Comments Thread For: Lomachenko Takes Over Top Spot on CompuBox Plus/Minus List

[aboutfkntime]

Wrong! Any decent fighter can amass a record of 20-0 fighting mediocre competition and fail when he steps up competition and reaches contenders and champions and ex champions! To say that Lom would have a harder time against a 4-2 fighter or a 12-4 fighter than a champion or top contender is downright ignorant. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence knows the completion at the start of a career does not match the competition at high levels. No way is it more difficult to beat a 4-2 fighter than a current or viable former champion who has had 30-40 fights. This is common fuking sense!

and, when he has more fights, that could be proven correct

or, are we just guessing ?

if so, then yes I agree

on a side note, the posters who have decided to jump on Loma's nuts are amusing

he has been on my P4P list for about a year LMAO

Lomachenko is legit, no question, and he will be P4P #1 imo

[Baltimore]

Man Loma is special.

Really think we are witnessing the start of a great career. I hope he can land a bunch of formidable opponents and build a great resume, he seems to really want to challenge himself.

[ShoulderRoll]

...... What the hell does Golovkin have to do with this thread? Are you kids really this pathetic, that you go into random threads to bad mouth someone?

what does GGG have to do with this?

In case both of you didn't notice his thread is about the plus/minus list. Which Golovkin happens to be on.

That's what he has to do with this.

[HI-TECH Boxing]

Loma got hit less against a guy that "supposedly" beat him up than Ward did against guys that he "dominated."

[ggg_kz]

5 pages of arguing about stats when the posters don't have an idea of what was the criteria in the first place. How can you be so gullible and dumb? Compubox says the stats represent the averages for the last 5 fights for a fighter that's why Loma made it with his 7 fights. Fights have to be credible enough to be counted. It makes sense to take the last 5 instead of 20 average because it's about trends and boxers' development.

[j0zef]

In case both of you didn't notice his thread is about the plus/minus list. Which Golovkin happens to be on.

That's what he has to do with this.

The article is not about him, and his name appears in the whole article once.
You're a low life troll who latches on any opportunity to whine about a fighter for no reason, like the little b1tch you are. That's pretty much the end of it.

Stick to the damn thread, we already have enough clueless low IQ trolls on the forum. You're a good poster when you don't succumb to this obsession.

[ShoulderRoll]

The article is not about him, and his name appears in the whole article once.
You're a low life troll who latches on any opportunity to whine about a fighter for no reason, like the little b1tch you are. That's pretty much the end of it.

Stick to the damn thread, we already have enough clueless low IQ trolls on the forum. You're a good poster when you don't succumb to this obsession.

Lomachenko took over the top spot on the plus/minus list from Golovkin. And he did so by fighting better opposition.

If I feel like commenting about that I'll do so.

[LoadedWraps]

Kinda surprised, he throws a lot of throw away punches, but he's accurate offensively when he looks to be.

No such thing as a throwaway punch. Every punch has a purpose.

[richardt]

Compubox says the stats represent the averages for the last 5 fights for a fighter

Where is this information located? The only thing I have seen with punch stats in the past is basing things for boxers on their punch stat recordable history. I didn't see anything in the article quantifying a number of fights unless my eyes are too tired now. If it is based on X number of fights then no one can say that Lom needs more fights for the stats to properly reflect the reality.

[SCEN3RY]

No such thing as a throwaway punch. Every punch has a purpose.

you're taking me too literally. if I meant what you think, I would've said, "he wastes" punches.