Isn't it a bit naive to expect past era fighters to be competitive against modern fighters...?

That Loma isn't getting stopped. Out of the two, Duran has been brutally ko'ed. It's not gonna happen to Loma.

 

So Linares scored a knockdown, but Duran, Hands of Stone, couldn't do it and capitalize on it?

Whatever you say.

 

**** me, how many times.

Duran was KOd at Light middle by one of the hardest punchers at the weight, and a stylistic nightmare. A guy who went up to CRUISER WEIGHT and had success. Duran, a natural 135lber. Who actually won a title at 160.

Meanwhile, your talking about a skilled, short volume puncher with average power against Duran. Who is actually slightly smaller than Duran.

Imagine Loma against Spence? Because that's the equivalent here.

 

A knockdown and knockout are two different things.

 

So probably the hardest puncher ever, and equally skilled, at 135lbs couldn't KO Loma at all. Got it.

And don't conveniently ignore my other point.

 

LOMA NEVER FOUGHT TOMMY HEARNS
FFS

Tommy would definitely do that to Loma. In fact he'd do that to Crawford and Spence as well.

 

Pacquiao at 135lbs hammers Loma.

Armstrong and Duran massacre him

 

1) Loma is the most skilled fighter to grace that division.
2) If Garcia is getting stopped, neither is Loma.

Stop being one of those revisionists that is too bitter to give a modern legend his props.

Sour grapes, man. Sour grapes.

 

It's up for debate.

But NOBODY in hundreds upon hundreds of fights has "massacred" Loma. It CANNOT happen.

 

You probably thought he'd do that to Barkley, too.

Tommy, JT & Tyson are my guys. But Tommy has been done over before, Loma NEVER has.

 

Has he fought the equivalent of a prime Armstrong or Duran? No. That is not up for debate.

You can beat 10,000 nobody's and not get massacred but still get taken out in a round by a prime ATG in his prime.

 

Nice troll. I'm a revisionist at 19. OK. Took you that long to write that?

I'm a big fan of Loma. He's not beating Duran or Armstrong. Or Pacquaio. They're all wrong for him.

I could see him beating someone like Canzoneri, McFarland etc. But I think he does a lot better at 126 to 130. Not 135. He could be really great at 130.

also, 'Loma is the most skilled fighter to grace that division.'

lol. Stop.

 

What the **** kinda logic is that?

Very close to definite troll.

 

What, in 3 round AIBA Amateur fights, in headgear? Stop. He had trouble with Selimov for ****s sake. Though I'm guessing you haven't actually watched the bouts.

Also, where's the definite proof he's had as much AM bouts as you say he has? I could believe the one loss, but that many bouts with it?

 

Who mentioned Duran? Not sure what he has to do with any of this. If I were to say that Duran hammers Lomachenko I'd point to to the Leonard, Buchanan, Marcel and DeJesus wins. Try to analyse how the fight might play out based on how I think they look on film in their primes, the quality of their opponents, who has the stylistic edge. Rather than select a version of a once great fighter who was ageing, above his best weight and inconsistent by that point as opposed to the force he was in his prime and use that version as a keystone to say that the prime version couldn't one sidedly beat another fighter. Lomachenko himself is now ageing and above his own best weight, which I can't see doing him any favours. I'd point to what Duran did to Leonard, who was a bigger, better version of Lomachenko, as well as trying to take in potential factors and pieces of evidence that might swing a fight in Lomachenkos favour. Rather than just say something like, 'well, Loma got put down by a hard right counter against Linares so Duran would paste him'.