You don't get it there's "great talent" and "special once in a lifetime" don't get the two confused they are "great talents" not "special". You could even say you see things that could make them special but you can't call him "special" yet. That's all I'm saying by the way you started the name calling. Also you misread Crawford is talent but not special.
Crawford would beat lomachenko but he is about 1 weight heavier naturally, weight would be a big problem in that fight
Lomachenko is the first boxer to win two titles in separate weight classes in just 7 fights. That is special, whether you like it or not.
I get the weight difference but truly "special" fighters beat other great fighters even bigger ones. Manny being an example. I fcking love Loma awesome and fun to watch but on this forum the term "special", "ATG", "duck" are used way to freely here. I truly believe Loma will make it into the HoF with relative easy.
Cool Broner has how many belts?!? We thought he was "Special" as well but as we've seen we need more than a handful of fights to truly call someone special. Whether you like it or not
Broner beat no one of note. Lomachenko beat Russell Jr and Walters in just 8 fights. Big difference here.
That's more down to having a good promoter and getting opportunities others don't get, there could be countless top amateurs with a lot of experience could win titles in less than 7 fights in 2 weights also but they will just have to go the traditional route of padding their records with ko wins at the start, look at inoue he wasn't a great amateur but won a title early because he was given the opportunity
Okay I'm sorry 2 good names makes you a once in a lifetime special!!! Hahaha you're right. /endsarcasm
I edited my post but you replied immediately. So my point is that he beat those 2 good names in just 8 fights which is unmatched in boxing history. Name the boxers who did that so early.
how many boxers where given that opportunity? that's down to good contacts and a good promoter, inoue proved even an average amateur could achieve a world title in a few fights, if you want to make that comparison then you'd have to see many more fighters given title shots early
Inoue beat a 39 year old Narvaez which was a solid win for a young guy at that early stage of his career, but Lomachenko beat better opponents than him.
How? I was referring to the rabid fans of Floyd and Pac of which I am neither but you obviously took it personal so I'm guessing you are a rabid Floyd fan.
I can barely understand what you're saying. Are you asking if Salido is number one p4p for 'beating' Lomachenko? That is an absolutely idiotic line of thought. If Castillo was given the nod over Floyd as many people felt he should have, then does that mean that Castillo is always pound for pound? What about the guys that beat Pac early on? What about the guy who beat Hopkins in his debut fight? Salido wasn't landing anything cleanly and everybody is going to pick Lomachenko to dominate and stop Salido if they fight tomorrow. Everyone understands the circumstances with the first fight. Come on, be a bit smarter than what you posted.
so if inoue was given the roman gonzalez fight in his 7th fight and beat him which a lot think he would how would that work out?