Better Win Moving up? Linares or Horn?”

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Sephiroth Rising 7, Jun 10, 2018.


  1. Accurate

    Accurate Jump back, wanna kiss myself! Full Member

    1,740
    2,160
    May 3, 2018
    Thats not whats being discussed though, is it.

    Who the F*CK is Jeff Horn.. Seriously, I actually couldn't think of his name when I started typing this. His best win is an old Pacquaio, but he didn't even beat and old Pacquaio! he was gifted a decision.

    So what is his best actual win, where he really won and wasn't gifted a decision. British/Euro level Gary Corcoran maybe, or an 85-year-old Randall Bailey??

    Linares is more skilled, more proven, and more accomplished than Horn.
     
    Serge and lefthook89 like this.
  2. lefthook89

    lefthook89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,569
    82
    Sep 28, 2009
    Lol even as a Crawford fan Loma's win against Linares was far superior. Linares was a true champion and a live opponent. Horn was a paper champ that played the role of sacrificial lamb against Crawford. Crawford still beats Loma though :p
     
    pacas likes this.
  3. Scar

    Scar VIP Member Full Member

    76,121
    2,761
    Jul 20, 2004
    :lol::qmeparto:
     
    Barrera likes this.
  4. Infern0121

    Infern0121 Well-Known Member banned Full Member

    2,217
    2,207
    Jan 21, 2018
    I'm not a fanboy of Crawford or Lonachenko so this will be an unbiased post.

    Lomachenkos win was better.

    Linares is just outside elite level, hes a top top world level fighter.

    Horn is what we used to call "euro level", he isn't world class, if you have followed his career you know that.

    He was just one of those guys from a country who doesnt produce good fighters, whos promoter had a good relationship with the WBO, they bought in a pacquiao who was BADLY faded and basically stitched him up.

    So yeah lomachenkos win was better but that being said crawford has all the ability to go on and do spectacular things.
     
    lefthook89 likes this.
  5. cippi

    cippi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,155
    888
    Feb 28, 2009
    lomas win over linares. not to mention loma was hurt .
     
  6. bandeedo

    bandeedo Loyal Member Full Member

    36,052
    24,037
    Feb 19, 2007
    how so? crawford looked completely dominant in his step up, whereas loma got dropped and gave up rds, but in fairness TO LOMA, he had the tougher task, its the manner in which each dealt with his individual task that has me giving them equal credit.
     
    Pimp C, pacas and TheyDontBoxNoMore7 like this.
  7. Sephiroth Rising 7

    Sephiroth Rising 7 'No tears please!' banned Full Member

    9,483
    8,779
    Sep 27, 2016
    Don't put words into my mouth.

    No where did I say or imply that had the ref done his job then Horn would have won.
    And like another poster rightly mentioned, there is a difference between rough house tactics and completely breaking the rules through low blows.

    Had kovalev decided to descend down to Ward's level, the Roc Nation ref wouldn't have hesitated in disqualifying him. Ward knew that, that is why he didn't care how brazen he was in contravening the rules in front of the ref's face.

    Just because the fighter you wanted to win, won doesn't mean we shouldn't look at the performance of the referee, which was terrible in both fights mentioned.
     
  8. lefthandlead

    lefthandlead Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,984
    878
    Jan 1, 2010
    Is this really a question?

    Linares has been world class for years. Horn got a hometown Dec over a shot Pac. Chances are you will never hear from Horn on a world class level again.
     
    pacas likes this.
  9. james5000

    james5000 2010's poster of the decade Full Member

    9,559
    3,677
    Apr 11, 2010
    Can someone please tell me who Linares beat that wasn't a bum?
     
    Pimp C, pacas and TheyDontBoxNoMore7 like this.
  10. james5000

    james5000 2010's poster of the decade Full Member

    9,559
    3,677
    Apr 11, 2010
    Jeffrey Horn beat Pacman ffs
     
    pacas likes this.
  11. rorschach51

    rorschach51 A Legend & A Gentleman Full Member

    12,195
    8,406
    Feb 18, 2012
    Linares is the better win, and a better fighter than Horn. But Horn had a better resume then Linares with just the Pacquiao win* alone. Basically Loma beat a better naturally bigger boxer, Crawford beat the lesser fighter that beat a faded but still active ATG.
     
    Pimp C and TheyDontBoxNoMore7 like this.
  12. james5000

    james5000 2010's poster of the decade Full Member

    9,559
    3,677
    Apr 11, 2010
    LOLOLOL Going life and death with Anthony "1 dolla" Crolla isn't great

    Neither is going life and death with that Olympic kid who sucks lol
     
  13. james5000

    james5000 2010's poster of the decade Full Member

    9,559
    3,677
    Apr 11, 2010
    That Olympic kid is like a Poor mans light weight Audley lol
     
  14. Sephiroth Rising 7

    Sephiroth Rising 7 'No tears please!' banned Full Member

    9,483
    8,779
    Sep 27, 2016
    No because we had no way of knowing how good Crawford was.

    I picked him to beat Crawford because there was huge question marks over whether Terrance was a B level fighter or belonged at world level. I also underestimated all the different things which happened in the build up that would have an effect on Horn. I forgot the man is human and can only take so much. I mean how can anyone expect an individual not to be effected by a car accident, jet lag, inhumane training conditions and then having to deal with Crawford's mind games and antagonism.

    Crawford couldn't cope with a hand injury for goodness sake and the tissues were out for him, in full sympathy and understanding.

    Lomachenko has proven from day 1 what he is capable of, through the fact that after only 12 fights, he's been willing to take on champions and legends of the sport and make them quit.
     
  15. kirk

    kirk l l l Staff Member

    71,036
    27,681
    Jul 26, 2004
    For the reasons I stated in my initial post.

    The criteria you are using will always penalize the fighter taking the bigger risk and fighting the better opponent, because they will never be able to dominate the superior opposition nearly as well as the guy fighting the weaker competition. Therefore when they have tough fights against good opposition, using your criteria its rated the same as a guy beating up a no hoper, because the no hoper got massacred while the good opponent put up a competetive challenge.

    Anyways... to each their own, I dont mean to come off as telling you how you should rate wins, but that criteria definitely puts fighters actually fighting good opponents at a disadvantage in comparisons.
     
    Sephiroth Rising 7 likes this.