Loma vs Rigo- Size debate

Lomachenko by KO. Drag a guy up two weight divisions and put 8 extra years on him and he might as well be a journeyman. He's got no realistic chance of winning and is just there for a paycheck. If Rigo were five years younger he might still have a chance. But there is no way that his physical abilities haven't eroded substantially by age 37.

We just saw what happens to young men when you try dragging them up two divisions to face a p4p guy with the GGG vs Brook and the Canelo vs Khan fights. Do we really need another lesson in what everybody already knows?

 

According to this forum: Size doesn't matter. Ali would beat Klitschko. That is a 16 % weight differential. While this is just a 6 % differential... So it wont matter.

 

Scott Steiner style.

''Size does matter, *****.''

 

Length, not strength.

 

GGG vs Brook, same deal. You haters on here predicted an easy blow out, I told you then no size difference, expect a competitive fight and Golovkin will have to break him down.

Just be sure when Loma doesnt Tyson Rigo, you use it as hate fuel, because Im telling you here and now thats a bs prediction. You are transparent.

 

Dan Rafael. Something about him is a joke.

 

Incredible fight ruined by a massive weight advantage.

This is a case of the unpopular fighter having to give up everything to the A side.

Two ****ing weight divisions.

This is the same thing that Canelo gets hate for.

I thought Loma was lauded because he didn't shy away from taking hard fights to achieve greatness. This is the opposite of that. This is abusing his fame and popularity to exploit another fighter. This is far worse than ducking.

Loma will win, but he won't get any respect from me.

 

I'm rooting for the underdog. I appreciate Lomachenko's style much more, but can't help but to root for the older smaller man. That's one disadvantage too many.

 

How is there a debate?
Why is there a debate?

Why do EE fighters always pretend to be smaller than they are?

Lomachenko was supposed to be half the size of Walters and ended up being twice his size!!! Walters is really just a big featherweight and Lomachenko is much more sizeable.

 

size debate is a little overrated here. People who talk about size use it as an excuse usually. I remember people saying Duran was small for Hearns/Hagler and Ray, but he fought at 154 before Benitez,Leonard and Hearns did. The size will not be a factor tonight. When people mention size they look for excuses. A great fighter can overcome the size thing against another great. If they really are that great.

 

You are such a loser. Working Duran hate into every thread. Duran is a legend, has been, will always be.

 

He quit in his biggest fight, and lost to all the legends he fought who were great. Overrated. If you cannot take opinions why comment on them. Ray started to land punches and Duran quit.. Not because of eating steak or having too much water as they said that night as I remember, he was hit and losing. Rigo quit, and who is the biggest quitter in the history of boxing? Mr. No Mas himself.

 

Loser. Your arguments suck, Duran had sack for even fighting these guys.

You are obsessed with Duran, every damn thread, we get it, you're loser here to hate on one guy, good for you, loser.

 

you sure brought up good facts to prove Duran is great and didn't quit. But he did quit for the same reason Rigo did tonight. Why are we even mentioning No Mas? Duran is synonymous with quitting. Like it or not. I didn't mention No mas..