Why do people think Mares would be more competitive than Rigo vs Donaire?

[IronDanHamza]

Mares and Donaire are both proven fighters.

Rigondeaux is not.

I'd rather see Rigondeaux-Frampton.

[puga]

Originally Posted by IronDanHamza

Mares and Donaire are both proven fighters.

Rigondeaux is not.

I'd rather see Rigondeaux-Frampton.

ive just seen frampton fight a couple of days ago .. he's like the energizer bunny and he's fast..good power too..

[tHuGbOsS]

Top Rank will never allow Donaire to fight Abner Mares. Expect them to throw hundreds of excuses to why the fight didn't happen. And Bob will use his "beef" with Golden Boy to shield Donaire.

[Hatesrats]

Too bad Golden Boy will end up matching Mares w/Leo Santa Cruz.
Probably on the undercard of the Sept. 14th they have planned.

[fvanesbeck]

Originally Posted by puga

what makes you say mares aint on that level but rigo is?

1) Amateur Pedigree: Mares was a good amateur, Rigo was a great amateur.

2) Nature of victories: Rigo has dominated most of his opponents, Mares has scraped by quite a few opponents. Surely if he's truly an elite fighter he'd be winning in more dominant fashion.

3) Athleticism: I think Rigondeaux is a far superior athlete, which would serve him well against Donaire.

[puga]

Originally Posted by fvanesbeck

1) Amateur Pedigree: Mares was a good amateur, Rigo was a great amateur.

2) Nature of victories: Rigo has dominated most of his opponents, Mares has scraped by quite a few opponents. Surely if he's truly an elite fighter he'd be winning in more dominant fashion.

3) Athleticism: I think Rigondeaux is a far superior athlete, which would serve him well against Donaire.

1. proffesional pedigre: mares proven vs elites , rigo is not.. theyre fighting in the pros now

2. most but he has 11 fights.. againts the best fighter he fought, he stunk

3. althletism is useful but only a fraction of why a fighter is better than the other..thats like sayin naz was better than barrera

[Hatesrats]

Originally Posted by fvanesbeck

1) Amateur Pedigree: Mares was a good amateur, Rigo was a great amateur.

2) Nature of victories: Rigo has dominated most of his opponents, Mares has scraped by quite a few opponents. Surely if he's truly an elite fighter he'd be winning in more dominant fashion.

3) Athleticism: I think Rigondeaux is a far superior athlete, which would serve him well against Donaire.

The one "Elephant in the room" regarding Rigo is his Chin.
He has the pedigree & the ability to beat anyone.

But can/will his chin hold up?

[Prince_Pugilist]

Originally Posted by MVOLT

Mares Unlike Rigo has Fought and beaten Legitimate Opposition

This is the main reason. Rigo might be more skilled but he hasn't had the same level of opposition. Mares is the second best 122 pound fighter on the planet. 1 v 2 makes a lot of sense.

[NearHypnos]

Mares has more skills than he has shown in his exciting fights. He's been come forward because he's had to. Also, he's earned his dues and thus people feel him and Donaire is a good fight. I honestly think he'll walk into something his good chin CANT withstand. Donaire's power is bigger than his class... Mares seems like a highlight reel KO waiting to happen IMO. His skill set, while good is a bad matchup for Donaire imo. If he CAN withstand Donaire's power...Donaire is in trouble. Mares doesnt have power but he is on your a ss and has very fast feet. Donaire marks up fairly badly...wonder how his face holds up and most of all, his gas tank (which hasnt exactly been stellar). Mares is live, has more than just a chance to win...but i personally dont like his chances.

[puga]

Originally Posted by Prince_Pugilist

This is the main reason. Rigo might be more skilled but he hasn't had the same level of opposition. Mares is the second best 122 pound fighter on the planet. 1 v 2 makes a lot of sense.

there is a big misconception about skills thats so popular around here..normally, when a fighter has a defensive style and lacks the offensive prowess they are viewed as a better skilled fighter than one with superb offense with defensive flaws..

its really like saying pure boxers are "better skilled" than boxer punchers which is really not the case.. one should detemnine the the skilllevel based on his style.. like " asking" how good of a pressure fighter is this guy or how how good of a defensive fighter is this guy..and so on..