Nicolino Locche v. @ 140

I know that Locche sceptics will say their usual stuff about if the bouts were held in Argentina...and the "home cooking" involved, but I really think that Locche would have won very close decisions against both.

 

Locche has one fatal flaw in that he was overly lacking any offence.

There's a huge difference between making someone miss and making them pay. He could make anyone miss a punch but he didn't always make everyone pay.

That being said very few men weighing 140 would take 8 rounds off Locche. I don't favour these two to do that.

 

It was hardly a "fatal flaw" now, was it? I mean after all, Locche did alright...he did pretty darned good career wise didn't he? Just 4 losses in 117 bouts? He owned victories over 3 of those men who defeated him...and aside from the 11th round tko loss on a cut by Cervantes near the end of his career (he won his last 7 fights) he was never ko'ed or really beat up.

 

Fatal in terms of his h2h ability in fantasy fights.

If there was one facet of his game you'd improve would that not be it?

 

I think Locche earns wins over both men.

 

I agree, if Locche had learned the art of counterpunching there's nobody in the history of 140 who could have beaten him IMO.

 

His defence ability is the best I've ever seen.

 

Yes, I'll admit that his paucity of punches would have hindered him in h2h bouts with the Armstrongs, Pryors, etc.,...and if I had that power to infuse a certain quality in El Untoccable's armory to enhance his supreme defensive gift (greater than any fighter's btw), it would be a Napoleseque gift of power, i.e., the ability to slice, dice, butcher or knock unconscious...as Napoles was able to do. That would make Nicolino Locche utterly and completely untouchable IMHO.

 

Oh, be assured, he could counterpunch with the best of them...he just rationed out his shots so severely...as Jimmy Young was known to do..which was probably a defensive master's inherent curse....when you're so committed to what your field of mastery was,....in this case, defense.

 

Absolutely. 117 bouts, 4 losses...never really beat up, much less ko'ed....his defense was indeed the best.

 

The controversy behind some of his fights is because he was overly negative.

I'm convinced he didn't even really care about punching the other man, just making him look foolish with his exaggerated defences.

His defence is without parallel but his counter punching is amongst the best because it too often lacked conviction and power.

He would make an absolute mug out of Pryor but he isn't gonna be able to stop him coming forward and that would cost him fight imo.

 

Yes...a high volume swarmer type has the best chance vs a defensive master like Locche...in the same manner that uniquely, a Joe Frazier high volume/swarmer type of fighter would have the best chance of beating my man Jimmy Young, whereas none of the heavyweight behemoths, Norton, or even Ali would IMO.

 

Lol that's a whole other debate my man.