Who was the better amateur Rigondeaux or Lomachenko?

It's close, personally I think Rigondeaux was very slightly better, I think his style, certainly against Lomachenko style in his later amatuer years was more suited to the amatuer style of fighting, Lomachenko has become far more pro like in recent years with his style

The 2 best amatuers I've seen, if Lomachenko records to be believed its actually better than Rigos, even if styles wise I rate Rigo slightly higher as an amatuer.

I think Lomachenko has the potential to be the better pro fighter, but time will tell there.

 

Without a doubt Rigondeaux, Rigo won close to 400 fights.

 

So did Lomachenko, 396-1. Two olympic golds and three world championships. Rigo only won two world championships and he lost 12 fights.
Lomachenko was undisputedly the better amateur, as good as Rigo was/is.

 

They share a common opponent, Sultonov. Rigondeaux beat him 27-13 at the 2004 Olympics, four years later Lomachenko fought him at Beijing and won 13-1, knocking him down in the last round. Here's the video:
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kI4lAjSUv4[/url]

 

Yes & Rigo is 5'5 & weighs 122lb.Vasyl is 5'7 & has much bigger frame than the cuban so it makes sense that he'd overwhelm him(130-135lb.I like/respect both have studied their film.

You forgot to mention vasyl has 5 gold medals & one silver,Rigo has 8 golds & no silver.The cuban is arguably the greatest amateur ever,Vasyl comes in at top 5 or 3.Maybe even 2 but there is a gap between them.

 

8 golds in what? Let's include Lomacenko's national wins and Euro champs as well then. He has still won more than Rigo. Only the Olympics and world champs count. If we include all those 'other' tournaments then Rigo has more runners up medals as well.
Their size is irrelevant, Sultonov was bigger than Lomachenko as well and was more experienced on the world stage when he fought Lomachenko. Sultonov was physically mature facing the young Lomachenko, Sultonov was big for the weight class. He fought Rigondeaux when he was just a kid, he was still growing.

The fact is Rigo had 12 losses and Lomachenko had 1, and Lomachenko did it with a pro style.
Lomachenko won more and lost less, so I don't see how anyone can make a claim for Rigo being the better amateur. You can say you liked him better or you enjoyed his style more but you cannot claim he's the better amateur, the facts contradict that.

 

Yeah he's legit all right. My favourite pro boxers are Rigo, Gamboa and Broner but I've had to talk trash about all three in the last few days with the comparisons to Lomachenko

 

Where is the proof that Lomachenko only has 1 loss?

 

Where is the proof for any fighters amateur record? Since Lomachenko has been on the world scene that's his only loss. If he has lost anything else it would be against some regional opponent in an insignificant tournament before Vasyl was known. Somehow I don't think he's beating everybody else around the world and losing in regional contests. Lomachenko himself has said he's only ever lost once, I don't see why he would lie. There's videos of him pulling Roy Jones style showboating on opponents when he was a kid, knocking them down. He's always been dominant.

 

Yeah tbh your point is right. Even IF there were losses, Henry Armstrong had losses at the start of his career.

His only loss to Selimov was actually avenged a year later, and Selimov will get his ass kicked on saturday.

 

I think it could be a close fight, Selimov's home town.. could sway judges in close rounds. I think Lomachenko is going to have to dominate to get the victory tbh.

 

I watch loma and I don't see what's so special, solid fighter, but doesn't look like a boxing genius by any stretch. Rigo is the ultimate ring general.

 

Come on now.. I have to question your boxing knowledge if you can't see the boxing genius in Lomachenko. He is complete in every facet of boxing, unlike Rigo he can create his own opportunities and switch/adapt to any style. Rigo is the man but he will always have stylistic challenges because he's very predictable in the way he fights, he is a pure counter puncher and that's his whole game. He doesn't have the variety of punches and the defence that Lomachenko has got, he can't punch and defend at the same time going forward like Lomachenko, he can't fight on the inside like Lomachenko.
Don't get me wrong though, I'm a big fan of Rigo and will be cheering for him against Donaire, I can't wait for that fight.