Gamboa vs. John - a possibility for the end of '08...

:roll: If you have something aginst Gamboa, which you obviously have, then I don't know WHAT and WHO you like in boxing. Gamboa is one of the best prospects ever.

Bye bye

 

According to me (and therefor imo official) you are the first Gamboa hater on this forum. Get a life.

 

Like Povetkin, I'm glad to see Gamboa target the elite, and not cherry pick which belt they go after. Also like Povetkin, though, I've got to wonder if Gamboa might be going after that elite just a little too soon. Regardless, it's a fight I'd like to see- as even a loss doesn't mean it's the end of the road.

 

Naw,y would anybody hate gamboa? I don't, but he has a big flaw that needs to be fixed if he wants hang with the elites. If he can get away with all those mistakes when fighting an elite, then I will be sold.. But until then, he's a big question mark.

Linares and John beats him..

I'd be surprised if he could beat Guerrero at this point.

 

Why are you even bringing the amateurs into this discussion as if it's of any significance?

Professional boxing is a whole different element of the sport. Only one person in boxing's history could do that type of **** and get away with it and that's Roy Jones, and believe me, Gamboa is no Roy Jones.

 

Why? He looked terrible in losing his title on the Mayweather/Judah card and has been fed a diet of bums since.

John's a slick boxer who could fight on the same level as JMM.

 

John is the best featherweight currently, sad that he never leaves Indonesia. I remember he was supposed to fight on Tarver-Jones 3 undercard but it didn't happen.

The fact that he is the only one who could beat a prime JMM clearly tells a lot about his skills. I think it would be a bad mistake to throw Gamboa too early against him. I am pretty sure Gamboa has everything to beat Chris John late 2009 but I would rather see him against Luevano or Linaresl late 2008.

 

Good point.. That might be true..

 

Gurrero is a well rounded fighter who can fight from both long range and short range although his inside game isn't too special.. Depending on the opponent, guerrero seems to change up his game 180'. He usually fights from the outside but ive seen fights where he'd constantly get inside and rough up his foes. Who knows if Gamboa can handle that kind of rough in-fighting but if he gets frustrated and is unable to handle it, then he's going to get beat down.

 

So it's not of any significance!!?? Please don't make me laugh. Gamboa has been there and done that, he is almost raised in the ring and fought all over the world. You got to be blind not to see how he feels at home in the ring and knows every trick of the game.

It's not ''another element''. In pro boxing endurance and power are more important. Gamboa was, and still is if he wants to, the cream of the crop of amateur boxing.

What do you mean with ''that type of ****''?

Amateur boxing is of all significance. It is the purest form of boxing were it all starts. Were all the basics are. If you miss that part, then you miss a lot. (NB.: excluded exceptional cases like for example Foreman)

 

Ok that's sounds fair:good Sorry for the other post though lol

 

Even Gamboa would have major problems with Chris John. Stylistically, he can make anyone look bad. He's not exciting by any means, but he's very slippery and a very accurate puncher when he does throw. He won't be a threat to KO Gamboa (he fights off his back foot against better fighters, which makes it difficult to generate power), but if Gamboa doesn't start keeping his hands up more, he'll be able to pepper Gamboa with potshots all night.

It will depend where the fight is fought. If it's in Indonesia or Germany, where judges tend to give the edge to the accurate puncher, I'll say John wins it. If it's in the US, where judges tend to favor the harder hitter, I'll say Gamboa.

 

i've been trumpeting gamboa's skills here, as i feel he is the real deal. but amateur success means little in the pro ranks. fraudley is a perfect example of this. there is a huge difference between amateur success and professional success. they could be considered different games all together. there are amateur fighters who do'nt translate well in the pro rank, and vice versa. cotto's style for example was'nt well suited in the amatuers, but he sure is one of the best pros at the moment. i'm not discounting amateur accomplishments in regards to a fighter, as those are where a fighters basics are grounded and skills his skills honed. all i'm saying is that its not the be all, end all in the pros. huge difference.