Who is better candidate for P4P No.1? I am all day reading posts with Broner this Broner that...but no one mentions the two times olympic gold medal champion and three times world amateur medallist.I think Lomachenko is the more promising young boxer and his historial has more base to afirm that in comparison to Broner, who no doubt looks very good but Lomachenko is from another planet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA-L8_xZhF8
Lomachenko is A+ in the amateurs and he'll be A+ in the pros, as he won everything as an amateur fighting in a pro style. Broner was a B- amateur and he'll end up as a B+ pro, always struggling against the elite. Same thing with guys like Berto, Lacy, Tarver and Taylor. Success at the amateur level usually reflects what level a guy can make it to as a pro. Maybe it's the mentality against the elite opponents? Andre Ward is another one. Lomachenko vs Broner will be a good one in a couple of years.
Well I wouldn't go that far with Broner being a B fighter in the pros, he is improving and right now is a very interesting boxer in the scene.But for example Mayweather at his age was much better than Broner is right now, only time will say... And Lomachenko, I think he is gonna be p4p 1 in the pros, I dont know if in the american media, but in the reality.
a lot of his game relies on his power. He doesn't try to out slick or out point fighters often. He comes out to set you up with one punch or break you down so he can eventually get you out of there. Then he doesn't have the footwork a lot of amateurs have. A younger Mayweather was good for the pros and amateurs. The older version is only good for the pro game. Broner tries to mimic the older version