Size and weight, please explain

Suppose age and inactivity had zero baring either? Only fighter in history to be still in his physical prime aged 37. Bernard hopkins

But Mayweather didn't use his size and weight though right? :dunce::lol1: I see you've gone missing gumby, no explaination as well, that's no mas just like rigo

A bigger guy can absorb a shot better and has greater bone density thus he'd of been less likely to injury his hand and his shots would of had more effect and Loma's considerably less. Its also incredibly tiring mentally and physically fighting a bigger guy let alone against a physical aggressive specimen like Loma. Nobody is saying it was just size but an accumulation of things with Loma possibly just being the better fighter included Who truly knows? Compubox said he landed 15 punches, he's broken jaws, bone density varies between people, Loma was the school teacher, Rigo was the student

Your missing the point, explain how Loma used his size and weight to win, I think if they had of been the same size and weight today them Loma would have won just as easily as he did A bigger guy can absorb a shot better and has greater bone density thus he'd of been less likely to injury his hand and his shots would of had more effect and Loma's considerably less. Its also incredibly tiring mentally and physically fighting a bigger guy let alone against a physical aggressive specimen like Loma. Nobody is saying it was just size but an accumulation of things with Loma possibly just being the better fighter included Who truly knows?

If this means Rigo is overrated etc what does it make all these other so called greats who lost at the tail end of their careers to much, much lesser fighters? Who didn't have half the disadvantages. On one hand you's claim he's overrated, one dimensional etc yet you seemingly think beating a guy like that makes you p4p? Eh? Let me tell you you don't win two Olympic gold medals and 7 Cuban national titles by being one dimensional or anything of the sort. Tell me where I said he was 1 dimensional and over rated, I didn't, I think Loma is just better in all aspects of skill than Rigo, he didn't do himself any favours quitting though

wBut Mayweather didn't use his size and weight though right? :dunce::lol1: Nah, he used his reach and skills, I bag fluid IVayweather for being so unprofessional by not making weight in that fight, fluid didn't bully JMM in that fight, that was just fluid needing all the advantages, don't forget that Rigo called out Loma, not the other way around, Rigo also called Loma out 2 years ago when Loma was at 126 but Rigo then pulled out, so nuffy, explain how Loma used his size and weight to win gumby

If this means Rigo is overrated etc what does it make all these other so called greats who lost at the tail end of their careers to much, much lesser fighters? Who didn't have half the disadvantages. On one hand you's claim he's overrated, one dimensional etc yet you seemingly think beating a guy like that makes you p4p? Eh? Let me tell you you don't win two Olympic gold medals and 7 Cuban national titles by being one dimensional or anything of the sort.

He's every bit as good as I thought then some. A loss to Lomachenko ain't taking away his accomplishments or anything else. He's 37 (ancient for a career sbw name me another that was still at their peak at that age? Let alone jumping two weights to fight a Lomachenko), been hugely inactive, his legs have gone. I never expected him too win. Everyone has their limits. He probably doesn't win even at his peak he's just too small. Rigo is still easily one of the very best boxers out there, a loss to a fvcking Lomachenko doesn't change sch1t. It just confirmed what most thought going into the fight. I'm sure you can come to your own conclusion on his 5 best wins Your missing the point, explain how Loma used his size and weight to win, I think if they had of been the same size and weight today them Loma would have won just as easily as he did

He's every bit as good as I thought then some. A loss to Lomachenko ain't taking away his accomplishments or anything else. He's 37 (ancient for a career sbw name me another that was still at their peak at that age? Let alone jumping two weights to fight a Lomachenko), been hugely inactive, his legs have gone. I never expected him too win. Everyone has their limits. He probably doesn't win even at his peak he's just too small. Rigo is still easily one of the very best boxers out there, a loss to a fvcking Lomachenko doesn't change sch1t. It just confirmed what most thought going into the fight. I'm sure you can come to your own conclusion on his 5 best wins

You think size/weight only matters in clinches? :rofl: Rigo was the one clinching, Loma was trying to get out, don't forget that Rigo had the reach advantage dumbo

figure out why boxing has weight divisions and yu'll have your answer. BTW TS is a guy that gave Mayweather no credit for JMM because of size and weight. :lol1: Not anyone's problem except fluids that he was so unprofessional that he could not make weight, did Rigo and Loma make weight, yes, did they make fight day weight, yes, that's professional stupid

them 8 pounds had him averaging 3 punches landed per round apparantly.... and now suddenly rigondeaux is an old shot fighter. Check that old thread of mine i just bumped if you want to see how highly rigondeaux was rated a few months ago. 2.5 punches per round to be exact

You need to be told why boxing has weight divisions do you? :rofl: No, I don't think Loma used his size or weight to win in any way, shape or form, he used footwork and angles, now explain how he used his size and weight to win nuffy

figure out why boxing has weight divisions and yu'll have your answer. I asked you clowns to explain in your own words how Loma used his weight and size to win, can't you read stupid?

Suppose age and inactivity had zero baring either? Only fighter in history to be still in his physical prime aged 37. His own fault. He could have fought years ago at 126. Or maybe he just isnt as great as you thought? Care to list his 5 best wins?

Suppose age and inactivity had zero baring either? Only fighter in history to be still in his physical prime aged 37.