Lomachenko; is he a H2H beast all time?

His amateur career is in one box — he rates as an ATG amateur. Good for him. That doesn’t mean he gets to add that to his pro legacy any more than Mark Breland does … he’s judged as a professional fighter on his merit and accomplishment as a professional fighter.

Same for whether he could have stayed at 130 instead of moving up. He’s a full-blown lightweight and has been for year. You’re acting like he’s weighing in at 130 1/2 with Army boots on and lead weights in his pockets while the other guy has one foot on the floor and one on the scale.

Let’s compare that to Ray Robinson, who was 157 and change when he fought for the light heavyweight title, who twice gave up 15 pounds to Jake LaMotta and fought full middleweights while scaling at or slightly above welter — and those are ON THE SCALE AT THE WEIGH-IN WEIGHTS. Henry Armstrong was fighting welters while weighing in at lightweight and such.

As for guys having more fights — yes, those matter. Where do you get the idea that every fighter who has 30 fights is fighting nobodies? Duran had a ton of fights before he won the title … not all of them were world-beaters but some were very good. How many fights did Robinson and Archie Moore have before becoming champs — were their records completely padded? You discount all their wins? Even more modern guys like say Ray Leonard … by the time he fought Benitez, he had wins over contenders, former title challengers and some very good fighters who were able to provide different looks and styles and tests in their own ways.

And all of the ones I’ve mentioned above, when they became champions they were (a) fighting a hell of a lot more often than twice a year (thus risking injury and probably fighting at less than 100% way more often than Loma) and were fighting 15-round title fights (Loma’s two most recent losses, he dropped the 12th round … and he’d have three more to go in their days).

Loma has had 20 fights any way you count it. That’s what we have to consider in calculating his standing as a professional fighter … we won’t add 30 wins because he had a lot of amateur fights. He’s lost three of those 20. You can give him all the excuses in the world, but those are facts.

 

Who said he's an ATG ? i've never made that claim. I don't think he's an ATG but i think he's very good fighter with one of the best resumes with only 20 professional fights. And his resume blows Muniga's resume out of the water.

 

You keep saying Munguia has a padded record that's how he was able to move up in the rankings and earn his spot? Well I respect that a lot more than someone like Loma who was just given a free pass for his spot.

 

like I said before Munguia is only 1 year older than when Loma had his pro debut the only difference is Munguia already has 41w with 33ko 0L. Munguia is barely getting started and right out the gate Loma is already behind.

 

I don't think He should've been nominated to fight for a vacant belt in his second pro fight, I think everyone knows that governing bodies's rankings and overall policing is problematic and WBO had and sitll has close ties with Top Rank, so They just did what Top Rank asked them for. What They "lobbied" for. I certainly won't blame Loma for asking for a title shot as soon as possible though.
So while it can be an argument against governing bodies and overall sports politics, I don't see how not having 20 more fights against journeymen or gate-keepers hurts Lomachenko's legacy or historical rating in any way - and here I agree with @Dynamicpuncher 100%.

 

Look lets be real when Haney rehydrates he's atleast 2 weight classes above Lomachenko, all you have to do is look at the size difference between them to tell you that it's plainly obvious. And the 36 hour weigh in should give you an indication of that.

How is Lomachenko the A side vs Haney ?

No because a close fight can have a clear winner as i said, Golovkin vs Canelo 1 was for example a close fight but there's no way Canelo won 6 rounds in that to earn a draw with the majority agreeing Golovkin won a close fight 7-5 or 8-4. I can't see 7 rounds for Haney let alone 8 and the judge who scored round 10 for Haney tells you all you need to know.

 

I never said it did my point was to @BoB Box that Lomachenko turned professional late after a long extensive Amateur career, so he was ready to fight to fight top professionals and didn't need to pad his record. I don't see that if Lomachenko padded his record that would make him more respectable ? if anything i like the fact that he was willing to step up so early in his career. Better than the likes of Crawford who has one of the most mediocre resumes for a P4P guy who hasn't even come close to fighting the best in his division.

Lomachenko is a small Lightweight and 35 years old, Haney is in his prime and atleast 2 weight classes heavier when he rehydrates. Along with considerable height/reach advantages.

I don't see that it does matter ? who cares about the stiffs Duran beat when he was coming up the ranks ? no one talks about that when looking at his resume. We judge fighters on their standout wins and achievements not how many wins they had against journeyman fighters.

Looking at Lomachenko's wins as number it don't look impressive but that's looking at it without context, the fact is Lomachenko has a good resume and certainly one of the best resumes for a fighter with 20 professional fights.

For example Usyk hasn't had that many fights but if he were to beat Fury, he would have one of the best resumes of the modern era. And probably would have a strong case of being in top 30 fighters of all time, based on his stand out wins and achievements not how many fights he's had.

Another example is Sugar Ray Leonard who didn't have a whole lot of fights compared to other ATG's, but hes rated really high for his stand out wins vs Duran, Hagler, Benitez, Hearns, the number of fights he had is irrelevant.

And i don't believe a padded 41-0 record from Mungia who has yet to have a stand out win over an elite name, is better than Lomachenko's resume not a chance in hell nor is it anymore "respectable" either.

 

As i said lets talk again when Muniga actually beats an elite name, until then his resume can't hold a candle to Lomachenko's.

 

Well good for you. You and Dynamic puncher can go hold hands in park for all I care. Now buzz off.

 

His post was perfectly respectful it's just different opinions that's all no need to get heated over it.

 

We were planning to do it a bit later on actually.

 

Mad? You mean Annoyed by a kid. I did say before we have 2 entirely different perspectives so lets not waste each others time debating, didn't I. You DP have become an unpleasant pebble in my shoe that's all.
So lets shift all the blame to the Governing Bodies? Well that's a two way road. Example, lets say Loma was not protected and thrown into the Grinder being forced to earn his keep from the age of 16 to 26..do you think Loma would have made it and if so would he have been able to now continue with the career he has had? I think not. After all Munguia is only 26 and Loma was 25 when he had his debut.

 

First off I'm not a kid I'm 23 years old.

Secondly.

"You and Dynamicpuncher can go hold hands in a park for all I care buzz off"

Certainly sounds hostile to me over an opinion where nothing was said, no disrespect to @Mastrangelo but we haven't had many interactions. So him agreeing with me is not like were ganging up on you. It's just he happens to agree with me on this subject.

@Saintpat is one of the first people i interacted with here, but yet he disagrees with me on this thread it's how it goes different opinions.

Finally if you want to end this debate then I'm fine with that, but let's leave this discussion on a good note with no hard feelings. Because really it's just two guys debating about boxing on a forum nothing more.

 

If you think me saying "M and Dynamicpuncher can go hold hands in a park for all I care now buzz off" is hostile then its probably because your holding hands with Mastrangelo while walking in the park. Lol. Its called sharp sarcasm so don't be so dramatic. Keep on with the debate if you choose by answering my question first..
So lets shift all the blame to the Governing Bodies? Well that's a two way road. Example, lets say Loma was not protected and thrown into the Grinder being forced to earn his keep from the age of 16 to 26..do you think Loma would have made it and if so would he have been able to now continue with the career he has had? I think not. After all Munguia is only 26 and Loma was 25 when he had his debut.

 

Nah I'm done thanks you can keep your sarcasm to yourself bye.