Lomachenko's 'punches' are not merely to score points, but to get himself in a position where he can smackdown his opponents. Not just that but they didn't know Loma had 16 knockdowns/knockouts in 28 fights at the ELITE amateur level (Worlds, Olympics, WSB). But because I've already seen Lomachenko, I knew he had power, they're only now being more quiet because of the knockout on Ramirez :conf

This is a legit question to you? Let's talk about chin:
..I mean..if you personally watched all of Loma's fights and analysed them, and saw that he wasn't even in the slightest bit stunned when he was hit with big shots, as the small guy in the division, against many guys who are natural 140lbers or at least big 135lbers, what judgement would you personally hold about his chin? All I'm doing is using my judgement here for discussions, but I also recognise that contrary to very good evidence and for some random reason which I don't understand very well, he may not end up having a good chin.

I want you to recognise though that people are immediately counting him out even though they have barely seen any footage of him..that's the opposite extreme of me and dealt saying he'd beat this guy, that guy etc.

lol don't pull your hair out, although there's always wigs


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

It's nonsensical to subject a _*novice*_ like Lomachenko to a fantasy match-up. If you want to do that in terms of Amateur Boxing, a different sport where they only fight three rounds and wear headguards, then fine, but he should actually be given the opportunity to achieve something in the Pro game before we start contemplating how he would have fared against someone of Hamed's caliber.

Now let's all be quiet so this horrible, horrible thread can die a quick death.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Well I've only made judgements about Loma's power, Loma's chin and minimal Gasnelo-ism based on his amateur and WSB fights. Headguard and without. People were saying Lomachenko has no punching power when they watched one or two fights of his, but what they didn't realise is that Lomachenko's 'punches' are not merely to score points, but to get himself in a position where he can smackdown his opponents. Not just that but they didn't know Loma had 16 knockdowns/knockouts in 28 fights at the ELITE amateur level (Worlds, Olympics, WSB). But because I've already seen Lomachenko, I knew he had power, they're only now being more quiet because of the knockout on Ramirez :conf
> 
> This is a legit question to you? Let's talk about chin:
> ..I mean..if you personally watched all of Loma's fights and analysed them, and saw that he wasn't even in the slightest bit stunned when he was hit with big shots, as the small guy in the division, against many guys who are natural 140lbers or at least big 135lbers, what judgement would you personally hold about his chin? All I'm doing is using my judgement here for discussions, but I also recognise that contrary to very good evidence and for some random reason which I don't understand very well, he may not end up having a good chin.
> ...


I go on fact. Not allowances made just to justify your fandom.

Sorry to be so harsh, but this whole situation is ludicrous.

Let's wait, see, and enjoy. Lomachenko probably is THAT good but until it's proven these kind of assertions are a little sad to see.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> What do you see in Kavaliauskas? I like the guy but when I see him I see a guy that's going to get KTFO at the top level.


You don't see me hyping Kavaliauskas up to be as good as other WW greats such as SRL or Gavilan, like what you guys are doing with Loma. When I look at Kavaliauskas I see good fundamentals and great ring generalship. I see nice killer instinct and respectable power. I see some excellent countering.

Why would he get KO'd at top level. This guy has explosive hands and doesn't leave a lot of room for countering opportunities.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> I'm saying his instinct wasn't to finish him. He landed like a 6 punch combo on him and what did he do? Move away then clinch not long after. As if he was the one who was hurt. Many fighters will capitalize on this fault.
> 
> Getting rounds in = Experience
> 
> ...


THIS!!! Holy fuck, I said the same exact thing! Lomachenko is supposedly moving so fast because he is already 100% developed as a pro, and doesn't need to start slow, but wait - he didn't take Ramirez out when he could have because he wanted to get some rounds in? For what? What's the point if you are already SO ready for the upper tier pro ranks?


----------



## chibelle (Jun 5, 2013)

I like how "pacing" is the built in excuse even though Loma is supposed to have endurance and trains specifically for 15 rounders.

So Loma can do 15 rounds yet he needs to learn pacing?
In WSB do you change the pacing of your punch rate compared to the pros?

LOL


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> I go on fact. Not allowances made just to justify your fandom.
> 
> Sorry to be so harsh, but this whole situation is ludicrous.
> 
> Let's wait, see, and enjoy. Lomachenko probably is THAT good but until it's proven these kind of assertions are a little sad to see.


That's fine. The thing is, I've always agreed to that and I'm actually in the same boat as everybody else so on that same basis tbh I agree it is ludicrous on an absolute level. I've personally never said he DEFINITELY has a good chin for example on the level that's set in stone like Glen Johnson. However, for purely discussion purposes only, let us accept what current _existing_ evidence points towards, i.e he has a good chin and he doesn't suffer from Gasnelogitis. 
It's fun to be able to do that about arguably the amateur GOAT vs top fighters.

In reality, there's just two things that have uncertainty 1. his chin 2. his skin i.e does he cut easily. I don't doubt anything else.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> THIS!!! Holy fuck, I said the same exact thing! Lomachenko is supposedly moving so fast because he is already 100% developed as a pro, and doesn't need to start slow, but wait - he didn't take Ramirez out when he could have because he wanted to get some rounds in? For what? What's the point if you are already SO ready for the upper tier pro ranks?


I don't think you've read mine or dealt's responses that address this. He is already the legit fighter, but lets say in simple terms, spread your gameplan across 10 rounds rather than 5. Lomachenko happened to be going too slowly which his corner pointed out twice.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> That's fine. The thing is, I've always agreed to that and I'm actually in the same boat as everybody else so on that same basis tbh I agree it is ludicrous. I've personally never said he DEFINITELY has a good chin for example on the level that's set in stone like Glen Johnson. However, for purely discussion purposes only, let us accept what current _existing_ evidence points towards, i.e he has a good chin and he doesn't suffer from Gasnelogitis.
> It's fun to be able to do that about arguably the amateur GOAT vs top fighters.
> 
> In reality, there's just two things that have uncertainty 1. his chin 2. his skin i.e does he cut easily. I don't doubt anything else.


So do you think Teofilo Stevenson would really beat Muhammad Ali or Foreman?


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> You don't see me hyping Kavaliauskas up to be as good as other WW greats such as SRL or Gavilan, like what you guys are doing with Loma. When I look at Kavaliauskas I see good fundamentals and great ring generalship. I see nice killer instinct and respectable power. I see some excellent countering.
> 
> Why would he get KO'd at top level. This guy has explosive hands and doesn't leave a lot of room for countering opportunities.


yeah I see the things you see to an extent. I'm actually a big fan of his, I have a huge interest in amateur fighters turning pro.

His defense isn't anywhere near as good as I'd like it to be. it's not too hard to land clean on this guy, it's not difficult to outbox him. He's been stopped quite a few times in the ams although the stoppage against Joyce in ams was just because of an arm injury. A work in progress unlike Lomachenko, but Robert Garcia's a good training but what E.K does well, he does very well. Exciting fighter though, who also believes Lomachenko is the best amateur just to throw it out there lol

Maybe EK would do better than I think simply because it's hard to outbox his olympic competition, but not the Maidana's.

Fingers crossed his Lithuanian teammate Petrauskas turns pro, now that guy is a talent, an even bigger talent.

&#8230;.Kavaliauskas cannot be compared to Lomachenko though jus' saying, so there's no wonder why you're not hyping this dude, whereas based on clips, I can say Loma is one of the very, very best I've seen. Be careful not to fall for the Oxnard hype :lol:


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

chibelle said:


> I like how "pacing" is the built in excuse even though Loma is supposed to have endurance and trains specifically for 15 rounders.
> 
> So Loma can do 15 rounds yet he needs to learn pacing?
> In WSB do you change the pacing of your punch rate compared to the pros?
> ...


:eye

atsch This post is pathetic on so many levels


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> So do you think Teofilo Stevenson would really beat Muhammad Ali or Foreman?


Well I havent studied Teo to death, whereas I have studied Loma to death enough to be confident and know how he'd do, just like how people can make a judgement on Rigo pre-Donaire.

Heavyweight is also an entirely different division so there are not entirely the same factors to consider when analysing Teo.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> yeah I see the things you see to an extent. I'm actually a big fan of his, I have a huge interest in amateur fighters turning pro.
> 
> His defense isn't anywhere near as good as I'd like it to be. it's not too hard to land clean on this guy, it's not difficult to outbox him. He's been stopped quite a few times in the ams although the stoppage against Joyce in ams was just because of an arm injury. A work in progress unlike Lomachenko, but Robert Garcia's a good training but what E.K does well, he does very well. Exciting fighter though, who also believes Lomachenko is the best amateur just to throw it out there lol
> 
> ...


Based on what i seen in this video his defense isn't bad at all. It's against an aggressive, decent opponent as well. He blocks punches very well.

[video=dailymotion;x10voxm]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x10voxm_2013-06-08-egidijus-kavaliauskas-vs-luis-borrego_sport[/video]

AM ability does not translate to pro ability. Duane Bobick beat Larry Holmes in the amatuers and I garuantee you Holmes would decapitate him like Norton did in the pros. I don't care about their amateur pedigree. I am more interested in his pro career at this point. EK will eventually be a quality fighter.

it doesn't matter how highly you rank Loma because no matter what you say he hasn't done shit in the pro game yet. Neither has EK. To me EK looks impressive on film. So does Loma. Neither have done shit in the pros. We haven't seen Loma test his skills against a great pro yet or even a good one, so I don't get the point of saying he would beat Floyd Mayweather or saying he would even stand a chance against Barrera. Based ON WHAT? Oxnard hasn't hyped EK at all by the way.



The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Well I havent studied Teo to death, whereas I have studied Loma to death enough to be confident and know how he'd do, just like how people can make a judgement on Rigo pre-Donaire.
> 
> Heavyweight is also an entirely different division so there are not entirely the same factors to consider when analysing Teo.


Rigo at least had 11 pro fights before Donaire so there's also that.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Based on what i seen in this video his defense isn't bad at all. It's against an aggressive, decent opponent as well. He blocks punches very well.
> 
> [video=dailymotion;x10voxm]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x10voxm_2013-06-08-egidijus-kavaliauskas-vs-luis-borrego_sport[/video]
> 
> ...


I'm not gonna watch that fight right now, but I can only talk from what I've seen (not many fights are available as I'd like), what I've read also and I don't consider his defence bad at all either, but I said I see him being KTFO at the top level, and I guess my judgements are reflected by the fact of the guy getting stopped numerous times and getting knocked down quite often in the amateurs with their headgear and padded gloves. You don't have to see him get hit either to notice what sort of fighter and punches he'd be vulnerable against. I am under the impression that you're too sold on his defence..each to their own. Showing me a complete bum is not going to be so valuable to me, I've seen him fight highly skillful ams.

I know amateur ability doesn't translate to pro ability, but EK is not the example you want to use to demonstrate that. Him having a pro style doesn't cancel out the negatives of his game either which is what I'm more concerned about - his negatives which could be another example of amateur ability not translating to pro ability. When I talk about him being outboxed, I don't just mean it from the perspective of the amateurs, but from the perspective of the pros.

'EK _will_ eventually be a great fighter' - well, that's just as bad as saying Lomachenko will be an ATG. Because there's no doubt that Lomachenko IS a great fighter already, however there's still those 'factors' where pros are concerned which makes us unable to talk about Loma, remember? As you know I'd go as far as saying they're relatively likely to catch EK out.

But that's EK, fuck EK for now. This is the GOATchenko show :lol:


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Rigo at least had 11 pro fights before Donaire so there's also that.


I don't buy into this BS really....magic word 'pro' fights even though they were against a bunch of shitcunts. 
Would you think it's too premature for someone who watched a very high number of Rigondeaux's amateur fights, to say the Rigondeaux of the Rico Ramos fight would beat Donaire? (Going back in time to 2011)?


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Anyone...answer this question. Let's go back in time to 2012. Pretend you're in January 2012. 
Imagine you know everything about Rigondeaux the way I know about Lomachenko. Is it ludicrous, is it too premature to say you feel that the Rigondeaux of the Rico Ramos fight would beat Nonito Donaire?


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I'm not gonna watch that fight right now, but I can only talk from what I've seen (not many fights are available as I'd like), what I've read also and I don't consider his defence bad at all either, but I said I see him being KTFO at the top level, and I guess my judgements are reflected by the fact of the guy getting stopped numerous times and getting knocked down quite often in the amateurs with their headgear and padded gloves. You don't have to see him get hit either to notice what sort of fighter and punches he'd be vulnerable against. I am under the impression that you're too sold on his defence..each to their own. Showing me a complete bum is not going to be so valuable to me, I've seen him fight highly skillful ams.
> 
> I know amateur ability doesn't translate to pro ability, but EK is not the example you want to use to demonstrate that. Him having a pro style doesn't cancel out the negatives of his game either which is what I'm more concerned about - his negatives which could be another example of amateur ability not translating to pro ability. When I talk about him being outboxed, I don't just mean it from the perspective of the amateurs, but from the perspective of the pros.
> 
> ...


I'm sold on him defensively because I seen some of his pro fights :lol: If you watched the fight you would know what I'm talking about. the dude he is fighting is also not a bum, why even say that if you haven't watched it :rofl

and saying he will eventually be a great fighter is the same as hyping Loma up to Barrera's level? Are you kidding me? :roflatsch


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> THIS!!! Holy fuck, I said the same exact thing! Lomachenko is supposedly moving so fast because he is already 100% developed as a pro, and doesn't need to start slow, but wait - he didn't take Ramirez out when he could have because he wanted to get some rounds in? For what? What's the point if you are already SO ready for the upper tier pro ranks?


Simple minds...


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Simple minds...


:lol:


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> I'm sold on him defensively because I seen some of his pro fights :lol: If you watched the fight you would know what I'm talking about. the dude he is fighting is also not a bum, why even say that if you haven't watched it :rofl
> 
> and saying he will eventually be a great fighter is the same as hyping Loma up to Barrera's level? Are you kidding me? :roflatsch


Well I'm saying that because it's a pro fight, and he has fought nothing but complete bums
http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=533982&cat=boxer ......IS a bum. Jheez!

Why are you getting hysterical? It is the same. Lomachenko is one of the very, very best I've seen on film and I know what I'm talking about since I and dealt analysed him in ways that virtually no one has. What you are saying has far greater conjecture, because you're imagining that EK is becoming greater in ways that you don't know about yet atsch whereas I'm saying oh look, like Rigo, Lomachenko aint really going to be learning shit. He's already complete, and from what I've seen, Lomachenko looks better than Barrera, and so if we were to play that game where we are predicting the future, we have to bring these 'discussion based assumptions' into play too. It's double standards, you can't have your cake and eat it.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Well I'm saying that because it's a pro fight, and he has fought nothing but complete bums
> http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=533982&cat=boxer ......IS a bum. Jheez!
> 
> Why are you getting hysterical? It is the same. Lomachenko is one of the very, very best I've seen on film and I know what I'm talking about since I and dealt analysed him in ways that virtually no one has. What you are saying has far greater conjecture, because you're imagining that EK is becoming greater in ways that you don't know about yet atsch whereas I'm saying oh look, like Rigo, Lomachenko aint really going to be learning shit. He's already complete, and from what I've seen, Lomachenko looks better than Barrera, and so if we were to play that game where we are predicting the future, we have to bring these 'discussion based assumptions' into play too. It's double standards, you can't have your cake and eat it.


Boxrec warrior at his finest. That win is better than it looks if you would watch the video. I'm sorry you can't take less than 10 minutes of your time to watch EK destroy someone. my bad. The guy just wasn't good enough to fuck with EK. I'm imagining that EK is greater in ways that I don't know? What kind of shit is this? The difference is, that I am not even comparing EK to anyone great, which is what you are doing with Loma. I never said he was going to be an all time great. This isn't rocket science. You can't compare Loma to anyone great until he does anything in the pro ranks and its the same deal with EK. the difference is I'm not a dick rider and I'm realistic with my favorite fighters unlike you. You have to be realistic and you won't get laughed at. Loma looks better than Barrera, in your opinion, because he hasn't fought the level of opposition Barrera has. it's really that simple. Put Loma in with Morales and he gets his ass whooped. They have completely different styles. Barrera would've broke him down late.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Boxrec warrior at his finest. That win is better than it looks if you would watch the video. I'm sorry you can't take less than 10 minutes of your time to watch EK destroy someone. my bad. The guy just wasn't good enough to fuck with EK. I'm imagining that EK is greater in ways that I don't know? What kind of shit is this? The difference is, that I am not even comparing EK to anyone great, which is what you are doing with Loma. I never said he was going to be an all time great. This isn't rocket science. You can't compare Loma to anyone great until he does anything in the pro ranks and its the same deal with EK. the difference is I'm not a dick rider and I'm realistic with my favorite fighters unlike you. You have to be realistic and you won't get laughed at. Loma looks better than Barrera, in your opinion, because he hasn't fought the level of opposition Barrera has. it's really that simple. Put Loma in with Morales and he gets his ass whooped. They have completely different styles. Barrera would've broke him down late.


Oh dear, oh dear. You really are a clown :lol: Yeah what's the harm in starting off with boxrec to get an idea of the opponents background?
I'd be scared if EK didn't destroy a bum with a 2-4 record and fights in some backstreet casino. Are you a professional figher too or something? Are you saying this because you have like a 1-3 record and want to feel significant and a 'hard man'? :rofl

Yeah you are imagining so by saying 'EK _WILL_ eventually become a _great_ fighter'. The point is, by making a statement like that, you are holding certain assumptions that I am holding about Lomachenko, except, the existing evidence for Loma is stronger than the existing evidence for EK. Did you know that if Loma had those WSB fights in USA, they'd be considered pro and he'd be 7-0? You feel that there is more evidence for Kavaliauskas because he fights a friggin casino worker bum :rofl

Rigondeaux hasn't fought Morales' competition either, I think Rigondeaux would beat Morales for example. I rate him that highly and recently people are now just realising Rigo's greatness. If you've got a problem with that then it's not worth conversing with me.

I'm simply using my knowledge of Lomachenko and making judgements on that. Hypothetical matchups are purely discussional and require assumptions. lool look at your little breakdown of the Barrera and Morales matchups, you give no justification whatsoever and I highly doubt you've seen anything much of Loma at all...which Lomachenko is this? Is this the Lomachenko who we're hypothetically saying has a good chin like he showed in the amateurs? Because to assume he doesn't have a chin or to assume he even has an average chin, is no better than what I'm doing in assuming he has at least a 'pretty good' chin. It's double standards but again you don't realise this. Howler upon howler lol

Laughed at by who? People don't really know enough about Lomachenko and have only seen 5 ish fights of his maximum and think that's enough for Loma's case? :lol:


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

@Abraham Egis is confirming what we were saying all along about the way Loma planned for the fight to go...pacing..then Egis gives his own 'personal' view, being happy about the KO. This just talks about a lot of good stuff in general tbh
http://www.boxingscene.com/lomachenkos-manager-on-career-future-big-fights--73405


----------



## Zopilote (Jun 5, 2013)

I so can't wait until Salido KTFO Loma....I know 2 people here who will be commiting suicide, and i will enjoy every single minute of it.


----------



## Zopilote (Jun 5, 2013)

Oh and Naz puts him in a coma.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Dude I don't give a shit about the fantasy match up of Naz vs Loma, I was talking in regards to if Loma was china chinned or not and if Salido could shed any light on that.
> And are you saying he lost the killer instinct he had in jumping on his French opponent in the gold medal match of 2008 when he had him hurt? He saw that he was hurt and kept throwing combinations until the ref stepped in to stop it in round 1. Are you saying he has lost that and he doesn't understand when a guy is hurt now? :lol:atsch
> He didn't land a 6 punch combo either, it was a counter body shot. He purposely stepped back in order to keep the fight going you tool. Maybe he wanted to enjoy the occasion for longer? Maybe he wanted to try something else out? Maybe he wanted to feel how the pro fight gloves felt? Maybe his dad told him to back off (Loma looked at his corner and shrugged his shoulders after the knockdown)? As I said there are a million possible reasons for Lomachenko stepping back. Getting rounds in isn't the equivalent of getting experience either you fucking moron. When Floyd or Pac comes back after a layoff are they getting rounds in for 'experience'? When a fighter is getting rounds in during sparring (which is what Ramirez was for Lomachenko) is that for 'experience'? Every fighter is always working on something, if they're not then they're losing something. I honestly think you might be literally retarded, some people aren't too clued up on one subject but it appears to be endless with you.


There is literally no other reason for a newbie to get rounds in other than experience, what else is he doing then? You try shit in the gym not in a professional fight where 1 punch can end things. Seasoned vets do it to get ring rust off. Completely different scenario.

You calling me retarded is laughable. You and your butt buddy are jokes on this site. You really are delusional.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> How can we reasonably pick Naz when we've never seen him against someone like Lomachenko?


Nice :lol:


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Ok so you've ripped me to shreds in Lomachenko topics..? :lol: just like when people 'ripped me to shreds' when I informed the moderators about racism right, so that CHB won't become the ESB trash? atsch I've never seen a single post from you/or at least haven't been bothered paying attention to which demonstrates you know anything about boxing and all you do is bark :conf


I'm sure if you ask around you'll see I'm far more knowledgeable about boxing then yourself. Before CHB I was on nothing more than ESB Classic and you actually have to know some shit to be able to post there. Whereas you'd get laughed off.

I don't need to say whether or not I've ripped you to shreds because you can just look at the backlash of every ridiculous comment you've made. When you get banned for saying Duran - Lomachenko is 50/50 lights should go off but they don't and you further and further continue to demolish any credibility as a poster you may have possessed. Now you're just known as nothing more than an extreme Loma nut hugger.

Also you informing Mods is a bitch move, I've literally never seen anyone else on this site cry to the mods in that fashion and you did it several times. Congrats on being a bitch.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> There is literally no other reason for a newbie to get rounds in other than experience, what else is he doing then? You try shit in the gym not in a professional fight where 1 punch can end things. Seasoned vets do it to get ring rust off. Completely different scenario.
> 
> You calling me retarded is laughable. You and your butt buddy are jokes on this site. You really are delusional.


This is where you get completely off track. Lomachenko isn't a 'newbie' in the slightest. He's a veteran, when guys like Donaire and Garcia are asked about Lomachenko they specifically say "He has all that experience". He's been boxing since he could walk, watching Roy Jones and Tyson. 20+ years of boxing experience, consistently beating the best the Russians and Cubans have to offer. He can do everything in a boxing ring, he is the most complete fighter I've ever seen and soon the rest of you tards are going to be forced to recognise that.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> I'm sold on him defensively because I seen some of his pro fights :lol: If you watched the fight you would know what I'm talking about. the dude he is fighting is also not a bum, why even say that if you haven't watched it :rofl
> 
> and saying he will eventually be a great fighter is the same as hyping Loma up to Barrera's level? Are you kidding me? :roflatsch


Erherm. As you can see from my sig Loma is already beyond MAB. Have some respect how dare you mention the ATG GOAT P4P KING Loma in the same sentence as the bum Barrera.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> This is where you get completely off track. Lomachenko isn't a 'newbie' in the slightest. He's a veteran, when guys like Donaire and Garcia are asked about Lomachenko they specifically say "He has all that experience". He's been boxing since he could walk, watching Roy Jones and Tyson. 20+ years of boxing experience, consistently beating the best the Russians and Cubans have to offer. He can do everything in a boxing ring, he is the most complete fighter I've ever seen and soon the rest of you tards are going to be forced to recognise that.


You didn't answer my question. But don't worry I'm used to you going off in tangents in order to spew more facts regarding Loma.

1-0. There is no blueprint. All hail Loma King of Kings.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

Zopilote said:


> I so can't wait until Salido KTFO Loma....I know 2 people here who will be commiting suicide, and i will enjoy every single minute of it.


im starting to feel the same. it's unfortunate as lomachenko is very good. this type of nuthuggery is appalling. it's disgusting.


----------



## chibelle (Jun 5, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> im starting to feel the same. it's unfortunate as lomachenko is very good. this type of nuthuggery is appalling. it's disgusting.


At least the Pactards waited until he defeated 3 Mexican ATGs and the Floydettes waited until was actually ranked #1 P4P. And PBF looks so much better than Loma on film. I mean it is not even close.
They have gone full retard based on WSB - the fucking WSB!!!!
Shit, Ward won the Super 6 tourney and all he got was #2 P4P. Loma is already top 10 ATG and ATG at his weightclass based on WSB!! Fucking WSB!!


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> im starting to feel the same. it's unfortunate as lomachenko is very good. this type of nuthuggery is appalling. it's disgusting.


It is and like you said it's unfortunate. Loma is a very talented guy but I wouldn't admit being a fan if it meant I was grouped with those two fruit loops. At least with Pactards and Flomos they had something concrete to back up their claims in 2 ATG careers. Here it amounts to nothing more than speculation. I'm not even confident Salido will win but I made a ban bet with both of them. I will be expecting gifts should Salido be victorious for having rid the forum of their presence for a few months.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> You didn't answer my question. But don't worry I'm used to you going off in tangents in order to spew more facts regarding Loma.
> 
> 1-0. There is no blueprint. All hail Loma King of Kings.


The answer to your question was in the post you quoted dummy. Are you related to Abraham? You both seem to share some neurological/comprehension issues. Have you been hit in the head much? Nasty fall when you were a child?


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

chibelle said:


> At least the Pactards waited until he defeated 3 Mexican ATGs and the Floydettes waited until was actually ranked #1 P4P. And PBF looks so much better than Loma on film. I mean it is not even close.
> They have gone full retard based on WSB - the fucking WSB!!!!
> Shit, Ward won the Super 6 tourney and all he got was #2 P4P. Loma is already top 10 ATG and ATG at his weightclass based on WSB!! Fucking WSB!!


the shit is unbelievable. it's like u said, at least the pactards waited a bit before going full retard. these dudes are already in that little yellow bus and lomachenko's still in the womb.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

chibelle said:


> At least the Pactards waited until he defeated 3 Mexican ATGs and the Floydettes waited until was actually ranked #1 P4P. And PBF looks so much better than Loma on film. I mean it is not even close.
> They have gone full retard based on WSB - the fucking WSB!!!!
> Shit, Ward won the Super 6 tourney and all he got was #2 P4P. Loma is already top 10 ATG and ATG at his weightclass based on WSB!! Fucking WSB!!


I don't care about WSB, it's what he did before then that cemented his place as a boxing legend.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> It is and like you said it's unfortunate. Loma is a very talented guy but I wouldn't admit being a fan if it meant I was grouped with those two fruit loops. At least with Pactards and Flomos they had something concrete to back up their claims in 2 ATG careers. Here it amounts to nothing more than speculation. I'm not even confident Salido will win but I made a ban bet with both of them. I will be expecting gifts should Salido be victorious for having rid the forum of their presence for a few months.


salido could very well be victorious. he's resume is very impressive. i'm gonna laugh if he wins. ill be rooting for salido and i don't even like him!


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> the shit is unbelievable. it's like u said, at least the pactards waited a bit before going full retard. these dudes are already in that little yellow bus and lomachenko's still in the womb.


It's simply because you and others don't follow world boxing, you only recognise US/hype/WWE/Broner super champion style boxing.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> salido could very well be victorious. he's resume is very impressive. i'm gonna laugh if he wins. ill be rooting for salido and i don't even like him!


If Salido wins he should be called the Cupacabra, because he slays GOATS. Amiright?...this thing on?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> salido could very well be victorious. he's resume is very impressive. i'm gonna laugh if he wins. ill be rooting for salido and i don't even like him!


Resume? That counts for nothing, it's what you can do. Against Lomachenko he's just going to succeed in taking a beating.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> It's simply because you and others don't follow world boxing, you only recognise US/hype/WWE/Broner super champion style boxing.


fighters from all over the world go to the us to fight. it's every boxer's dream to fight in the us. it's the boxing capital of the world and home to best fighters the world has ever seen. up until last year, where did pacquiao fight? where does maidana fight? marquez, morales, barrera, where did they fight? matthysse? rigondeaux, ggg...the list goes on and on. that is world boxing. it's world class boxing. u see it all in the us: technical fights, dogfights, retarded fights, etc. it's the highest level of boxing.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> If Salido wins he should be called the Cupacabra, because he slays GOATS. Amiright?...this thing on?


:lol: you're right, you're right.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> *Resume? That counts for nothing*, it's what you can do. Against Lomachenko he's just going to succeed in taking a beating.


Dealt with you are the gift that keeps on giving.


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Resume? That counts for nothing, it's what you can do. Against Lomachenko he's just going to succeed in taking a beating.


are u crazy? jesus christ, man, are u serious? dont u think he has to prove what he can do?


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Dealt with you are the gift that keeps on giving.


he must trolling. he cant possibly be serious.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> he must trolling. he cant possibly be serious.


All I know is he keeps adding gold to my sig.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Resume? That counts for nothing, it's what you can do. Against Lomachenko he's just going to succeed in taking a beating.


Let me copy and paste what I replied to this before:

I think it's more than just that. Pacing goes into a part of this, but I've seen him fade a little in the WSB toward rounds 4/5. He has a high energy style, so it'd make sense if he did and that's why he's working on his pacing now of course. It was especially in the Selimov fight where it seemed like his body punching was wearing him down a little. 
This probably won't be an issue in the future, but this is why we have to see him vs elite *pros * first over 10-12 rounds. A style that you don't see as often in the amateurs where a fighter will throw away the early rounds and start investing to body. I think we both know Saldio is the fighter that fits that description.

You think it won't be an issue at all, but the truth is, neither of us really know.* That's everybody who's opposite of your stance is saying. There's too many projections, assumptions and unknown variables to outright proclaim the things you're saying at this moment in time. 
I forgot whether it was you or @The Undefeated Gaul who said not to obsess over resumes and use the eye test. But one reason resumes are so important, because to quote Andre Ward "We all look like KO artist against C level opposition".

One thing that makes Roy such a H2H monster for a lot of people was that he looked untouchable vs weak competition yes, but he was also spectacular vs great competition in James Toney and Hopkins *


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

JMP said:


> The pinnacle of recent heavyweight boxing


:lol:

Yeah, but...



















Absurd.

Silver in '99 for the Cuban team boycott, of course. Beat the guy he was supposed to meet in the final a year later at the Olympics. Even though Felix Savon was all in on the Castro regime and never once even considered defecting and turning pro, I feel sort dirty for simply calling him "a great amateur" and not simply just a great fighter. That's some excessive dominance and is perhaps a bit understated compared to all the love and attention Teofilo Stevenson still gets today.



Pedderrs said:


> It's nonsensical to subject a *novice* like Lomachenko to a fantasy match-up. If you want to do that in terms of Amateur Boxing, a different sport where they only fight three rounds and wear headguards, then fine, but he should actually be given the opportunity to achieve something in the Pro game before we start contemplating how he would have fared against someone of Hamed's caliber.
> 
> Now let's all be quiet so this horrible, horrible thread can die a quick death.





Flea Man said:


> I go on fact. Not allowances made just to justify your fandom.
> 
> Sorry to be so harsh, but this whole situation is ludicrous.
> 
> Let's wait, see, and enjoy. Lomachenko probably is THAT good but until it's proven these kind of assertions are a little sad to see.


Not really OT but it's interesting to take a gander.

Some very notable pros who captured Olympic Gold
(no particular order)

Roy Jones (1988, Light Middleweight)**
Ray Leonard (1976, Light Welterweight)
Pernell Whitaker (1984, Lightweight)
Muhammad Ali (1960, Light Heavyweight)
Michael Spinks (1976, Middleweight)
Lennox Lewis (1988, Super Heavyweight)
George Foreman (1968, Heavyweight)
Joe Frazier (1964, Heavyweight)
Wladimir Klitschko (1996, Super Heavyweight)
Floyd Patterson (1952, Middleweight)
Oscar De La Hoya (1992, Lightweight)
Guillermo Rigondeaux (2000/2004, Bantamweight)
Andre Ward (2004, Light Heavyweight)

** Worst robbery in boxing history

Do you think Lomachenko will be more like them and less Mark Breland, Howard Davis, Ray Seales? Or worse Tyrell Biggs, Audley Harrison, Henry Tillman, et al. :lol:

Some other pretty good ones: Meldrick Taylor (1984, Featherweight), Joel Casamayor (1992, Bantamweight), Yuriorkis Gamboa (2004, Flyweight), Kennedy McKinney (1988, Bantamweight), Vassiliy Jirov (1996, Light Heavyweight), etc

One thing is for certain as it pertains to current boxing: There is absolutely no fighter I'm more looking forward to seeing what happens with. This has absolutely taken the cake and become THE thing to draw my attention on for 2014, I can't fucking wait. :rofl


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Let me copy and paste what I replied to this before:
> 
> I think it's more than just that. Pacing goes into a part of this, but I've seen him fade a little in the WSB toward rounds 4/5. He has a high energy style, so it'd make sense if he did and that's why he's working on his pacing now of course. It was especially in the Selimov fight where it seemed like his body punching was wearing him down a little.
> This probably won't be an issue in the future, but this is why we have to see him vs elite *pros * first over 10-12 rounds. A style that you don't see as often in the amateurs where a fighter will throw away the early rounds and start investing to body. I think we both know Saldio is the fighter that fits that description.
> ...


I don't agree that he looked tired against Selimov, but even if he did it doesn't mean anything. Fighting every second week ensures that there's always going to be residual fatigue and he's not going to be at his best.
As for Ward's quote... Do you really believe Lomachenko hasn't fought A class guys? He has and he's beaten them all. Have you ever seen anyone win gold like Lomachenko did in Beijing?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Trash Bags said:


> are u crazy? jesus christ, man, are u serious? dont u think he has to prove what he can do?


He has proven what he can do. But as I said, resume counts for nothing, it's what you can do. Did Donaire get extra points against Rigo because of his resume? No, he got his ass kicked because of what Rigo could do.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Can we stop fucking posting that Jones/Toney GIF


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> :lol:
> 
> Yeah, but...
> 
> ...


Excellent post as usual.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Can we stop fucking posting that Jones/Toney GIF


:lol:
Lomachenko actually did that exact same move in the final of the '09 worlds


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> I don't agree that he looked tired against Selimov, but even if he did it doesn't mean anything. Fighting every second week ensures that there's always going to be residual fatigue and he's not going to be at his best.
> As for Ward's quote... Do you really believe Lomachenko hasn't fought A class guys? He has and he's beaten them all. Have you ever seen anyone win gold like Lomachenko did in Beijing?


He wasn't exhausted in the Selimov fight, but I think he was noticeably slowing down. A lot of fighters seem to slow down around round 5-6 though and get their second wind later in the fight though like Sergio Martinez.

and the Andre Ward quote was used to justify why resumes are indeed important. I had a friend message me on facebook after he saw this video






He asked me if Hamed was one of the best fighters of all time :blood


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Can we stop fucking posting that Jones/Toney GIF


:lol: sorry man


----------



## Hatesrats (Jun 6, 2013)

Loma ain't worthy of a "What IF" Vs. Naz.
Do something in the pro's first....


----------



## Zopilote (Jun 5, 2013)

Hatesrats said:


> Loma ain't worthy of a "What IF" Vs. Naz.
> Do something in the pro's first....


:deal


----------



## Rudyard (May 23, 2013)

Hatesrats said:


> Loma ain't worthy of a "What IF" Vs. Naz.
> Do something in the pro's first....


preach


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Hatesrats said:


> Loma ain't worthy of a "What IF" Vs. Naz.
> Do something in the pro's first....


Agreed.


----------



## Rockinghorseshit (Oct 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> :lol:
> 
> Yeah, but...
> 
> ...


All respect to Savon's amateur career but in all honesty he's nothing more than glass jawed bum that was stopped by the likes of Dal chen Li (a defeat not avenged) Juan Delis Causse, Usman Arsaliyev (No rematch) Noel Perez Bio, Radim Marovski (didn't avenge the defeat). Theres no telling how awful he would of been in the pro game.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Rockinghorseshit said:


> All respect to Savon's amateur career but in all honesty he's nothing more than glass jawed bum that was stopped by the likes of Dal chen Li (a defeat not avenged) Juan Delis Causse, Usman Arsaliyev (No rematch) Noel Perez Bio, Radim Marovski (didn't avenge the defeat). Theres no telling how awful he would of been in the pro game.


How about Stevenson?


----------



## FelixTrinidad (Jun 3, 2013)

:rofl


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Rockinghorseshit said:


> All respect to Savon's amateur career but in all honesty he's nothing more than glass jawed bum that was stopped by the likes of Dal chen Li (a defeat not avenged) Juan Delis Causse, Usman Arsaliyev (No rematch) Noel Perez Bio, Radim Marovski (didn't avenge the defeat). Theres no telling how awful he would of been in the pro game.


I was hoping for a JMP reply first. :lol: :verysad


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> Excellent post as usual.


Thanks. I've probably got a lot more in it on another topic though: http://checkhookboxing.com/showthre...-(Floyd-Whitaker-Jones-Bernard-Hopkins)/page3



bballchump11 said:


> :lol: sorry man


:rofl Nah, it's cool.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> But but but he was so accomplished as an amateur?


Fixed.

Also wasn't I arguing with you saying he could've been glass jawed to which you said with the number of fights he had at the elite level that he can't? Guess you got proved wrong. Again.


----------



## rjjfan (May 17, 2013)

I imagine March 1 will be the day when the entire internet crashes from the sheer amount of posts bashing Loma if Salido wins. :lol:


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

*"They placed that medal around my neck and played the national anthem. Nothing else I do in life will top that feeling. After winning the Gold medal, everything else is icing on the cake."*


----------



## rjjfan (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> *"They placed that medal around my neck and played the national anthem. Nothing else I do in life will top that feeling. After winning the Gold medal, everything else is icing on the cake."*


Why is that dude holding Lomachenko's medal?

[email protected] Undefeated Gaul


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

rjjfan said:


> Why is that dude holding Lomachenko's medal?
> 
> [email protected] Undefeated Gaul


Visit the third page of the Ring IQ thread and try to dispute Whitaker's greatness. I'll strike you down with all of my hate.

:lol:


----------



## rjjfan (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Visit the third page of the Ring IQ thread and try to dispute Whitaker's greatness. I'll strike you down with all of my hate.
> 
> :lol:


You'll get no arguments from me. ATG fighter and the best LW boxer I've seen.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

rjjfan said:


> You'll get no arguments from me. ATG fighter and the best LW boxer I've seen.


His LW reign is underrated compared to Duran's because it was shorter in terms of calendar years, but really about equal in terms of quality. I love Duran too so there's not a whole lot in it, but they are the only two Undisputed 135 champs of the last 35 years, pretty crazy. Whitaker didn't just hold a mere strap. His dominance also works to level things out IMO and hardly preposterous to rate him higher.


----------



## FelixTrinidad (Jun 3, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> *"They placed that medal around my neck and played the national anthem. Nothing else I do in life will top that feeling. After winning the Gold medal, everything else is icing on the cake."*


Whitaker is an ATG and I agree with everything you said.. but that line is bullshit.
I am 100% certain that when Pernell was sniffing coke and getting high it was a greater feeling than listening to some shitty Anthem which Americans actually stole from the very Country they fought so hard to liberate themselves from......................


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

:rofl


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> I'm sure if you ask around you'll see I'm far more knowledgeable about boxing then yourself. Before CHB I was on nothing more than ESB Classic and you actually have to know some shit to be able to post there. Whereas you'd get laughed off.
> 
> I don't need to say whether or not I've ripped you to shreds because you can just look at the backlash of every ridiculous comment you've made. When you get banned for saying Duran - Lomachenko is 50/50 lights should go off but they don't and you further and further continue to demolish any credibility as a poster you may have possessed. Now you're just known as nothing more than an extreme Loma nut hugger.
> 
> Also you informing Mods is a bitch move, I've literally never seen anyone else on this site cry to the mods in that fashion and you did it several times. Congrats on being a bitch.


I really haven't seen anything from you that displays good knowledge, but more importantly I haven't seen anything from you that displays good critical thinking skills. So even if you know your stuff, you won't be able to do anything with the knowledge you've gained. Let's say I don't really know much about boxing, well..I've got a solid foundation there because I have good critical thinking skills and can analyse etc. whereas you're as sloppy as shit and I doubt you went far in life as a result...so yeah, I won't 'contest' that you know more. I'd prefer the latter.

Informing mods about racism isn't a bitch move. I mean, dude, I care more about CHB not falling to shit than your presence and the presence of other racists who want to turn this into ESB - but here we are, talking about something to divert because you couldn't handle the heat.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

rjjfan said:


> I imagine March 1 will be the day when the entire internet crashes from the sheer amount of posts bashing Loma if Salido wins. :lol:


The thing is, here is the only place I have seen such fervent Lomachenko praise, and Dealt_with and Gaul are the only ones I've seen doing it on a delusional level. Their worship of this guy is scary as fuck. I wouldn't want to be within 20 feet of Dealt_with if I were Lomachenko. :-(

I mean, this joker said that Vasyl is more rounded then MAB. I don't think anyone outside if CHB, who know Dealt_with and Gaul, wouldn't take that as outright trolling.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Fixed.
> 
> Also wasn't I arguing with you saying he could've been glass jawed to which you said with the number of fights he had at the elite level that he can't? Guess you got proved wrong. Again.


:huh Are you and Abraham one and the same? Seriously


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Regarding Whitaker citing the gold medal as the apex of his career...please. He says that because he CAN say it. He said it _because_ of how much he accomplished in his career, and could afford to make such an outrageous statement.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> :huh Are you and Abraham one and the same? Seriously


Why haven't you voted in the poll? :huh


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I really haven't seen anything from you that displays good knowledge, but more importantly I haven't seen anything from you that displays good critical thinking skills. So even if you know your stuff, you won't be able to do anything with the knowledge you've gained. Let's say I don't really know much about boxing, well..I've got a solid foundation there because I have good critical thinking skills and can analyse etc. whereas you're as sloppy as shit and I doubt you went far in life as a result...so yeah, I won't 'contest' that you know more. I'd prefer the latter.
> 
> Informing mods about racism isn't a bitch move. I mean, dude, I care more about CHB not falling to shit than your presence and the presence of other racists who want to turn this into ESB - but here we are, talking about something to divert because you couldn't handle the heat.


Well I'm only 20 but I bet I've achieved more in my life than you. On here you have never shown any sort of critical thought regarding any topic beyond spewing the same regurgitated lines regarding Lomachenko on why he beats everyone past and present. If your critical thought produces such gems as "Well he's never been beaten so he has no weaknesses" then carry on because me in my limited intellectual capabilities could never reproduce such genius.

In every thread I've seen where you post you get schooled to the extent you try this pathetic charade that you were just trolling the entire time when it's obvious to everyone you weren't. Much like when you were banned because you said Duran v Lomachenko is 50/50. A point of view that would not be backed by any poster on here besides yourself and dealt with. Of course bringing this fact to your attention would not cause any penny to drop.

Couldn't handled the heat? Perhaps you should re read what was occurring you were antagonizing everybody and began name calling and the second somebody said something you couldn't handle YOU cried to the mods. Don't dish it out if you can't take it. There was a reason you yourself were warned for your antics. You and dealt with really are sad cases.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> Why haven't you voted in the poll? :huh


Why would I? I think these fantasy match ups are pointless unless there's a chance of it happening. And I don't need to see the popular opinion, most people on here DKSAB.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> :huh Are you and Abraham one and the same? Seriously


He's in America and I'm in Australia. In Perth much like yourself. Maybe we should meet up so you can show me how to produce a perfect kinetic chain in punching?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> The thing is, here is the only place I have seen such fervent Lomachenko praise, and Dealt_with and Gaul are the only ones I've seen doing it on a delusional level. Their worship of this guy is scary as fuck. I wouldn't want to be within 20 feet of Dealt_with if I were Lomachenko. :-(
> 
> I mean, this joker said that Vasyl is more rounded then MAB. I don't think anyone outside if CHB, who know Dealt_with and Gaul, wouldn't take that as outright trolling.


Vasyl is more rounded than ANYBODY. If I was a female I wouldn't want to be within 20 feet of you. Oh wait, that already happens.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Let me copy and paste what I replied to this before:
> 
> I think it's more than just that. Pacing goes into a part of this, but I've seen him fade a little in the WSB toward rounds 4/5. He has a high energy style, so it'd make sense if he did and that's why he's working on his pacing now of course. It was especially in the Selimov fight where it seemed like his body punching was wearing him down a little.
> This probably won't be an issue in the future, but this is why we have to see him vs elite *pros * first over 10-12 rounds. A style that you don't see as often in the amateurs where a fighter will throw away the early rounds and start investing to body. I think we both know Saldio is the fighter that fits that description.
> ...


'Fade a little towards round 4 and 5'
a. Well I haven't really seen fading, but getting a little more tired than say the Valentino fight is common sense. 
b. It's a 5 round fight not a 5 round fight from a sceduled 12 rounder. It's going to be far more fast _paced_. Lomachenko's concern when pacing was 'how slow do I have to be so I can do this across 12 rounds in an optimal way?' By misjudgement he was going too slow. 
c. Selimov fight took him outside of cruise control and they were both going at a pace that you wouldn't see in say round 4 of a pro fight where you'd think it'd go the distance. Loma goes for the attack but for 12 rounds he'd slow it down a lot, and yet he still looked completely fine in that fight. 
d. It can give off that impression that he is fading as if you've known him from amateurs, he starts off feeling out his opponent by pressing the attack, then he uses what he knows about the way they attack and where he feels he could land points to completely outpoint them, then he focuses more towards outpointing the opponent in the less risky way off the back foot more than in previous rounds.

- If I didn't know these things, I would have jumped and said 'Oh look Loma fades'. You guys should trust us Lomatards. 
Lomachenko dealing with top amateurs in those constructs are A level opposition, not C level opposition. It's an awful statement to say they're C level. And in the WSB for example, 4 of the 5 fighters he thought I would not expect to be C level opposition. So he's fought a number of different highly skilled people with a number of different styles, and yet 'everyones beating eachother but no ones beating Lomachenko'.

What about Rigondeaux? Did you feel you had to see Rigondeaux of the Rico Ramos fight against anyone 'elite' to make a judgement on who he'd beat/how good he is?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> He's in America and I'm in Australia. In Perth much like yourself. Maybe we should meet up so you can show me how to produce a perfect kinetic chain in punching?


You still don't know what a proxy is? If I'm in Perth again I'll be sure to visit :lol: Do you think you're hard?


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> You still don't know what a proxy is? If I'm in Perth again I'll be sure to visit :lol: Do you think you're hard?


Incredibly.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Vasyl is more rounded than ANYBODY. If I was a female I wouldn't want to be within 20 feet of you. Oh wait, that already happens.


More rounded than _anybody_? Anybody in history?? Are you fucking serious, dude?


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Well I'm only 20 but I bet I've achieved more in my life than you. On here you have never shown any sort of critical thought regarding any topic beyond spewing the same regurgitated lines regarding Lomachenko on why he beats everyone past and present. If your critical thought produces such gems as "Well he's never been beaten so he has no weaknesses" then carry on because me in my limited intellectual capabilities could never reproduce such genius.
> 
> In every thread I've seen where you post you get schooled to the extent you try this pathetic charade that you were just trolling the entire time when it's obvious to everyone you weren't. Much like when you were banned because you said Duran v Lomachenko is 50/50. A point of view that would not be backed by any poster on here besides yourself and dealt with. Of course bringing this fact to your attention would not cause any penny to drop.
> 
> Couldn't handled the heat? Perhaps you should re read what was occurring you were antagonizing everybody and began name calling and the second somebody said something you couldn't handle YOU cried to the mods. Don't dish it out if you can't take it. There was a reason you yourself were warned for your antics. You and dealt with really are sad cases.


There's a chance you could have. But I doubt you have on an intellectual level. You would say I haven't shown critical thought because you can't see that far and are not willing to entertain thoughts, but you know more don't you with your DVD set of the 4 fights from olympics. I've never said 'he's never been beaten so he has no weaknesses'.

So where did I get schooled about Lomauran? The comment that came my way was 'so Loma would beat Ali right?' or something like that. Yes, schooling. And I returned to give a good breakdown of Rigo-Loma.

Well me and dealt_with know more about Lomachenko than anyone else here.

Yeah name calling is fine and I was called names, but there's a difference to general name calling, and racism. Racism should be reported. So you best be on your best behaviour.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> :lol:
> 
> Yeah, but...
> 
> ...


:deal Breland gets a lot of hate, he still was a good pro lol 'pro world champion'.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> More rounded than _anybody_? Anybody in history?? Are you fucking serious, dude?


100%. I've told you this before so I don't know why you're acting surprised. He is the most complete/adaptable fighter I've ever seen. The only fighter in pro boxing today that can even be talked about in the same sentence is Andre Ward.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Abraham said:


> Regarding Whitaker citing the gold medal as the apex of his career...please. He says that because he CAN say it. He said it _because_ of how much he accomplished in his career, and could afford to make such an outrageous statement.


Floyd can't say it. :-(


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Well I'm only 20


That explains a fair bit, I'm going to try and remember that from now on.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> There's a chance you could have. But I doubt you have on an intellectual level. You would say I haven't shown critical thought because you can't see that far and are not willing to entertain thoughts, but you know more don't you with your DVD set of the 4 fights from olympics. I've never said 'he's never been beaten so he has no weaknesses'.
> 
> So where did I get schooled about Lomauran? The comment that came my way was 'so Loma would beat Ali right?' or something like that. Yes, schooling. And I returned to give a good breakdown of Rigo-Loma.
> 
> ...


Back before you 2 went full retard I'd always end my replies by saying let him have some fights first. Not willing to entertain thoughts and not being able to see 'that far' is why I criticized Broner a lot while everyone else thought he was going to be a P4P star. It's why I haven't bought into Thurman being all that special. It's why I haven't bought into Canelo as being something special. Why? Because I'm more conservative and go by WHAT HAPPENS not what potentially could happen particularly when in the case of Lomachenko when you have extremely little to go on. Would you say Gary Russel Jr beats guys like MAB based on the cans he's beaten? No you wait before he's beaten credible opposition before making such sweeping statements.

You have been banned before and warned more than me. I have been warned once and never banned. Looks like it's you who should be on your best behaviour.

What counts as intellectual achievements? I've already got a degree literally as quickly as one could get one. Never failed a subject in my life. Unless you're in Mensa you probably couldn't claim to have superior intellectual achievements.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> *There is literally no other reason for a newbie to get rounds in other than experience*, what else is he doing then? You try shit in the gym not in a professional fight where 1 punch can end things. Seasoned vets do it to get ring rust off. Completely different scenario.
> 
> You calling me retarded is laughable. You and your butt buddy are jokes on this site. You really are delusional.


Well here you are, you and your simple mind. The way you displayed it is that getting rounds in was purely just for experience in the way any other newbie would. However, your surface level thinking is really pathetic. He was getting rounds in not to gain experience the way a newbie would where they are still developing their game etc.. Because Loma is complete already he doesn't need to do that, but he is simply seeking to spread his 5 round gameplan that he did at WSB over a course of 10 rounds, and so Egis Klimas confirmed this the other day that that is the fight that Loma was preparing for. This can only be tried in a professional fight, but there you are committing your howler again showing a lack of knowledge, understanding and critical thinking.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> :deal Breland gets a lot of hate, he still was a good pro lol 'pro world champion'.


Yeah, he probably doesn't belong being mentioned in that group. Just given how highly he was touted and all...


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> That explains a fair bit, I'm going to try and remember that from now on.


And how old are you?


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Floyd can't say it. :-(


Well, Floyd cites Augustus as the toughest fight of his career, but is it, really? No. He says it because he wants to. ODLH and Cotto were surely harder fights for him than Augustus.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> 100%. I've told you this before so I don't know why you're acting surprised. He is the most complete/adaptable fighter I've ever seen. The only fighter in pro boxing today that can even be talked about in the same sentence is Andre Ward.


I want you to love me, dude. Your insults cut me to the bone. So, here.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Well here you are, you and your simple mind. The way you displayed it is that getting rounds in was purely just for experience in the way any other newbie would. However, your surface level thinking is really pathetic. He was getting rounds in not to gain experience the way a newbie would where they are still developing their game etc.. Because* Loma is complete already* he *doesn't need to do that*, but he is simply *seeking to spread his 5 round gameplan that he did at WSB over a course of 10 rounds*, and so Egis Klimas confirmed this the other day that that is the fight that Loma was preparing for. This can only be tried in a professional fight, but there you are committing your howler again showing a lack of knowledge, understanding and critical thinking.


This is called being able to pace oneself. Somebody who is complete AKA adequate in every possible facet doesn't need to learn to pace. You have contradicted yourself in your own sentence. Keep trying.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Abraham said:


> Well, *Floyd cites Augustus as the toughest fight of his career,* but is it, really? No. He says it because he wants to. ODLH and Cotto were surely harder fights for him than Augustus.


:lol: :lol:


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

I don't like the way Egis Klimas speaks of Rigondeaux. Other than that, pretty sound guy with an amazingly strong top end to his stable of fighters. Who wouldn't want to manage Lomachenko and KOvalev


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> And how old are you?


28


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Back before you 2 went full retard I'd always end my replies by saying let him have some fights first. Not willing to entertain thoughts and not being able to see 'that far' is why I criticized Broner a lot while everyone else thought he was going to be a P4P star. It's why I haven't bought into Thurman being all that special. It's why I haven't bought into Canelo as being something special. Why? Because I'm more conservative and go by WHAT HAPPENS not what potentially could happen particularly when in the case of Lomachenko when you have extremely little to go on. Would you say Gary Russel Jr beats guys like MAB based on the cans he's beaten? No you wait before he's beaten credible opposition before making such sweeping statements.
> 
> You have been banned before and warned more than me. I have been warned once and never banned. Looks like it's you who should be on your best behaviour.
> 
> What counts as intellectual achievements? I've already got a degree literally as quickly as one could get one. Never failed a subject in my life. Unless you're in Mensa you probably couldn't claim to have superior intellectual achievements.


Ok all hail the master who did a 2 year textiles degree at some random institution rather than 3 or 4 yaer degree. Your age aint shit either. 22 at graduation this year but I was ill for a year and last year was in property development. Otherwise I would have been pretty young too. I've been warned once, and have been banned for 24 hours to think over Lomachenkouran. Big deal I got banned for that. Fuck it, this isn't Lomachenko topics, so just so you can sleep at night lets say you're a bright star.

I already adressed this 'future star' phenomenon when I had the discussion with Tommygun about Kavaliauskas. 
I wouldn't say that because Gary and Loma do not compare as Loma is light years ahead which people aren't afraid to admit unless they're Lomahaters here on this forum. Loma is better and already shown that against a much better opponent :lol:

Loma is already in effect, 7-0. I'm taking what I know about Loma and doing high end analysis to match him up against different top opponents, a level of analysis that the Lomadoubters are not capable of.

Rigondeaux of 2012 didn't face credible opponents, was it bad for someone who knew about Rigo the way I know about Loma, to firmly believe he'd beat Donaire or any other top fighter? It can be argued that Rigo of today 2014, has only one good name on his resume..'how dare I say he's up there with the best 122lber's of all time'


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Ramos is shit, but he was actually the #2 guy at 122 when Rigo fought him. :lol: :conf


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

rjjfan said:


> Why is that dude holding Lomachenko's medal?
> 
> [email protected] Undefeated Gaul


I don't know but I can tell you is that he better be saying the same words as the other dude who was holding an olympic gold medal:
Former Olympic gold medalist Istvan Kovacs said of Lomachenko, "Thank God there was no Lomachenko in my division at the time, I never saw a fighter like him before."

:lol:


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> The thing is, here is the only place I have seen such fervent Lomachenko praise, and Dealt_with and Gaul are the only ones I've seen doing it on a delusional level. Their worship of this guy is scary as fuck. I wouldn't want to be within 20 feet of Dealt_with if I were Lomachenko. :-(
> 
> I mean, this joker said that Vasyl is more rounded then MAB. I don't think anyone outside if CHB, who know Dealt_with and Gaul, wouldn't take that as outright trolling.


Actually everyones praising him, but there aren't bigger Lomatards than me and dealt and tbh there's probably only one or two somewhere in this world on a forum who have analysed Loma as much as me and dealt lool although I'm yet to meet them. I wait for the day with open arms.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> Well, Floyd cites Augustus as the toughest fight of his career, but is it, really? No. He says it because he wants to. ODLH and Cotto were surely harder fights for him than Augustus.


Yeah Floyd is just being a show off. Cotto was a hard fight.


----------



## Leftsmash (Oct 22, 2012)

FelixTrinidad said:


> Whitaker is an ATG and I agree with everything you said.. but that line is bullshit.
> I am 100% certain that when Pernell was sniffing coke and getting high it was a greater feeling than listening to some shitty Anthem which Americans actually stole from the very Country they fought so hard to liberate themselves from......................


:rofl

Cocaine definitely is a hell of a drug.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> I want you to love me, dude. Your insults cut me to the bone. So, here.


If Loma wanted to stop Ramirez, he would have switch like I've seen him do, to his left, and just lay the onslaught on Ramirez which would start with a huge body shot..but Ramirez couldn't handle it even though he was a pro who has never been stopped, despite being small and fat at 135lbs and pretty lazy.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Leftsmash said:


> :rofl
> 
> Cocaine definitely is a hell of a drug.


Believe he actually said that before he even had his pro debut.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Ramos is shit, but he was actually the #2 guy at 122 when Rigo fought him. :lol: :conf


No one answers the question I posed about moving back in time to Ramos 2012 fight. Could this _untested_ Rigondeaux beat Donaire? The Rigondeaux who learned just one thing which plays to my favour - 'Fuck Hyde, stick to your amateur style'.


----------



## Leftsmash (Oct 22, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> Believe he actually said that before he even had his pro debut.


Probably, I was just having a laugh at Felix's comment.


----------



## Felix (Mar 13, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Well here you are, you and your simple mind. The way you displayed it is that getting rounds in was purely just for experience in the way any other newbie would. However, your surface level thinking is really pathetic. *He was getting rounds in not to gain experience the way a newbie would where they are still developing their game etc.. Because Loma is complete already he doesn't need to do that,*


That bold part ^^



> *he is simply seeking to spread his 5 round gameplan that he did at WSB over a course of 10 rounds*, and so Egis Klimas confirmed this the other day that that is the fight that Loma was preparing for. This can only be tried in a professional fight, but there you are committing your howler again showing a lack of knowledge, understanding and critical thinking.


Is negated by that one^^.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Felix said:


> That bold part ^^
> 
> Is negated by that one^^.


Not quite. Newbies like Lomachenko's victims and top prospects of the year Verdejo, Ramirez and Valdez have a lot to work on, Lomachenko like Rigo doesnt need to work on shit. Lomachenko only needs to manage that one thing, pacing. It's more something to 'manage'.


----------



## Felix (Mar 13, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Not quite. Newbies like Lomachenko's victims and top prospects of the year Verdejo, Ramirez and Valdez have a lot to work on, Lomachenko like Rigo doesnt need to work on shit. Lomachenko only needs to manage that one thing, pacing. It's more something to 'manage'.


No, that's simply you arguing semantics because you know I'm right.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Ok all hail the master who did a 2 year textiles degree at some random institution rather than 3 or 4 yaer degree. Your age aint shit either. 22 at graduation this year but I was ill for a year and last year was in property development. Otherwise I would have been pretty young too. I've been warned once, and have been banned for 24 hours to think over Lomachenkouran. Big deal I got banned for that. Fuck it, this isn't Lomachenko topics, so just so you can sleep at night lets say you're a bright star.
> 
> I already adressed this 'future star' phenomenon when I had the discussion with Tommygun about Kavaliauskas.
> I wouldn't say that because Gary and Loma do not compare as Loma is light years ahead which people aren't afraid to admit unless they're Lomahaters here on this forum. Loma is better and already shown that against a much better opponent :lol:
> ...


It was a 3 year degree but kay.

To think a guy who has 1 fight doesn't beat ATGs isn't being a hater it's called being sensible. Ramirez wasn't any better than the bums Russel has been beating. If he beats Salido then that's different.

Rigo already had 11 fights, no it is not bad to believe that but ramming your opinion down everybody's throat and resulting to insults and being called a hater because you do not agree is. In spite of this most on here would still be hesitant to pit Rigo against ATGs and say with utter conviction like yourself that he'd beat them.

Also address the last time I quoted you. You said Lomachenko is complete but then admitted he needs to learn how to pace himself, therefore not being complete. Want to rephrase?


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Felix said:


> That bold part ^^
> 
> Is negated by that one^^.


Yeah I already brought the fact he contradicted himself to attention. Dodged it.


----------



## Felix (Mar 13, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Yeah I already brought the fact he contradicted himself to attention. Dodged it.


Yeah I noticed you had, after I'd posted. I've no problem with anyone praising hot prospects, but to openly ignore common sense, reasonable argument, and to also contradict oneself so blatantly, beggars belief.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Felix said:


> No, that's simply you arguing semantics because you know I'm right.





MadcapMaxie said:


> It was a 3 year degree but kay.
> 
> To think a guy who has 1 fight doesn't beat ATGs isn't being a hater it's called being sensible. Ramirez wasn't any better than the bums Russel has been beating. If he beats Salido then that's different.
> 
> ...


atsch no you're not. Read my point again. Loma's game is developed. A newbies isn't. He's just spreading his existing and already *complete game*, over 12 rounds..whereas Verdejo for example is not the complete fighter yet, he has a lot of developing to do. Hence why Lomachenko is going straight in with the best now. It's purely because of this reason why I wouldn't be surprised if this fight was 7-5 win for Loma..not something you'd expect from ATG. 'Complete' has become lost in translation here. Your line of argumentation is also knit picking from you guys.

'hater', tbh its just for banter terms where we're going by the rule 'the one who doubts is the one who hates'. Nothing serious who cares.
What about the Rigo from the Rico Ramos fight? People feel he does match up to ATGs.


----------



## Felix (Mar 13, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> atsch no you're not. Read my point again. Loma's game is developed. A newbies isn't. He's just spreading his existing and already *complete game*, over 12 rounds..whereas Verdejo for example is not the complete fighter yet, he has a lot of developing to do. Hence why Lomachenko is going straight in with the best now. It's purely because of this reason why I wouldn't be surprised if this fight was 7-5 win for Loma..not something you'd expect from ATG. 'Complete' has become lost in translation here. Your line of argumentation is also knit picking from you guys.
> 
> 'hater', tbh its just for banter terms where we're going by the rule 'the one who doubts is the one who hates'. Nothing serious who cares.
> What about the Rigo from the Rico Ramos fight? People feel he does match up to ATGs.


I'm trying to read your point, but you don't have one. If he has to adapt the game he already has to better suit twelve rounds, then he's still developing. It's very simple, so please do keep up.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Felix said:


> I'm trying to read your point, but you don't have one. If he has to adapt the game he already has to better suit twelve rounds, then he's still developing. It's very simple, so please do keep up.


If Floyd is suddenly contracted to fight a 15 round fight, are you going to claim that he's still developing/has to develop as a boxer?


----------



## Felix (Mar 13, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> If Floyd is suddenly contracted to fight a 15 round fight, are you going to claim that he's still developing/has to develop as a boxer?


Learning to pace himself appropriately in order to accommodate the extra rounds would be something he'd have to develop, adjust, work on...whatever you call it, it's the same thing. You and Undisputed Girl seem to be labouring under the mistaken assumption that I don't understand what you're saying. I do. You're saying that there's no aspect of his performance that needs further development. You're saying that he doesn't need to work on defence, head movement, footwork, timing, punch selection, feinting, combination punching, or any other aspect. You're treating these as something separate from his ability to ensure he paces himself well. They're all aspects of his game. If he needs to adapt to a greater number of rounds, then that aspect of his game needs development. He's come from one environment to which he had become perfectly suited, to one in which he needs to tweak, adapt, or fine-tune a specific aspect of his game. It's still development. That other dripping tip, Undeniable Gimp, was arguing semantics because he contradicted himself.

If Floyd had to, for some reason, adapt to fighting fifteen rounds, then yes, I'd say he needed development. He'd need to take everything he does and ensure he can remain every bit as successful as he currently is over twelve rounds. If he's complete and perfect, why was his debut not twelve rounds?


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Felix said:


> Learning to pace himself appropriately in order to accommodate the extra rounds would be something he'd have to develop, adjust, work on...whatever you call it, it's the same thing. You and *Undisputed Girl *seem to be labouring under the mistaken assumption that I don't understand what you're saying. I do. You're saying that there's no aspect of his performance that needs further development. You're saying that he doesn't need to work on defence, head movement, footwork, timing, punch selection, feinting, combination punching, or any other aspect. You're treating these as something separate from his ability to ensure he paces himself well. They're all aspects of his game. If he needs to adapt to a greater number of rounds, then that aspect of his game needs development. He's come from one environment to which he had become perfectly suited, to one in which he needs to tweak, adapt, or fine-tune a specific aspect of his game. It's still development. That other dripping tip,* Undeniable Gimp*, was arguing semantics because he contradicted himself.
> 
> If Floyd had to, for some reason, adapt to fighting fifteen rounds, then yes, I'd say he needed development. He'd need to take everything he does and ensure he can remain every bit as successful as he currently is over twelve rounds. If he's complete and perfect, why was his debut not twelve rounds?


:rofl:rofl :deal


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

15 rounds wouldn't be shit to Floyd. I'd be concerned about the vast majority of drainers though.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Felix said:


> Learning to pace himself appropriately in order to accommodate the extra rounds would be something he'd have to develop, adjust, work on...whatever you call it, it's the same thing. You and Undisputed Girl seem to be labouring under the mistaken assumption that I don't understand what you're saying. I do. You're saying that there's no aspect of his performance that needs further development. You're saying that he doesn't need to work on defence, head movement, footwork, timing, punch selection, feinting, combination punching, or any other aspect. You're treating these as something separate from his ability to ensure he paces himself well. They're all aspects of his game. If he needs to adapt to a greater number of rounds, then that aspect of his game needs development. He's come from one environment to which he had become perfectly suited, to one in which he needs to tweak, adapt, or fine-tune a specific aspect of his game. It's still development. That other dripping tip, Undeniable Gimp, was arguing semantics because he contradicted himself.
> 
> If Floyd had to, for some reason, adapt to fighting fifteen rounds, then yes, I'd say he needed development. He'd need to take everything he does and ensure he can remain every bit as successful as he currently is over twelve rounds. If he's complete and perfect, why was his debut not twelve rounds?


He asked for his debut to be 12 rounds, and for the title. He wasn't allowed to due to sanctioning bodies etc. so he had to fight the 10 round eliminator first against Ramirez. This is why we have problems, people don't even make an effort to understand basic details before arguing a viewpoint.
And as if 15 rounds would make a difference to Floyd. If you want to be pedantic then every fighter always needs development. That's another reason why we have problems, people are either too stupid to understand context or just want to argue for the sake of argument even if they have nothing to base their argument on.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> He asked for his debut to be 12 rounds, and for the title. He wasn't allowed to due to sanctioning bodies etc. so he had to fight the 10 round eliminator first against Ramirez. This is why we have problems, people don't even make an effort to understand basic details before arguing a viewpoint.
> And as if 15 rounds would make a difference to Floyd. If you want to be pedantic then every fighter always needs development. That's another reason why we have problems, people are either too stupid to understand context or just want to argue for the sake of argument even if they have nothing to base their argument on.


This.


----------



## Felix (Mar 13, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> He asked for his debut to be 12 rounds, and for the title. He wasn't allowed to due to sanctioning bodies etc. so he had to fight the 10 round eliminator first against Ramirez. This is why we have problems, people don't even make an effort to understand basic details before arguing a viewpoint.
> And as if 15 rounds would make a difference to Floyd. If you want to be pedantic then every fighter always needs development. That's another reason why we have problems, people are either too stupid to understand context or just want to argue for the sake of argument even if they have nothing to base their argument on.


No, it's just that your assmaster pal Unintelligible Gonad doesn't have the intelligence of a fucking gym shoe, and doesn't realise when he contradicts himself. If he needs to acclimatise himself to twelve-rounders, then he's still developing a facet of his game; his pacing.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Dealt_with and Gaul


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> Dealt_with and Gaul


So are you implying that everybody who shares the same view on a boxer is gay for each other? You have a lot of guys that you're keen on then. But you can't be gay... girls don't like you :huh


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Felix said:


> No, it's just that your assmaster pal Unintelligible Gonad doesn't have the intelligence of a fucking gym shoe, and doesn't realise when he contradicts himself. If he needs to acclimatise himself to twelve-rounders, then he's still developing a facet of his game; his pacing.


Yeah, we had different ideas of it, I said it was lost in translation.

So does Sugar Ray Robinson who wants to go from 15 rounds to 12. So does RJJ if he needs to go to 15 rounds. This is truly pathetic now. Shit, unoriginal, 10 year old humour with the name changing, shit critical thinking skills and shit knowledge of Loma in particular.


----------



## rjjfan (May 17, 2013)

You know what, as much as I disagree with @Dealt_with and @The Undefeated Gaul assessment of Loma's greatness, I don't see the need to insult them personally. They will get their chance of redemption on March 1, and I personally think Loma has the tools to win via UD or MD.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> Dealt_with and Gaul


Why, Abraham? :verysad


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Just joshin', you two. Calm down.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

rjjfan said:


> You know what, as much as I disagree with @Dealt_with and @The Undefeated Gaul assessment of Loma's greatness, I don't see the need to insult them personally. They will get their chance of redemption on March 1, and I personally think Loma has the tools to win via UD or MD.


Wow. You don't see the need to insult dealt_with personally? Have you read any of this guy's posts?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Abraham said:


> Just joshin', you two. Calm down.


Have you ever suspected that you have autism? Serious question. Even with text you have trouble with understanding tone and context.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Have you ever suspected that you have autism? Serious question. Even with text you have trouble with understanding tone and context.


Stop yelling at me!


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> So are you implying that everybody who shares the same view on a boxer is gay for each other? You have a lot of guys that you're keen on then. But you can't be gay... girls don't like you :huh


Hopefully this doesn't get to Johnstown levels. :lol: Abe seems a little more mentally stable than that, but you're pretty much being hounded, followed and quoted at every turn. Plenty of off topic/sexual references thrown in, stuff that just doesn't have anything to do with boxing.


----------



## elterrible (May 20, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Dude, that was in 2009. Unfortunately I think he's even fatter now.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He turns 40 this year. Hasnt fought in over a decade. Mayweather turns 37... still on top, still undefeated. Pretty crazy


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Hopefully this doesn't get to Johnstown levels. :lol: Abe seems a little more mentally stable than that, but you're pretty much being hounded, followed and quoted at every turn. Plenty of off topic/sexual references thrown in, stuff that just doesn't have anything to do with boxing.


I don't mind, but hopefully we can keep it in the lounge. I really don't understand the connection people are making between boxing and sexuality, first I get called gay because I'm a fan of a boxer, now I get called gay for simply sharing the same (unpopular) view as another poster.. :huh It's like me calling bball gay because he's a fan of Floyd and then telling him his boyfriends are MichiganWarrior, Cellski and all the other posters who are fans of Floyd. 
I'm talking about sport here, I'm not sure where others are trying to drag it to..


----------



## Rorschach (Dec 2, 2012)

Abraham said:


> Dealt_with and Gaul


:nono Keep this shit out of General.... "Abraham" ...


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

rjjfan said:


> You know what, as much as I disagree with @Dealt_with and @The Undefeated Gaul assessment of Loma's greatness, I don't see the need to insult them personally. They will get their chance of redemption on March 1, and *I personally think Loma has the tools to win via UD or MD*.


:lol:

I've never really understood predicting an MD or SD -- he's either winning the fight or he isn't. I'll only use UD as it's convenient to writing "by decision" or "outpoint". I guess that's supposed to imply some people/a particular judge may view it closer than others or something :huh He's got the tools, he'll use them and I think he's going to make him look ridiculous honestly. It's going to be pretty awesome to watch.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> :lol:
> 
> I've never really understood predicting an MD or SD -- he's either winning the fight or he isn't. I'll only use UD as it's convenient to writing "by decision" or "outpoint". I guess that's supposed to imply some people/a particular judge may view it closer than others or something :huh He's got the tools, he'll use them and I think he's going to make him look ridiculous honestly. It's going to be pretty awesome to watch.


I feel like I could do with analysing Salido more. Going by memory of his fights from a while back and having no Loma vs Salido lens when watching the fights is not the way.

Watching Salido-Gamboa right now. Gamboa's speed and his combinations are excellent and very accurate, however Salido has been able to land some good shots because Gamboa comes in with a far less intelligent approach than Lomachenko, Gamboa has unimpressive defence as he's coming in with his chin in the air. It's no surprise that in amateurs when he fought a young Albert Selimov, Selimov was getting in with some good counter punches (Selimov lost the fight)..but I feel the amateur construct is better for Gamboa honestly.
Gamboa was having success off the back foot too, this is good news for Loma. I feel Loma should fight a good minute per round like this. 
Loma is far more cerebral than Juanma too.

I will watch Cristobal Cruz rematch, Juanma 2 and Garcia as well, then I'll make a formal, detailed judgement. I think it would be good idea to watch the Guerrero fight too if I can be botehred.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Mini-update:

Having watched Gamboa-Salido, I actually feel that Loma would either TKO Salido or Loma will win by at LEAST 4 rounds with around 2-3 knockdowns landed by Loma. Salido will do his best work from rounds 7, 8, 9 - being nice to Salido. I won't be unfair to Salido by just judging him from this fight, I'll look at others again.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> :lol:
> 
> I've never really understood predicting an MD or SD -- he's either winning the fight or he isn't. I'll only use UD as it's convenient to writing "by decision" or "outpoint". I guess that's supposed to imply some people/a particular judge may view it closer than others or something :huh He's got the tools, he'll use them and I think he's going to make him look ridiculous honestly. It's going to be pretty awesome to watch.


You had to appreciate Teddy Atlas' commentary on those Fight Night video games.
_
"I have it a split decision" _



> Mini-update:
> 
> Having watched Gamboa-Salido, I actually feel that Loma would either TKO Salido or Loma will win by at LEAST 4 rounds with around 2-3 knockdowns landed by Loma. Salido will do his best work from rounds 7, 8, 9 - being nice to Salido. I won't be unfair to Salido by just judging him from this fight, I'll look at others again.


It's definitely a good idea to look back at some of Salido's past performances to familiarise yourself with his strengths and weaknesses. There's no better way to gauge the quality of fighter than by watching footage. The only problem we have is, and I keep coming back to it because I feel like it's a valid point, is that Lomachenko has only had one Professional fight so far and it was against a barely credible opponent in...sorry, I've forgotten his name. So, anyway, although there is plenty of evidence available for us to assess Salido's qualities as a Professional Prizefighter, the same can't really be said of Lomachenko. I guess it's just a case of wait and see. No? 'Kay.

One has tried. There is no blueprint.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> It's definitely a good idea to look back at some of Salido's past performances to familiarise yourself with his strengths and weaknesses. There's no better way to gauge the quality of fighter than by watching footage. The only problem we have is, and I keep coming back to it because I feel like it's a valid point, is that Lomachenko has only had one Professional fight so far and it was against a barely credible opponent in...sorry, I've forgotten his name. So, anyway, although there is plenty of evidence available for us to assess Salido's qualities as a Professional Prizefighter, the same can't really be said of Lomachenko. I guess it's just a case of wait and see. No? 'Kay.
> 
> One has tried. There is no blueprint.


Yeah on empirical terms I'd say let's wait, but I want to rationalise a matchup so will assume he has a good enough chin, good enough stamina, based on the evidence I do have. Just like how some may have wanted to rationalise a matchup between the extremely untested Rigondeaux who had just become world champion having beaten Rico Ramos, against the P4P star in Donaire at the time. Just like Gary Russell Jr vs Donaire except Lomachenko has beaten a better opponent than ANYONE on the 'experienced pro' Russell Jr's resume. 
I want to make my own mere *prediction* of a fight between a international title holder and a world champion, with the knowledge that I have of Lomachenko which enables me to develop some good arguments coupled with my strong critical thinking skills, whereas people who haven't seen much of Lomachenko do not really have the privilege of analysing this matchup, to any real depth.
Grow some balls, Harry. Don't be afraid to be bold when others are too pussy.









When I'm correct, you'll realise how good I am at this.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Yeah on empirical terms I'd say let's wait, but I want to rationalise a matchup so will assume he has a good enough chin, good enough stamina, based on the evidence I do have. Just like how some may have wanted to rationalise a matchup between the extremely untested Rigondeaux who had just become world champion having beaten Rico Ramos, against the P4P star in Donaire at the time. Just like Gary Russell Jr vs Donaire except Lomachenko has beaten a better opponent than ANYONE on the 'experienced pro' Russell Jr's resume.
> I want to make my own mere *prediction* of a fight between a international title holder and a world champion, with the knowledge that I have of Lomachenko which *enables me to develop some good arguments coupled with my strong critical thinking skills*, whereas people who haven't seen much of Lomachenko do not really have the privilege of analysing this matchup, to any real depth.
> Grow some balls, Harry. Don't be afraid to be bold when others are too pussy.
> 
> ...














> whereas people who haven't seen much of Lomachenko do not really have the privilege of analysing this matchup, to any real depth.


So..that's like..all of us then?


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> So..that's like..all of us then?


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


>


I appreciate the avatar, I really do, but wouldn't it be more apt if you changed it to Crabbe or Goyle?


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> I appreciate the avatar, I really do, but wouldn't it be more apt if you changed it to Crabbe or Goyle?


Lingardium levio-SAAAAAA


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Lingardium levio-SAAAAAARRRRR


----------



## LittleRed (Jun 4, 2013)

Well that went places I didn't anticipate.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

LittleRed said:


> Well that went places I didn't anticipate.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


>


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I feel like I could do with analysing Salido more. Going by memory of his fights from a while back and having no Loma vs Salido lens when watching the fights is not the way.
> 
> Watching Salido-Gamboa right now. Gamboa's speed and his combinations are excellent and very accurate, however Salido has been able to land some good shots because Gamboa comes in with a far less intelligent approach than Lomachenko, Gamboa has unimpressive defence as he's coming in with his chin in the air. It's no surprise that in amateurs when he fought a young Albert Selimov, Selimov was getting in with some good counter punches (Selimov lost the fight)..but I feel the amateur construct is better for Gamboa honestly. Gamboa was having success off the back foot too, this is good news for Loma. I feel Loma should fight a good minute per round like this.
> Loma is far more cerebral than Juanma too.
> ...


Good stuff, definitely not a bad idea to rewatch some recent Salido.



Pedderrs said:


> One has tried. There is no blueprint.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> So..that's like..all of us then?


I'd estimate that I've seen at least 50 Lomachenko fights, including against the best Cuban, Russian and Kazakh fighters, as well as guys who are cleaning up the pro game (Verdejo, Valdez, Ramirez). Even the Welsh fighter Craig Evans who is 10-0 as a pro said that Lomachenko hits harder than anyone he's fought and broke his nose in their contest. You don't seem to understand that these level of fighters in the amateurs are far more professional than the majority of pros. Lomachenko has 20+ years of boxing experience against the best fighters around the world.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> Even the Welsh fighter Craig Evans who is 10-0 as a pro said that Lomachenko hits harder than anyone he's fought and broke his nose in their contest..


Oh. Well, this is embarrassing. I wasn't aware that the formidable Craig Evans had commented. I retract everything I have ever said about Vasyl Lomachenko being new to the Professional game. That's not true; he's definitely not new and has absolutely nothing to prove. Breaking Craig Evan's nose should guarantee his place in the HOF. An impressive feat, indeed.

As a side note, BoxRec is telling me that Craig Evan's competition so far in the Professional game have a combined record of 73-335-12. Majestic.


----------



## chibelle (Jun 5, 2013)

Seriously, Craig Evans is a name you can drop?

I don't think even Craig Evans can drop his own name.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Craig Evans is just an example of a name that is pro who commented on Lomachenko. All of these big issues that you're making is regarding 'pro' fighters. Rigondeaux fights shit opposition, but we're allowed to call him an ATG in terms of H2H ability, Lomachenko fights better opposition but he aint shit..

Djelkhir is also another pro, the guy that Lomachenko whooped in 1 minute to win the olympic gold medal. He has reasonable power, good chin and he's 15-0 in the pros and has just entered WSB and currently has a record there of 1-0 as the season has started. He looked good. http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=485346&cat=boxer p.s I hope this dude is actually properly focussed on boxing.

WSB is not just for amateurs. Pro fighters who were good ams fight in WSB too.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Craig Evans is just an example of a name that is pro who commented on Lomachenko. All of these big issues that you're making is regarding 'pro' fighters. Rigondeaux fights shit opposition, but we're allowed to call him an ATG in terms of H2H ability, Lomachenko fights better opposition but he aint shit.


Not that I necessarily think Rigondeux would beat the best fighters to have ever campaigned at 122lbs, but fighting and beating the likes of Nonito Donaire, Joseph Agbeko, and Ricardo Cordoba is infinitely more impressive than defeating what's his name. It's based on Rigondeux's performances against that caliber of fighter that legitimises the idea that he could compete, and perhaps even beat, the likes of Wilfredo Gomez, Erik Morales, Marco Antonio Barrera, etc. Rigondeux has proved himself at the highest level in the Professional game and against an assortment of different styles. The same cannot be said of Vasyl Lomachenko, and until it can he has no business being favoured over someone of Naseem Hamed's caliber. It's really that simple.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> Oh. Well, this is embarrassing. I wasn't aware that the formidable Craig Evans had commented. I retract everything I have ever said about Vasyl Lomachenko being new to the Professional game. That's not true; he's definitely not new and has absolutely nothing to prove. Breaking Craig Evan's nose should guarantee his place in the HOF. An impressive feat, indeed.
> 
> As a side note, BoxRec is telling me that Craig Evan's competition so far in the Professional game have a combined record of 73-335-12. Majestic.


I'm saying that in the 'pitter patter' game Lomachenko is breaking bones, you seem to think he's just been sparring before his first pro fight. Don't be that dumb.


----------

