Adrien Broner AM Career

No he doesn't, as you say look at the PDL fights. Look at his amateur career. He can't beat the elite because he is B grade, he doesn't have the brain to improve his game either. That's why I'm writing him off right now.
I hype up Lomachenko because that is a guy who actually deserves hype. Put Lomachenko in with Broner for his first pro fight and I would bet my life without hesitation that Lomachenko wins.
Broner has poor footwork, he relies a lot on upper body movement. He potshots and admires his work too much and I don't think he's all that fast. Broner and his chicken legs wouldn't be able to stay away from Lomachenko, Broner isn't too good on the inside and he'd be in trouble from the combinations.
You saw how plodding, slow PDL gave Broner all the trouble he can handle, you don't think a busier, more athletic, technically proficient boxer in Lomachenko can take him?
Take the blinds off, beating 20 bums in a pro career means absolutely **** all to anyone apart from a casual fan who thinks it means something.
Broner is a poor mans Mayweather just as Berto was a poor mans Mosley.

 

Over 300?

Are you counting his tweeter wars too :fight?

Knowing you, you probably are.

 

what lomachenko was 315-1, yes broner should be compared to am greats like pernell whitaker, mayweather and jones because that is his style but not as profiecent

 

o year in the am he could never beat ****** but he was like a 15 or 16 year old kid when ****** was a vetran

 

His style might just be more suited for the pros. Mayweather was also more suited for the pros.

 

he may not have been an amateur star but they say he's had over 250 fights with a positive record(few losses)

 

nope over 300

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJ3_fD3zrrQ[/ame]

 

he got a bronze the Junior Olympics according to his boxrec.

 

No because, he's whitewashed every opponent he's ever fought using a pro style.. scoring body shot knockouts and fighting on the inside.
Boxing is boxing and Lomachenko is a master. Same as Rigondeaux, he didn't pick up his boxing skills in 9 pro fights so maybe you should stop acting like the amateurs count for nothing.
That's a bit strange for you to bring sexuality into a conversation about boxing.. is there something you're trying to tell us? Your username sounds like it could be a phallic reference now that you mention it....
Let's just stick to boxing talk, I have no interest in discussing your confused sexuality :good

 

Who cares who's a fan of who? Why are you so homotional?
I know for a fact that Lomachenko would demolish Broner in his first pro fight. Promoters don't do that sort of thing though, they prefer to take the Broner route and have them beat a bunch of no names to pad the record and build up the brand first. Are you new to boxing? Don't you understand how this works?
Pro boxing is a business, a pro champion isn't a champion.
The only competitive fight Lomachenko had at the olympics was against the Cuban fighter Toledo. Toledo would also embarrass the B grade Broner in the pro ring with his boxing skills. Boxing skills - that is all that matters, amateur or pro.

 

Ams are meaningless. Ever heard anything about Chad Dawson, Devon Alexander, Tim Bradley, Lamont Peterson, Daniel Garcia ect tearin up the ams? Back in the day alot of slick boxers had great am records but mow the judging has changed and the ams do t reward that style. Amir Khan, Andre Dirrell Ect have more of an am style

 

Chad Dawson was 67-13 as an amatuer. He did win silver at the world championships but otherwise unspectacular.

Devon Alexander got knocked down by a guy named rock allen and didnt even go to the olympics, and was never more then a national amateur standout. Never world level.

Same with Bradley, a national prospect never elite Amateur.

10 years ago being a top amateur meant something, not anymore