Crawford or Lomachenko?

"Are you asking if Salido is number one p4p for 'beating' Lomachenko? That is an absolutely idiotic line of thought."

but yet that shows the own insanity of your logic, the thing with castillo etc is floyd re matched him and won clearly thus putting that behind him, loma hasn't that's the difference, salido was landing a lot and cleanly, i don't think the re match will happen at this point either

 

I'm a big fan of both , lomo is in my top 5, but Feel like Crawford is a real pro, I see him going up in weight and taking out spence to be honest. He does not get tagged , when he does , its crazy, you can think of the moments, that's the mark of a special talent , how easy they make the sport look.lomo is great, amazing skill, the best foot work in boxing, ....but he gets tagged by lesser fighters, the minute he meets Gamboa or Marquez, then we will see his true levels.but even without these fights Lomo and Crawford are in my top 5, I just rate Crawford ahead, he earnt it the hard way, and beat solid opponents,

 

Exactly, put a maidaina or a castillo/Hatton he will face the same problems, fighting dirty is part of boxing, a special talent beats all styles . He needs to rematch solido to set the record straight.

 

exactly the point i was trying to make

 

Once lomochenko beats solido in a rematch , he will be p4p 2 or 3 , Or even one , right now Crawford, lomo, GGG, Joshua, and Rigo are all taking out contenders and fighters unbeaten streaks, all lomo has to do is take out solido, then he a consensus number one based on resume and talent, but if Crawford gets the PAC fight and stops him in impressive fashion , then this debate is back on. Rigo skill wise, Joshua power wise, and ggg for pure god of war dominance. All lomo has to do is beat solido, I feel like the blue print is written , hence why the rematch wasn't quickly taken!, let's see hey,

 

Orlando Salido

 

Welfare boy? You must be a young adult still living at home lmao... Cavity creep! Lol

 

Why?

How did you come to this conclusion?

Crest, LOL you ****ing tramp.

 

You can't be that ****en lame lmfao... You can't be that ****en dumb lol lol.

 

Crawford

 

Obviously you can and you are living proof.

 

Ok no more arguing from me all day. You can have the last word. Imma talk boxing today. Peace CC lolzz

 

Glad you are learning.

Good luck with the boxing talk, considering your lack of boxing knowledge you'll be off the forum in a couple of minutes.

 

Sure go ahead think what you want your opinion means absolutely nothing to me personally. Also I'm a fan of boxing and one of the few people on here who calls and spade a spade. But again your entitled to your opinion and so can I. /shrug no fcks given have a good day

 

Much has been made of the "Lomachenko struggles with pressure/volume puncher" etc. based on one fight in which he was repeatedly hit low and was overly cautious in pacing himself (the result of fighting 12 rounds for the first time in his career).

If he struggled so much with Salido, one would expect the fight to have a uniform look to it. And yet, by my lights, the kid swept the so-called championship rounds, nearly knocking Salido down in the final round, and in so doing clearly demonstrated that he had adjusted successfully-- or at least successfully enough to close the fight by sweeping the last few rounds-- to exactly the kind of fighting so many on here seem to think is his Achilles heel.

Personally, I believe Lomachenko's biggest errors in that fight were overly cautious pacing, which in hindsight was understandable given the circumstances, and incredulously poor tactics (ie mindlessly tying Salido up every time he bull-rushed). The latter is far less forgivable given the Ukrainian's superior foot-speed and foot-work.

Nonetheless, I wouldn't count on the kid making the same mistakes again. Lomachenko punishes Salido in the rematch, and both camps know it.