There a general indicator of talent levels Quigley beat him two easily when he was barely a senior boxer O'Neill beat him handily O'kane completely dominated him Khytrov beat the **** out of him and got robbed, in fact if that was a pro fight ogogo would have easily been knocked out So yes being a good amatuer does have an effect on how we judge fighters in the pros Lomachenko won a title in only three pro fights if being a good amatuer Ment nothing he wouldn't have been able to do that same with rigo
Third question : do you think that you can make accurate predictions about boxers who have just had 7 bouts?
Thanks, so you don't think amateur and pro boxing are the same. Thanks for agreeing with me. point 1 proven. I have already mentioned great amateurs who did nothing in pros.
No if you weren't so ******ed you can see that by in large better auteur make better pros than average amatuers
No unfortunately you can't read or comprehend English , your either foreigner ******ed, or a ******ed foreigner
He won that bull**** tournament when he was 12 Ffs and tyson fury wasn't at that tournament he was the youth world championships when he was 17