Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Beouche, Dec 15, 2021.
Yeah, those were always good!
Let’s get back on track guys.
This is my take on Loma:
I think he’s outstanding. But he stayed too long in the am’s.
I don’t like criticising guys for pursuing their dreams, but at the same time, I feel as though we’ve all missed out on his best years.
I know the Olympics is a huge goal, but why have 2 cycles?
I don’t understand that.
He should have turned pro years ago.
I'll start the thread !
Man you trippin.
How many fights someone has is literally irrelevant when they are fighting for titles as soon as they turn pro. Why is this hard to understand for you?
Say he built up his hype by knocking over 20 low level guys on his way up before fighting Salido, are you going to be going on about “He’s only got a 36-2 record”? Because that record is exactly the same and the same quality as the one he has now.
Who is calling him the GOAT, wasn’t our conversation about him being an ATG? Why the hyperbole and changing of the goalposts now? It makes you appear dishonest and sneaky, do you have an agenda here? Please make a clear argument, I don’t want to waste time with fantasy and team cheerleading.
I think you’ll find that knowledgeable people on boxing look at boxing matches and opposition, not numbers in a vacuum on a piece of paper. Your thinking makes absolutely zero sense to me. Do you think JCC at 90-0 was a better fighter than Floyd at 50-0, and that Floyd can’t be the GOAT with only 50 fights? We were talking about being an ATG for a start, that’s a lower level in case you’re not aware. Your focus on number of fights is completely irrational and illogical. Please explain to me what makes a number special for you? If Lomachenko now fights 100 debut amateur fighters and beats them all, he has a record of 116-2, are you going to claim he only has 118 fights? Do you get it yet? Saying he has only had 18 fights is not an argument for or against anything, it’s irrelevant.
What are you talking about?
The thread is literally titled: ‘Is Loma the P4P GOAT?’
No, the number of fights isn’t irrelevant.
You cannot rank him over a guy like Floyd Mayweather on just 18 fights.
The only argument you’d have, is if you were saying that you think that he’s more skilled, and that your ranking is based on personal preference and/or on a H2H basis.
Of course it’s not JUST numbers. It’s BOTH.
Why are you being so argumentative?
Loma hasn’t done enough YET.
He’s got a 16-2 pro record.
He hasn’t beaten any GREAT fighters.
His amateur record isn’t taken into consideration.
He has ATG skills, and we’ll have to evaluate his resume again when he’s retired. But as of yet, he hasn’t done enough.
It’s this simple:
He has ATG skills, but he doesn’t have an ATG resume.
LMFAO! So titles bouts and non-titles bouts have the same level of importance? You can't seriously be funnier?
Why does boxing even have 'prizes', if they don't matter?
In case you did not know, boxing is called 'PRIZE-FIGHTING'. Thus, if we follow the rules of logic, when a 'PRIZE' is on the line, a boxing bout is significantly different and more important than when no 'PRIZE' is on the line. Is that difficult for you to understand?
Nobody gives a rat's ass how well you do in your backyard or in a non-televized and unwatched club against anybody, even against a great boxer.
It's funny you accuse me of saying things I can't prove things and pulling things out of my ass, when you've proven nothing yourself. How about YOU prove boxers will put the same effort in a sparring contest or a non-competitive bout without any prize involved as they would in an actual competitive bout with some prize on the line.
What have they got to gain for winning a sparring or non-competitive bout? NOTHING! What have they got to gain for winning a competitive bout with prize on the line? Medals, money, belts and etc.
Thus, I've just proven to you that a boxer will be better prepared for a competitive bout than for a non-competitive bout, more so than you have up until this point.
Quality of a fighter is also dependent on mentality. A top quality fighter could come in half-hearted without any care in the world to a sparring contest and lose, but beating that same fighter when everything is on the line, is when it matters most.
You telling me you'd fight the same way if your life was on the line, or your family's life was on the line, as you would in a friendly match? Do you realize how stupid your argument is?
"And you're wrong, you can discount accomplishments because amateur Boxing and pro Boxing are different things with different equipment, rules and criteria. No one mentions Ali's amateur career, Leonard's, Whitaker's or anyone else you can think of when they talk about their greatness. Everyone now just wants to find a convenient excuse to make their dear Loma something he is not."
Right, so by that logic, you can also discount amateur boxing experience as well for the same reason, as you yourself stated, amateur boxing and pro boxing are different things with different equipment, rules and criteria. So his amateur experience can be totally discarded.
Thus, with no pro boxing experience, Lomachenko came and became the fastest world champion and fastest multi-division champion of all time in pro boxing. Thus, it makes Lomachenko among the greatest boxers of all time
Also Ali, Whitaker or any of those other guys don't have remotely have the amateur record the likes of Lomachenko, Rigondeaux or Felix Savon have so your point is utterly moot. There's nothing truly 'GREAT' about those guy's amateur boxing career as can be said about Lomachenko.
So whatever way we look at this, you lose!
Did you seriously respond after a whole month just to say all this stupid stuff?
It's called prize fighting because there is money on the line dumbass, that was the case even before the term "World Boxing Champion" was even invented. Did Ali take Richard Dunn and Chuck Wepner more seriously than the likes of Frazier and Norton in their first rematches which were non-title bouts? Did Tyson take Douglas more seriously than Ruddock? I don't think so mate. Literally every time someone fights for a title against someone who is not qualified, he gets criticized left and right because it's the fighter who matters, not a stupid prize.
And nobody who genuinely knows a lot about Boxing gives a damn about amateur accomplishments when regarding greatness. When was the last time someone ranked the likes of Rigondeaux, Golovkin or Kovalev, (whose amateur careers are close to Loma's) on a respectable ATG list ? You haven't proven jack. You've been proven wrong time and time again and yet you're so delusional that you still think you're right. I predict you're going to respond by repeating the same gibberish as always, so I'm not even going to bother responding from now on. Have fun ranting to a brick wall.
Not done near enough to be considered GOAT.
No and he is not in the discussion either.
Yes I did! And what? What has the timing of my response got to do with the content? Nothing!
I know that dumbass, but funny how you went from acting like a sparring match which barely anybody is even viewing, is not even televised, has nothing on the line, has the same level of importance to an actual competitive title fight at the highest level, to then comparing those bouts to bouts like Mike Tyson vs Ruddock which even though titles may not be directly on the line, but are actually watched by millions of people all over the world with the intention of eventually leading to a title fight, LMFAO! This is how irrational and all over the place you are! You don't even understand your own position, that's how pathetic your posts are.
By the way, I never said a bout has to ONLY be a title fight for it to be important, so take your straw-man arguments elsewhere or dump them where the sun doesn't shine. What I did say, was that any fight where something is on the line, is more important than any fight where nothing is on the line. Tell me if I need to break this down for you even further, if that's far too complex a concept for your puny brain to comprehend.
So guess what? Frazier vs Ali had a lot on the line, for starters, millions of people watching. Same with those other fights. And even if those fights did not directly have a title on the line, they were indirectly leading to title fights.
That's why when you compare a Olympic gold medal final bout, where potentially billions of people are watching a fight at the highest level and at the biggest stage, to a random sparring contest where Harry Greg beat Dempsey where nothing is on the line, be it prize, pride, views and etc., you lose all credibility and nobody will take you seriously.
"And nobody who genuinely knows a lot about Boxing gives a damn about amateur accomplishments when regarding greatness"
That's an appeal to authority, which has no bearing on what the truth is. Whether someone gives a damn about something, has no bearing on the truth.
Believe it or not, but amateur boxing is a part of boxing, in fact, it is historically a more authentic and a greater part of boxing than modern pro boxing, as Olympic boxing is the oldest form of boxing which started during the ancient Greco-Roman era. On top of that, Olympic boxing has no politics, less corruption and the best have to face the best in a tournament format without being able to duck or dodge fights.
Heck, winning a gold medal more than once in Olympic boxing is much more difficult than winning any world title in pro boxing.
"When was the last time someone ranked the likes of Rigondeaux, Golovkin or Kovalev, (whose amateur careers are close to Loma's) on a respectable ATG list ? "
Many do, just because you don't know of said people, don't mean they don't exist. They might not be rated highly by western boxing media / fans, such as from USA or the UK, but that doesn't mean they aren't seen in high regard in other parts of the world.
"You've been proven wrong time and time again and yet you're so delusional that you still think you're right. I predict you're going to respond by repeating the same gibberish as always, so I'm not even going to bother responding from now on. Have fun ranting to a brick wall."
LMFAO! And what exactly do YOU think you've proven with that paragraph?
You're the one who responded to me first, not the other way round. And now that you've been put in your place, you can't handle it and it's causing you serious discomfort.
Your position is so incoherent, that you are seemingly unable to see that for the same reasons why one can discard Lomachenko's amateur boxing achievements, they can also discard Lomachenko's amateur boxing exerperience. Likewise, for the exact same reasons why one can praise Lomachenko's amateur boxing achievements, they can also praise his amateur boxing experience.
Both go hand in hand, and cannot be separated! That's basically the gist of the topic. It's you who is either too low IQ to comprehend this, or are deliberately ignoring this due to whatever agenda you have in your head.