When people say 18-3 to discredit Lomachenko

I think people are pretty aware of how crappy he has been treated by officiating and rate him fairly.

He was a great AM and he deserves respect for that, too. It's his fault for not turning pro earlier though.

 

He was also a fully grown man when he turned pro and a 2 time Olympic Champion. He was as prepared for world level boxing as anybody ever was coming out of the amateurs.

I was a fan of Loma back in the day. I began to dislike him when his fans, the media and himself began to pump him up as the most skilled fighter ever. Not only was he not the best fighter of all time. He wasn't the best fighter of his era. Not even from his own region of the world. Not even from his own country. In fact, plenty of EEs who came up around the same time as him were better fighters p4p. It all got to be too much. He didn't earn that praise.

 

Let's take an honest assessment here. Loma's 18-3 is not a normal 18-3 because he skipped the can crusher part of a fighter's career. To me he went 19-2. I had him losing to Lopez convincingly. I had him beating Haney 7 rounds to 5. Can't see how anybody can score that for Haney. Had him losing narrow to Salido, but that loss comes with my opinion that Loma should have been awarded a DQ win. You can make a solid argument that he should be 20-1.

With that said, his resume isn't that impressive. In comparison to other ATGs (and I don't rate him as an ATG). Who did he really beat or fight? His best opponents were GRJ and Lopez. That is not impressive. It just isn't. You can't defend that. Even Loma doesn't award himself much credit for beating a 37 year old blown up Bantamweight.

The record is thin. He's not better p4p than Usyk, Briedis, Kovalev, Beterbiev or even Bivol and Golovkin. Hell, I'm not sure if he's better than Gvozdyk. Yes, he's greater than Gvozdyk because Gvoz was forced into early retirement after a bad beating, but was he better? Not sure.

Mairis Briedis took the best fighter of this era (in his prime no less) to the brink. And I'm supposed to believe Loma is a better fighter? For what? Because of "skills". It's not all about skills. Loma is a narrow shouldered, short armed fighter who when matched against the best looked a little weak physically. Loma's style was better suited for the amateurs where there is emphasis on punches landed and flashiness. In the pros you have to put the thump on.

 

Much better than his record indicates, One of the most skilled active fighters, and beautiful to watch, probably the #1 on that regard as far as pure boxers are concerned. Probably a future HOFer.

But one of the best ever? Really? When he’s not even the best Ukrainian fighter of his generation?

Come on. It’s this type of **** that drives haters.

 

He's not even as good as Briedis or Kovalev FFS. And depending on how today's fight with Beterbiev and Bivol goes he may not be as good as 1 or even both of them. It really got out of hand. Completely and totally so.

 

If you take away the "building" fights from most top fighters, they would have similar records. Loma jumped in at the deep end.

 

I've had Usyk p4p 1 since he beat Gassiev. I want to make that clarification. Yes, Beterbiev's resume is a tad thin. Although after today it will get significantly stronger. If Beterbiev goes out there and blows out Bivol then I think it's quite obvious he's better than Loma was p4p. If they both have an excellent showing we could possibly consider both of them better than Loma.

And also, Beterbiev has handled business. 20 fights. 20 KOs. He's never had the letdowns that Loma has.

 

Disagree with Briedis(who had a great performance against Usyk, but also has at least half a dozen lack-luster performances that would suggest otherwise) and not sure who I’d rank higher between Kovalev and Loma but I agree with the overall point.

I firmly believe Usyk and Crawford are better and more complete fighters among active fighters, and the winner tonight will definetly go down as a greater fighter too.

 

He beat Haney

But I think the politics killed his desire

Haney was being moulded as the next superstar and Loma was the old man on the way out

 

Sports are a results oriented business. AB is 20-0 with 20KOs.

The fact that Loma is a narrow shouldered, short armed and relatively weak fighter is a negative for him. AB is physically strong. Which is actually an advantage in boxing and should be considered a positive attribute when ranking fighters.

 

The OP and the two posts that followed all invented excuses for Loma's losses, including Salido. That fight is not even a big deal and should not factor in to any review of Loma's legacy. It was too much, too soon, but Loma rebounded immediately and almost certainly would have dusted Salido had they fought again. There is no need to fabricate the reality of that fight, and yet doing so is a Loma fan stock in trade.

I agree that "18-3" is a very weak argument against him, and it's so obviously poor that I consider those making it to be trolling. It's not even worth interacting with Loma's detractors on that basis.