Review of Vasyl Lomachenko vs Miguel Marriaga Fight

He's 29 years old and has hardly taken any damage do to his awesome reflexes and defense. I guarantee he has 4-5 more prime years left in him. And he has not even shown his best. Watch.

 

I never said he was over the hill. He's at his absolute peak at this moment and the time is now. The time isn't 3 years from now. It's today.

 

I hear what you are saying. But I believe he'll be one of those that will be operating at top gear for years to come. He's a phenom.

 

pac was coming off fights with dlh and hatton, not coming up from 112. cotto was never the #1 fighter at any weight he has ever competed in, while mikey is pretty much the consensus daddy of the lightweight division while in his prime and on the p4p lists.

 

It's just common sense. The guy is 29 which means he a young fighter. 32 is not young. And he has a young fighters style. He's not a classical, walk you down, high guard, power punching technician. He doesn't have an old fighters style.

 

I disagree with the spirit of this post. But it's also hard to say how Good of a win Mikey would be for Loma. Since Mikey has never fought an A level guy. When he fights Loma then we can start to find out how good the guy really is.

 

we have to look at things in their proper context and from the correct perspective. pacs boxing journey, as a whole, could be the most amazing story ever, but the god given ability to put on weight successfully is not the determining factor in how great of a fighter you are. its a factor, but not the deciding factor. cotto got as high as #1 ranked challenger in his long career, and i dont say that to discredit pacs win, ive always said that truth about cotto.
loma has never fought an a level fighter either, but nobody seems to hold that against him when assessing his place on a p4p list, why is mikeys dominance of everyone he has faced different? i have no trouble seeing the obvious skill and talent in both fighters and how they would stack up against each other. thats why i see mikey beating him.

 

I've always said that MAB I was the best win on Pacquiaos resume and probably the best win since Roy Jones shutout Toney.

Would be very impressed if Loma can beat Garcia wide. Remains to be seen though just HOW good Loma and Garcia really are. They need to fight.

 

Simple question why is Mickey Garcia pursuing the fight with Loma so desperate going up and down in weight. Bob spoke recently about Loma coming back in Dec but Garcia was ignored he mentioned Rigo, Beltran and others.

 

Cogent points however you have to examine the current version of Lomachenko not the one who faced Salido in his second pro fight and was hit low the entire fight. Granted Garcia did look very strong against a guy much bigger than any Loma opponent but Garcia has gained strength moving up and if they ever do fight it will be at at least 135 giving Loma more room to grow and add strength as well.

Loma has gotten much stronger moving to 130 and is only going to be even stronger at 135 so it becomes an inexact science accurately predicting who is/will be stronger when one of the targets is not stationary.

 

If anyone is a usual suspect it's you. You insecure *****. Loma is the truth enjoy him and move on.

 

the most impressive thing about pac was the race. he started the race without tires and ended up winning the indy 500... and he did that while placing in the kentucky derby riding a donkey. and he may still end up winning the derby on that donkey if he gets elected president.

 

Bandeedo has said in threads after the Broner fight that he thinks Garcia is May/Pac level. For my part, I'm still skeptical. I think he's Cotto/Bradley level.

 

i dont remember doing that, else i would place him #1 p4p, which i dont think he is. i do think he would beat both right now, but pac and floyd are top 30 atg's and mikey hasnt cracked top 100. for me to put mikey alongside those 2, he would need to move up to welter and unify the belts, and i dont think hes big enough to do it.
as i stated earlier, i look at things in their proper context and perspective, which may confuse readers who ball everything up together to produce one answer.