Here's Why The Resume Of P4P No. 1 Lomachenko Trounces Bud Crawford's By A Country Mile.

How is calling **** how it is "biased". If I was biased wouldn't I tear GRJ resume apart, which is extremely easy to do? No, I gave him full credit for it. Loma's resume is just way overhyped, don't get me wrong, he's done nothing wrong. He wants to fight the best, and what he's done in such a short time is amazing. I love his attitude, but his resume just gets blown way out of proportion. I would say the same about Crawford is people started to act like he's this clear cut #1 guy. Hell even GGG has a better resume than both quite easily. Canelo/Jacobs > way better than anyone they both have fought.

 

95% of your posts in regards to Loma is a negative post, through his entire career you've been lambasting after every one of his big wins how this or that win was overrated.. At some point you have to step down and just give the guy his due but you're one of those guys who just keeps persisting.

As in regards to Mikey, I don't need to hype up the win, it's pretty much guaranteed to give Loma great credit, I've always had a real soft spot for Mikey though because he fights in a very stylistically pleasing style to me so I MIGHT be overrating him due to that but it's got nothing to do with Loma.

I can see you if Loma wins going around how Mikey wasn't even that good though.

 

Postol was very overrated, and was on the map because of his victory over Lucas. Good win but not as good a win as let's say Linares. Walters was a very good scalp, and a better win than Diaz imo. Indongo was a good win for bud but beating troyanowski and burns isn't really that big a deal, when you look at how his career turned.. Russell is a better win. Gamboa is probably comparable to rigo has he was a smaller guy moving up. Comparing the two resumes, still I can't make a point as to how bud pulls ahead of Loma... Now skill for skill, there's an argument to be made.

 

I react to how the forum reacts. Do you disagree that the win over Linares was getting overrated or Rigo? The win over Rigo was an absolute joke, he deserved 0 credit for that. The win over Linares he deserved PLENTY of credit, but a huge portion of this forum wasn't putting that win as a HOF/ATG category type win. This forum was plagued with these kind of posters who also hate Floyd, Crawford, Ward, Spence. If the majority of forum was quiet and wasn't overhyping it, I would just say that it was a very good win.

If Loma beats Mikey it's very good win, by far his best win. One of the best wins in boxing unless you count GGG's win over Canelo, since Canelo is just better than Mikey.

 

You're a biased POS. At least embrace the fact that you're a biased POS.

 

Gamboa and Rigo aren't comparable. Gamboa had fought at 135 and 130 before. Rigo jumped 2 weight classes while being tiny at 122. He also wasn't 37. You think Postol was overrated, I think Linares win is way overrated. You say that he was put on the map because of his victory over Lucas. So why was Linares put on the map? For wins over mediocre UK level fighters who don't have any good wins? I agree Russell is a better win than Indongo. I'd compare Indongo and Diaz to Walters. Gamboa is more comparable to Russell.

For me Postol > Linares slightly. Let's be honest Postol would beat every one of Linares' best wins. And Matthyse would have brutally stopped Linares.
Walters > Indongo/Diaz slightly
Gamboa = GRJ.
Molina/Lundy/Burns=Sosa/Martinez.

 

Loma is a fantastic fighter. His resume is just overrated. I criticize whoever is being overhyped and defend those who aren't getting their due.

 

In your attempt to be some kind of reactionary to this forum you have swung towards the other end of the spectrum, even when you give some credit to Loma it's always with some stipulation "Oh but..."

I don't think I've ever seen you say something simple like "Loma is a great fighter" with no pretext behind it which is a hard thing to do considering how impressive Loma's short career has been.

I've done it with Crawford plenty of times watching his fights and I think he could end up being better than Loma, he's got a very good division open for him and I think H2H guy's a monster. Just at this point in time, Loma's ahead.

 

And I think Crawford's wins is easier to pick apart if I WANT to. Anyone can do this ****.

His best wins are Gamboa and Postol. Postol's only got one thing going for him, and that's Lucas after his absolute war with Garcia, no fighter would come away same after that.

Gamboa - this is basically Crawford's Rigo if not worse becuse at least Rigo was at the time still a respected fighter, Gamboa was pretty much gone off the radar by the time Crawford fought him. 0 credit.

Other than that? Burns, Beltran, Indongo? C level.

 

Gambia and rigo are comparable because they were both smaller guys fighting in divisions they had no business in. Linares was put on the map because he's won title belts in multiple divisions where as Postol beat a tired past prime Lucas for a title that really meant 0.
Russell isn't comparable to Gambia because gamboa keeps losing, while Russell has bounced back nicely since losing to Lomachenko.

Loma>Crawford as far as Resumes go imo.

 

While I don't disagree that Loma's resume is over rated as well. The more I look at it, the clearer it is that Loma's resume is better than Crawford's.

 

Why do i feel like the only person who is a big fan of both? People are way too obsessed whith their hate boner for a fighter or a fighters fanbase. Who cares. Both are elite talents and Im interested in what they do from here in out. I do have loma rated above Crawford but that could be attributed how poor 140 has been and how Loma is more active. Activity could be placed on Crawford but Im not in his camp so I have no idea. I couldn't care less which fighter gets marketed more. Ill be watching both fighters career regardless of what network or promoter they are tied to. Which fighter a promoter deems as more marketable is completely irrelevant to me. Both fighters are in a position to potentially bolster their p4p ranking and thats all Im looking forward to.

 

Gamboa was small for 135, but Rigo was extremely tiny. Gamboa wasn't a small FW, I'd say 130 was the perfect division for him at that time. Rigo could have easily fought at 118. I get your point on saying that it's comparable that they fought in smaller division, but in terms of credit it's not comparable. Rigo jumped 2 weight classes just to fight Loma, Gamboa wasn't jumping up for Crawford.

That tired past prime Lucas is just better than Linares' best wins easily. But you see how it's easy for you to discredit Postol now while I can easily do it every Loma win. That's why these arguments are kind of pointless.

That's an extremely flawed logic to say that. Gamboa was stopped and beaten up brutally. GRJ lost a decision. Also GRJ at the time was extremely young while Gamboa was in his early 30's.

Fair enough dren, I actually agree with the Linares weight jump fight he edges it, but it's not by far. Crawford's win over Horn would put him right back there and arguably ahead. In terms of just names, not short term accomplishments.

 

I rate Loma's resume ahead but it's not by far. Crawford's win over Horn would put him right back there and arguably better. Crawford beating a Thurman would put him WAY above Loma. Let's not even compare aThurman like talent to Linares.

 

Indongo easily dominated Burns. Crolla struggled lol. That's a top 3 linares win. But I agree, it's easy to discredit both. I disagree that Crawford's are easier. Because I can discredit Loma's easily. Neither of guy has this incredibly notable win.