Rigondeaux vs Lomachenko ... who was the best amateur ???

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Cuban Bon Bon, Aug 28, 2013.


  1. rapidfire

    rapidfire Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,655
    2
    Jun 17, 2007
    Both amateur legends, i think Rigondeaux did a bit more though.
     
  2. Kevin Willis

    Kevin Willis Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    9,692
    11,866
    Jan 16, 2013
    I better say Rigo. I would not want to be called a wayciss {sic}
     
  3. Kevin Willis

    Kevin Willis Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    9,692
    11,866
    Jan 16, 2013
    Delete! I misinterpreted the response and said something stupid. Even stupider than usual for me.
     
  4. dealt_with

    dealt_with Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    9,931
    1,230
    Apr 27, 2012
    You can say that you think Rigondeaux was better but to say he did more is statistically/factually inaccurate.
     
  5. rapidfire

    rapidfire Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,655
    2
    Jun 17, 2007
    I think it is hard to statistically prove who the better amateur was. My personal feeling is that Rigondeaux did slightly better. Nothing inaccurate with it. Just my opinion.
     
  6. Beouche

    Beouche Juan Manuel Marquez Full Member

    23,723
    4,043
    Oct 13, 2010
  7. dealt_with

    dealt_with Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    9,931
    1,230
    Apr 27, 2012
    Well no, Lomachenko won more major tournaments, a val barker trophy and had a record of 396-1, plus an undefeated WSB stint if you count that. Rigo had a record of 400-12. So that's something quantifiable, not a matter of opinion.
     
  8. rapidfire

    rapidfire Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,655
    2
    Jun 17, 2007
    Pure numbers of major tournaments won are almost equal. It´s hard to rate their competition. However i think Rigo did slightly better, that´s just my opinion off course. And you are entitled to yours.
     
  9. Zacker

    Zacker Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,833
    16
    Jun 24, 2009
    Lomachenko have the better resume but I was always so impressed by Rigo so I'll vote for him. This is even though I am more sure of Lomachenko having succes in the pros than I was of Rigondeaux at the time.
     
  10. dealt_with

    dealt_with Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    9,931
    1,230
    Apr 27, 2012
    But they're not equal are they. Lomachenko has a Val Barker trophy and only 1 loss on his record that he avenged, while Rigo has 12 L's and no Val Barker.
     
  11. dealt_with

    dealt_with Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    9,931
    1,230
    Apr 27, 2012
    Pick the Cuban poster in this thread..
    Toledo didn't beat Lomachenko in London, he put in a tighter performance than in the '11 world champs but he still clearly lost.
     
  12. rapidfire

    rapidfire Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,655
    2
    Jun 17, 2007
    But Rigo has 2 World cups (although this off course is a team accomplishment) and Loma has none. As i said it´s hard to debate about one having a better resume than the other. Especially when you have pure numbers like their losses that you cannot even prove, cause there is nothing like boxrec for amateurs. My feeling is that Rigondeaux would beat Lomachenko if at the same weight. But as i said, it´s just my personal opinion.
     
  13. MrMagic

    MrMagic Loyal Member Full Member

    39,534
    71
    Oct 28, 2004
    No Laszlo Papp? :lol:
     
  14. PIPO23

    PIPO23 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,897
    6,252
    May 18, 2006
  15. Peril

    Peril The Scholar Full Member

    9,183
    664
    Jan 6, 2011

    Grown man fighting teenagers, what a great achievement.