Which fighters in history were as good at countering as Loma is now?

Several. Lomas specialty isnt even countering. Its not letting his opponent get off in the first place. Because of his footwork he is not there by the time his opponent gets set to punch, he also throws 4/5 punches really soft just to keep his opponents guard up.

Counter puncher is a really really poor characterization of lomachenko who has great ability but is not a counterpuncher.


For a great counter puncher, the more an opponent throws the harder he gets punished. Marquez vs Juan diaz for example.
Toney vs Jirov.
Roy Jones vs Bryan brannon and merqui sosa(Brannon came at him with everythig he had and Roy took both out in unusually quick and brural fashion)

 

Where do I began? We can start with Pep, How about Napoles !Gomez! Benitez! Pedoroza! Duran! Leonard! S.Sanchez!How about Robinson! Ali! Toney! R.Jones! I can go on and on if you need me too. And those fighters I named did it against far better competition. The best fighter Lomo has faced was Rigo. A naturally smaller man ( much smaller). And the overrated G.Russell. Counter punching has been around since forever. It wasn't created by Lomo. Hell theirs been plenty of fighters in the past not considered great who were fantastic counter punchers like H.Davis Jr, and S.Mamby. and recently E.Burton. Let's see how Lomo looks 5 yrs from now before we ( or some of you) make him the G. O.A .T

 

Do you know what a counterpuncher is?
Griffin was a counterpuncher. Counterpuncher look like **** vs other counterpuncher.

Marquez looked like **** vs Norwood
Jones vs Griffin and tarver
Toney vs Jones

Counterpuncher look great vs Fighters.

Jones vs Gonzalez, Brannon, Sosa
Toney vs Jirov
Marquez vs Diaz and Pacquiao
Rigondeaux vs Donaire

Lomachenko is a great fighter but he is NOT a counterpuncher. He is a Calzaghe type "activity fighter" is what I would call it.

Those guys look good against counterpunchers because they throw and move too much to let the counterpuncher get off.

Calzaghe looked good against Hopkins and Jones

Loma looked good against rigondeaux


Lomachenko looked worst against the guy who threw the most shots against him, salido. Against a real counterpuncher salido would have gotten beat up being that agressive

Lomachenko relies on not letting guys get off in the first place.

 

Lomachenko is the greatest 130-135 pound Ukrainian counter puncher ever.

 

Dude you just exposed that you don't know boxing. Loma is a great fighter top 2 p4p right now, but he is not a counterpuncher.

 

Who says Lomo can't counter? 4:20 mark. Watch and learn. IMO Lomo is the most skilled boxer since...maybe Roy Jones in the 1990's.

Unlike Jones he is a better infighter, and confronts his man at all times, hitting from all angles with speed and accuracy, combined with perhaps the greatest footwork in the history of the ring which at times allows him to pivot and shift to a blind side attack.

Maybe he isn't the best pure counter puncher of all time, but he's up there.

Hats off to the author of this video. He must be a professional trainer.

[url]0:50[/url] Light Punches [url]2:04[/url] Feints & Fakes [url]3:50[/url] Baiting [url]5:14[/url] Guard Destruction [url]6:14[/url] Grappling [url]7:35[/url] Angles

This content is protected

 

Loma's not even the best counterpuncher of the current era.

Roy was a natural counterpuncher. Look at how he countered Hill's jab in their fight.

 

To be a counter puncher you often have to sit back and wait for the opponent to attack and miss. This type of primary strategy can cost you rounds if you're not active. James Toney and Bernard Hopkins are examples.

Lomo can counter punch well, but with his style, he attacks with quickness, footwork, angles, balance, and a bag of tricks seldom seen. If the other guy fires back and missed while Lomo is active, then he'll counter to the head or body, but its an attack based counter. Not a trap based counter.

I don't see Roy Jones going toe to toe often, and countering during the process. Jones preferred to fight on the outside. Most likely because he wasn't as durable in a pound for pound sense.

Jones for all his amazing skills was far more safety oriented.