I am not buying the Lomachenko hype (poll added!)

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by BigBone, Aug 6, 2017.


Where do you rate Lomachenko pound-for-pound TODAY?

  1. P4P#1

    37.9%
  2. P4P#2

    6.9%
  3. P4P#3

    17.2%
  4. P4P#4-6

    23.3%
  5. P4P#7-10

    8.6%
  6. Not achieved P4P pro raking yet

    6.0%
  1. bandeedo

    bandeedo Loyal Member Full Member

    36,050
    24,032
    Feb 19, 2007
    you mean my opinion as opposed to your proven facts? lol. i hope the fight gets made so you can see for yourself how little you know about what youre seeing in the ring.
     
  2. Manfred

    Manfred Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,187
    5,402
    May 22, 2011
    Martinez, Sosa, Walters, and Marriaga. Not an elite fighter in the bunch. I believe Walters sold out. If he makes Berchelt, Davis, Mikey, and Linares quit on their stools then you would be making a valid point.
     
  3. BigBone

    BigBone Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,463
    1,726
    Nov 20, 2007
    Pretty shocking that 1/3rd thinks Loma's professional boxing P4P#1 with that resume and 2/3rd has him in the top 3, though not unexpected with that much propaganda.

    A supposedly 400-fight veteran with multi pro rule fights exposed vs. Salido not that long ago, solid wins over T-Rex & Marinez, great win vs. rusty, elite Walters. If I'm fair, there's a legit debate of leapfrogging Inoue, Yamanaka, Estrada, Rigondeaux, Joshua and perhaps 3-division champ Mikey Garcia, though some debatable. Ranked over Ward, GGG, Canelo, Crawford, Thurman, Kovalev and Pac? Are we still being sane?
     
  4. the factor

    the factor Active Member banned Full Member

    694
    340
    Sep 13, 2014
    I'm not as impressed as most with Garcia's win against Bronner. No doubt he won 10 rds. Bronner made it difficult to land clean with his high guard but MG rarely penetrated his defense cleanly. He did land some nice body shots but it was basically heavy bag work for MG. The worrying sign for him is he showed signs of fatigue later in the fight and that should not happen with heavy bag work when he was always hitting something. My opinion may not be as clouded as yours. I am neither American, Mex-Am, Mexican or Venezuelan so I have no ethnic bias to what I observe. I stand corrected but would guess by your user name, good english and the fact that you are butt hurt about anyone picking against your guy that you are Mex-Am. I too would like this fight to happen. If you think MG breezes through JL you be wrong. If Garcia can't stop him he gets outpointed.
     
    Graphic demo likes this.
  5. BigBone

    BigBone Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,463
    1,726
    Nov 20, 2007
    Well let's put it this way: fighting a physically much stronger guy with many traps and advanced pro skills, Lomachenko won 5 rounds (vs. 10-loss Salido) and Mikey won 10 (against a 4-division champ). Now that we put it this way, in the most cagey opponent in their respective careers, I'd say Mikey faired much better. And noticed how I picked Broner as Mikey's most skilled. Of course Mikey lost 0 rounds to Salido and turned him into a pulp before he beat Loma.
     
  6. bandeedo

    bandeedo Loyal Member Full Member

    36,050
    24,032
    Feb 19, 2007
    i see what i see because ive followed both fighters careers from their debuts and know what they can do, i know their support systems, i know what problems one poses for the other, i know my boxing, and i dont let my personal bias cloud my judgement. i also know when someone is projecting, so im assuming youre white and probably eastern european.
     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2017
  7. purephase

    purephase Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,740
    89
    Jan 14, 2011
    I think Inoue belongs above him on any P4P list based on accomplishments and I think the only reason he isn't is because Lomachenko fights in the US.
     
  8. purephase

    purephase Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,740
    89
    Jan 14, 2011
    I still think the OP's point about promotional advantages often gets glossed over here. I think you can count on one finger how many 2-fight pros would even get the opportunity to fight for a belt that quickly and get an immediate second crack at a vacant belt coming off a loss.
     
  9. the factor

    the factor Active Member banned Full Member

    694
    340
    Sep 13, 2014
    I'm talking about Garcia v Linares in that quote.
     
  10. the factor

    the factor Active Member banned Full Member

    694
    340
    Sep 13, 2014
    I'm white but not european.
     
  11. KiwiMan

    KiwiMan Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,404
    14,596
    Feb 28, 2016
    A lot of people judge p4p by eye test instead of just resume. Surely even you would agree that Loma looks like a top 3 p4p fighter, if not #1? On resume Loma is already p4p-level but not top 3 of course.

    And from your list, Pac is old and just lost, same is true of Kovalev, GGG is older and doesn't look as good as he used to, Ward is getting old too, etc.
     
  12. BigBone

    BigBone Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,463
    1,726
    Nov 20, 2007
    There is no such thing as looking like an achieved fighter. Either you show the results in the professional ring, or you don't, creating fantasy does not count in P4P. David Benavidez looks pretty ****ing awesome right now, don't you agree? Where do you rank him, pound for pound?
     
  13. KiwiMan

    KiwiMan Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,404
    14,596
    Feb 28, 2016
    I do think eye test /current form should be a part of a p4p list. Otherwise old guys like Pac, or even shot guys like RJJ, would be at or near the top of p4p lists as long as they are in the sport.

    A boost in the rankings due to eye test is not sufficient of course to take someone like Benavidez into the p4p ranks (he doesn't look top 20 p4p yet and hasn't even got a top 50 resume). But a couple of places to put Loma into top 3, top 5 is reasonable.
     
  14. BigBone

    BigBone Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,463
    1,726
    Nov 20, 2007
    That's just bollocks and removes the chance of having an objective criteria. Having your performances, with the weighed average of more recent ones, and how you looked in those fights is a pretty good basis of ranking, and surely enough, Loma looked good vs. the likes of Walters, Martinez and T-Rex, while he also looked bad vs. Salido. And others might say Inoue looked better vs. accomplished Narvaez, Carmona and Hernandez, and not lost a fight in the process, so based on 20-20 vision, how could you rate Loma above Monster?

    And I didn't even bring up Crawford who sparked Gamboa and looked like a boxing God vs. Olympian Diaz, Walters of his division (Postol), Beltran, Burns, Dulorme, Klimov and so on, without having a Salido moment. How does your eye-sight works exactly if you conveniently ignore the fact that a 10-loss pro took Lomachenko to school on live TV? Do you conveniently break away from the eye test and bring up number of fights, not making weight, low blows or whatever fits your agenda?
     
  15. KiwiMan

    KiwiMan Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,404
    14,596
    Feb 28, 2016
    P4p lists have never been objective, e.g.:

    Pound for pound is a ranking of who the better fighters are regardless of size. As these fighters do not compete directly, judging the best fighter pound for pound is subjective, and ratings vary. They may be based on a range of criteria including "quality of opposition", factors such as how exciting the fighter is or how famous they are, or be an attempt to determine who would win if all those ranked were the same size.

    How can you say that after saying that considering "eye test" and "current form" is bollocks? What is the difference with your considering "how [a fighter] looks"? Doesn't make sense at all.

    I think Loma's recent performances have been better than The Monster in terms of skill level. I trust my eyes, and as I'm leading the league prediction contest they are doing pretty well this year. If you rate Crawford higher on a p4p basis I don't have a problem with that.

    I believe it is pointless to continue this discussion, there is no way you can say that Lomachenko got "taken to school" by Salido unless you have an agenda. Having Salido winning is fine, but it wasn't even close to a schooling.

    Bottom line is: it's fine to have p4p list like you do based on quality of opposition, but there's also a place for more eye-test based lists.
     
    Gannicus likes this.