Naoya Inoue's defense

Very, very lame way to argue. Let's get to the root of our discussion instead of wasting time. Do you seriously think Linares was elite at lightweight? Who did he beat to make you think that?

 

7 out of 10

 

Come on man, you spreading it a little too thick.

 

C'mon man!!

His best defense is making people afraid of his offensive prowess.

It's like when King Kong came in to Tokyo.

They were more worried about getting their head chewed off than what their gun or spear might do to it.

He probably has a good chin if they were to open up on him anyway.

Nobody touching the Monster in next 2-3 years.

 

Lame? You want to have a discussion about "elite" lightweights when you literally changed your idea of what constitutes "elite" in the space of about three posts. When I called you out on your bullsh*t, you backpedaled faster than a circus clown and offered some inane excuse about a perceived elite. You ran your mouth and you got caught looking stupid. Deal.

Yes, Linares was an elite lightweight. "Elite" doesn't mean HOFer or ATG; it means one of the best in a particular weight class at a given time. Linares certainly fit that definition when he fought Loma.

I could very easily flip the script on you. You claimed, at least for the time being (as we've seen, your definitions of "elite" are very flexible when you need them to be), that Devin Haney is an "elite" lightweight. Who has Haney defeated that would warrant such a designation?

And you are right about one thing, however-- I don't need a forum to tell me that Linares was considerably more talented than Paul Butler.

 

I'm going to cut out all of the nonsense and focus on this specifically, since our argument is on whether or not Loma has any elite wins at lightweight (and secondarily, which we can discuss after, who was better between Linares when Loma beat him and Butler when Inoue beat him). Why do you consider Linares elite at lightweight? He was elite below light, but at lightweight he accomplished nothing besides beating a paper champ and being overrated due to his work in lower weight divisions.

 

That's what I've seen so far, his offense is his defense. That's why I can't rate him inside the top 5 of all time at 118 pounds just yet.

 

Inoue's slippery as hell and rolls most shots. His offense isn't his defense because it's not like he steamrolls guys with power. He doesn't take a shot to land his. He sets guys up and OUTBOXES them and the power just happens to be overwhelming.

 

I was perfectly willing to have a reasonably discussion...until you you launched into a hysterical tirade, ranting that I didn't know this, I didn't know that, yada yada yada. That dog doesn't hunt here, my guy.

I already answered your question about Linares. I define elite as one of the best in a particular weight class at a given time. Again, Linares certainly fit that definition. Indeed, if memory serves, he was also the Ring magazine champ when he fought Lomachenko.

The pertinent question now is: how do you define elite? Originally, you seemed to suggest that elite status depended entirely on a fighter's resume. Recall you asked me me who Linares beat to merit that distinction. Yet, that position quickly unravels with the slightest of scrutiny.

How so? Easy--earlier you mentioned that Mikey Garcia was one of three "elite" lightweights available in the Loma era. However, a quick review of Garcia's ledger at 135lbs reveals two wins of any consequence whatsoever: a KO of Dejan Zlaticanin and a UD of Robert Easter.

Are wins over Easter and Zlaticanin elite wins? If the answer is "no," by what metric is Garcia an elite lightweight? Eyeball test? And if you consider Easter and Zlaticanin elite wins, in what parallel universe are Loma's wins over Linares, Pedraza, Campbell, and Commey not elite wins??

 

I didn't suggest that

This content is protected

resume matters for defining an elite fighter, you're adding a condition to my claim to create an entirely differently claim. I would argue that both resume and losses sum up an elite fighter. Admittedly, my way of describing an elite fighter isn't objective, but let's look at Mikey Garcia's contender record at LW vs Linares':

Mikey Garcia record at LW:

TKO 3 WBC champion Zlaticanin
UD IBF champion Easter

Additionally, although at a higher weight, Garcia did beat former LW champion Adrien Broner.

Linares record at LW:

TKO 11 loss DeMarco
TKO 2 loss Thompson
KO 4 for vacant WBC title vs Prieto (A 24-7 unrated journeyman)
TKO 10 Mitchell
UD Crolla x2
Robbery vs Campbell (famous gatekeeper as you know)
TKO 10 loss Lomachenko
TKO 1 loss Pablo Cesar Cano

Now, I'm not even sure if I would consider Mitchell and Crolla better than Easter and Zlaticanin. But with losses to every genuinely elite fighter he faced, a KO loss vs a journeyman and a robbery vs a gatekeeper? Clearly overall not as impressive as Garcia's time at LW. Especially given that Garcia went on to beat H2H better, larger competition than the guys he beat at LW.

 

Not an unreasonable post.

I would add, however, that Garcia's record above 135lbs should have no bearing on how we assess his resume at lightweight.

Crolla, Mitchell, and Gesta are more or less on par with Zlaticanin and Easter. Similarly, I never argued that Linares's tenure at lightweight was more impressive than Mikey's. Rather I maintained that Linares met my eminently defensible definition of elite.

I'm confused, however, by your assertion that Linares lost to every "elite" fighter at 135lbs. Are you now including Loma in the aforementioned category ? If so, we're only quibbling at the margins at this point.

But since I now have some understanding of how you define "elite," Loma's resume at lightweight (Linares, Commey, Pedraza, Campbell) is more impressive than a ledger that only includes wins over Zlaticanin and Easter.

And while I certainly weigh wins and losses in any consideration of what constitutes an elite fighter, I don't crucify a fighter for taking an "L" or two if their competition is consistently challenging.

As for Lomachenko, I believe he is an elite lightweight with "elite" wins, as I define the term, at that particular weight. Is he an ATG at 135lbs? Of course not and I never intimated as much. I do, though, believe he could have been an ATG at 130lbs.

 

I'll come back to this, the debate seems to be winding down, but I cannot focus at the moment to type up something legible. I will reply later.

 

No worries, man.

We've already come to an understanding, as they say.

Cheers and happy holidays.

 

Yeah, happy holidays man.

 

How is that KO of the year?