Watching Lomas fights and its easier to see why he lost to Lopez

As I've said though you're suggesting Loma to do the same thing he did rounds 7-11 from the start. The chances of him getting caught in the early-mid round is huge. just like he did when he tried to press the issue in round 12 and Lopez hurt Loma and started teeing off on him. And now that theres more time for Lopez to land that one shot against an elusive but more open Loma, he most certainly will. Based on Loma's performance against Nakatani i see no improvements from the first fight against Lopez. As I've said i favor Loma to win a decision but you know, i have this funny feeling Lopez is going to counter him to bits.

 

You talk like a man with a hole in his head.

 

No, I'm not suggesting Loma fight as aggressively as he did in rounds 7-11 for the entire fight. In fact, I specifically stated that I felt Loma was a bit too aggressive in some of those rounds than would normally be prudent against a kid like Lopez. It is no secret, however, why he elected to fight the way that he did: the nearly insurmountable deficit he faced on the cards absolutely dictated such an approach if he had any hopes of winning.

Again, had he been a bit more offensive minded in the first half of the fight---and here the bar is embarrassingly low, given how little he did in the first 5 rounds--he wouldn't have had to force the action as much as he did in the second half of the fight. Moreover, there's no reason to think he cannot steal rounds in the first half of the fight with calculated aggression. Indeed, a case can be made that he should have received the nod in Rd 2 by virtue of winning that exchange at the end of the round.

Sure, Lopez hurt Loma in Rd 12 and won the round convincingly. That's boxing, and in boxing you have to take risks. Had Loma not taken any risks, he wouldn't have arguably won 5 of the last 6 rounds. Nor was Lopez "countering him to bits" despite the aggressive approach Loma adopted in the second half of the fight. Indeed, Loma was able to back Lopez up on more than one occasion. As I mentioned before, Lopez achieved most of his success that night moving forward and pressing the action, not by counter-punching the smaller man.

Good conversation here.

 

I just feel like the fact that when Loma actually started, ya know, doing something, he beat the breaks off of Teo for 4 rounds, kinda discredits any argument that Teo is better. All respect in the world to Teo for biting down on that mouthpiece and coming to party in the 12th, though. That was big boy, champion ****.

But yeah, is the excuse that Teo was tired? If you're an "elite" boxer, and you get tired after 6 rounds that were fought at a snails pace with an average of 4 or 5 real punches landed per round, then you have some severe gas issues to work out. He wasn't tired. When Loma turned it on, just like everybody who Loma turns it on against, Teo became mentally overwhelmed, which then made him physically overwhelmed.

I just don't know how anyone can honestly watch that fight and make an argument that Teo is the better fighter. It's baffling to me.

 

Haha. You can't understand how anyone can watch the fight and conclude the guy that won 7 rounds very clearly is better than the guy who lost them?! Wow. This forum is a special place.

 

I think not this forum but exactly you are special and unique person in this forum.

You do not have rights to prohibit discuss fights here and if forum does not likes you, no one force you to use this forum.
I can easily see that some part of posters had some fights under belt and some posters here are unbiased and score rounds fairly.

While you most likely prefer opinions like this: ohh, Loma is bad, Lopez had exposed him and beated him up easily etc.
You are free to use other forums and their boxing sections. This if you think that you do have rights for ppl here to prohibit express their opinions and score rounds.

I will bring for you one example to compare and really get how do you think.
Fight fans in general apply double-standards. These individuals are known as morons.

Patterson vs Johansson 1 st fight: Patterson gets brutally stopped.
They are doing rematch and second rematch where Patterson had won.

Now there is some Loma who had lost fight on cards ( Fight fans in general apply double-standards. These individuals are known as morons.) and enough ppl in forums are representing this fight like it looked the same as Patterson vs Jonansson I st fight.
Etc alike bull**** and even are thinking that they do have almost legal rights to enforce forum members to dance under their own music.
Sure.

 

Um. Woah dude. Take a nap, chill out a bit.

I'm responding to one opinion with my own. I didn't imply for him to stop posting or find another forum because I disagreed with him. Now you, on the other hand, have done just that to me. Which in your own words, twice stated, would make you a "moron." I wouldn't go that far. It's just subjective opinion. But if you want to hold yourself to such standards, well, I won't tell ya what to do!

 

If you assume that 1 lost fight ( on judges cards ) is ultimate proof that boxer A is better than boxer B you should use the same criteria also for other boxers and especially if they had been stopped in distance.

1 st lesson: Patterson had lost 1 st fight vs Johansson by KO.
If you use for Patterson the same criteria than for Loma, then sorry, looks that Patterson should be worse than Johansson automatically.
2 st lesson: cos Douglas KOed Tyson out cold in their first fight this then should mean that Douglas always was better boxer than Tyson?

All evaluation criteria you use for Loma you should use also for ALL other boxers.

 

My response was to a poster claiming it is baffling for someone to think Lopez is better than Lomo. Do you know what baffling means? And specifically in regards to their actual fight. I think you need to be saying all these things to the guy I quoted, not myself.

 

yes, because we're robots who just process information based on result and not by our eyes.

I see high level fighters give up rounds all the time. "Slow Starter". "Downloading info". But I don't assume the other fighter is better because he won those rounds. I have eyes. I can see that one boxer isn't being active. So my opinion isn't based on the result of the round.

Did Tyson Fury not fight extremely tentatively against Wilder in the 1st fight? Yes, he won the rounds because Wilder was equally inactive, but regardless. It was still clear after that first fight who the superior boxer was. To me, I can't comprehend how people can watch that fight, watch all of their fights before, and in Loma's case, after, and come to the conclusion that Teo is the better fighter. Because when it came down to it, and BOTH guys started participating, it was a bonafide asswhooping. If you were to rank the 20 best punches of the fight, Loma would account for throwing 15 of them. Easily.

Teo is very, very good. He's likely going to be very special. He hasn't even hit his peak yet. And he won that fight.

On the cards.

 

So. Lomo won the fight in an alternate dimension? Not following the last part.

Your example of Fury/Wilder I does not fit with what you're saying. Wilder would have had to legitimately win the fight in order for that to be comparable.

Let's use the term participate as you have. So one fighter couldn't participate for six straight rounds. Well, what a terrible strategy to do if you don't close the show afterward. Sign of an inferior fighter with bad strategy and execution. To continue with how you mention when they both started participating and also your theory of listing the best individual punches... well you must not have watched that 12th round cause both those sentiments go out the window.

It is "baffling" to you for someone to think Lopez is better? My man, we just saw them have an actual 12 round boxing match! There can only be one boxer who it would be "baffling" to view as the better of the two. Hint: it is not the guy who clearly won.

 

He lost because he started slower, part of that is Lopez' power.

Injury? Maybe.

It was a somewhat close fight. Neither really dominated.

 

Alternate dimension? Nah. Teo won the fight on the cards. He won more rounds. But he didn't win the "fight". He was thoroughly outclassed when Loma started trying. He was beat the hell up. Looking just as hopeless as many of Loma's opponents. Now, that only matters in arguments like this. Teo's job is to win at least 7 rounds. And he did that.

No, Wilder/Fury does not have to be a direct correlation for me to compare them. Fury was very tentative because of Wilder's power. Loma was was very tentative because of Teo's power and possibly his shoulder. But Fury is clearly better than Wilder and Loma is clearly better than Teo.

By the way, we saw what happened in Fury/Wilder when Fury realized "Ya know, I'm levels above this dude Let me just go straight at him and see if he can whether the storm."? He ran through Wilder like a finish line. Teo is certainly more skilled than Wilder. But Loma is more skilled than Fury. Will the rematch look like Fury/Wilder 2? Doubtful Teo is too good to be embarrassed like that. But will it look more like rounds 7-11 than rounds 1-6? I'm very confident it will.

 

Comrade Surrix for meTank did a much better job on Pedraza than Lomachenko. Talking about weight bullies I remember when Lomachenko retired the fantastic Rigobdeaux who had to move up several weight classes for the fight.

Also congratulations to Ukraine for excellent performances so far in the Euros.

 

Good chance Teo will catch Loma good and put his lights out if they rematch which is far from certain.