Artem Lobov making a good point about record padding in boxing

The only thing I'll point out is that boxing has amateur boxing for a reason. Some don’t get the amateur fights they need before turning pro. Padding should be done, as much as possible in tha amateurs.

89% boxing on tv are mismatches , Boxing in need of more 50/50 fights

boxing is partly for the boxer MMA is for the company's profits and to appease casual fans That record padding is also why the average boxer who fights 40+ fights later in life has pugulista dementia also.... Too much punishment.

Brutal!....This is what he looked like after the fight. https://scontent.farn1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/56757558_2395161980496071_2401797221465980928_n.jpg?_nc_cat=110&_nc_ht=scontent.farn1-1.fna&oh=325dd42a43b70357710ceeffdd14ad46&oe=5D4A4A36 Ironic thing is for his long term health this fight was probably better than a traditional gloved fight. No gloves create more superficial wounds on the face as above but due to the fact the fighter aren't throwing as hard as they would with gloves (as per Artem himself) better for the brain.

There are but so many legit opponents. Then you have to factor in how many of them are available ? But how are legit opponents created? Not everyone is a Loma or a Floyd who shows massive talent from the start. Making the top fighters have to fight other top fighters is what creates these legit opponents. Its the difference between old school and modern boxing. Its not like human beings as a whole are devolving physically or mentally. You just need the right environment and matches, and the result will be good fighters. Mma would have the exact same problem if they employed boxing's style of matchmaking. In fact the same would be true for any sport. You always need competition for progress to appear.

Boxing fans call you a bum soon as you lose a bout

Wait.. you think mma fighters are at the top of their game when they turn pro? I have no idea and I don't care. I was talking about boxing...ya know, the sport this site is supposed to be about. Also, lol at the bold :lol1: Oops I was wrong. It's actually less than that. That proves my point even more.

When it comes to boxers who recently turned pro, it's more about gaining experience than record padding. In boxing, a fighters in ring and monetary potential are maximized. Fighter's shouldn't just "step up" before they're ready like the idiots in this thread are saying. It's almost like some of you are unaware that amateur fights are 5 rounds and championship fights are 12. Wait.. you think mma fighters are at the top of their game when they turn pro? :lol1: Another delusional fan here to defend boxers padding their records beyond belief. Also, lol at the bold :lol1:

A great guy in MMA would only be considered maybe decent in boxing. MMA guys are pretty basic with their hand game. Kicking and grappling is where they shine. what.. dude that's not the point at all. the greatest boxer to ever live would be considered fuking crap in mma. :lol1: My point flew over your head and that's ok. let's move on

It’s not about padding their records, a lot of them have to learn along the way. A fighter with a limited amateur background need at least 15 to 20 pro fights to learn and work on their skills sets.

He's absolutely right. There is no reason for a prospect to fight 15-20 no hopers before stepping up. Taking a few losses early in your career shouldn't be a big deal as long as its against good competition. Tell that to Lomachenko haters

When it comes to boxers who recently turned pro, it's more about gaining experience than record padding. In boxing, a fighters in ring and monetary potential are maximized. Fighter's shouldn't just "step up" before they're ready like the idiots in this thread are saying. It's almost like some of you are unaware that amateur fights are 5 rounds and championship fights are 12.

The difference is boxers pad their records and Artem loses to the guys that are supposed to pad his record. Fan of Artem btw, his bare knuckle fight today was fuccing crazy. Looking forward to him vs Pawly Manginalee

Boxing fans seem less forgiving to losses than MMA fans for example, which is why an MMA star who loses doesn't signal the end of their career. I can respect a hard fought loss against a tough opponent than a win against a can. I think Floyd influenced that kind of belief to boxing fans.

You earn your stripes in boxing you can call it padded record if you want and no that type of shenanigans doesn’t happen in boxing outside of Floyd fighting Conor I could argue fighting a journey men is way tougher than fighting a guy in mma with little to no experience yeah you could argue that, but your argument would have zero validity. before most fighters even get to a big organisation in mma, they have likely had one of the following: superstar career in muay thai, kickboxing, boxing, jiu jitsu or similar long amateur career that incl an olympic medal been mma champion in one or more organisations people in mma earn their stripes too, they just don't fight 20 no-hopers to "earn" them because the money isn't the same. Absolutely cringe to hear boxing fans criticize mma when the level is so much more consistent to the fighter from day 1.

There are but so many guys at the top to step to. For every quality guy, there are 1000's of mediocre guys. And top guys facing each other is a matter of availability and the negotiation process. I follow mma quite a lot, not jus UFC. Generally, whichever level the fighter is on, they will face a guy similar in ranking. You'll never see a deontay wilder vs eric molina type cherrypick title defense in any of the big three organisations. ever. There's absolutely no question that mma fights are more competitive in general. boxing should aspire to be the same, not the opposite which is why it's so pathetic to hear boxing fans criticize mma fighers' records. embarrassing.

There isn’t a single ufc champion under the age of 27. Obviously it takes time to progress. If a boxer turns pro at 18 they have to grow. There’s a reason 18 year olds don’t fight in the ufc. Cause they’re not good enough

Boxing fans seem less forgiving to losses than MMA fans for example, which is why an MMA star who loses doesn't signal the end of their career. I can respect a hard fought loss against a tough opponent than a win against a can. That's just not true. Complete myth. What it is is in MMA, there are smaller gloves, so more of a luck factor where a worse guy can KO a better guy, plus, way more ways of winning, so style differences and improvements are all major factors where someone who gets dominated at the top level at one point, like Holloway vs Mcgregor, can become dominant himself later. In boxing, its not a loss that's a problem, it's the fact that if someone loses wide to one elite guy, chances are they are going to lose to every other elite guy they face, and every fight at that level is just going to be a repeat. If you have bad handspeed and no power, you cant still become elite by going and learning amazing jujitsu, know what I mean? You're pretty much screwed. So the moment David Price's chin gets found out the first time he steps up, it signifies to fans that he will get chinned every other time he steps up, so you can't really put him in top level fights anymore because the outcome is almost predetermined. But, a chin you cant change. Other things boxers COULD improve but boxing also seems to lack the same culture as MMA has that is so focused on identifying weaknesses and improving them. If boxers would improve after a loss and be able to perform better next time, fans would love that story, and those fights. But with 90% of boxers who lose, I notice they never improve or fix their weaknesses, so after awhile it gets boring watching the same exact Adrien Broner fight over and over where he loses, you know what I mean? Whereas in MMA, you rarely see that with guys who lose. But the few who do... like Ronda Rousey's boyfriend, what's his name... he kept getting knocked out the same way like 4 times in a row, and UFC cut him. Fans got bored watching it. So it's really no different. The few times UFC fighters fail to improve after a loss, their fans lose interest as well. It's just most UFC fighters find ways to avoid that. If they lose their first title shot because of bad takedown defense, then their next few fights they will go back to the drawing board and make it a "takedown defense" camp more than even an MMA camp. And so on. Boxers dont seem to do that and that's the real issue. The loss thing is a myth. Most the top earning boxers right now have losses. Canelo, Loma, GGG, Klitschko before he retired, Ward before he retired if you count the Kovalev and Boone IMO losses, Danny Garcia, Mikey Garcia, Amir Khan, Kell Brook. Jermell Charlo I bet will still get big paydays even though he lost because unlike many boxers who lose due to lack of speed or power, he has the athleticism to win top level fights in the future regardless of the fact he lost, so it really dont matter that he did. That's the key. See that myth about boxers who lose and it ruins their career... what that really is is, boxers who get found out to not be that good, it ruins their career. Sometimes. And most the time it only takes one loss because fighters are so protected now with matchmaking that if you lose at all to one of those C-level cherry picks, it probably means you ain't that good. Now if you lose to someone legit, but you're still really good, and you go on to keep proving that, then the loss is meaningless. So fighters like Jermell who might not be great but are quite good, a loss dont mean ****. Just like Shane Mosley, all those guys had losses. Cotto. It dont matter. They made big money. Sergio Martinez. If you're good, your record doesn't matter. It's just a common excuse to give if someone isn't at the world class level, "oh that loss made fans lose interest, it's unfair," when really it's that he just wasn't world class at that moment, and either didn't become world class after, or never got another opportunity because of a PROMOTER failing to notice their improvements so the fans never got a chance to see. But trust me, whether you lost or not, whether you were world class when you lost or not, if you improve, if you become world class, and if you get an opportunity to definitively prove it to fans, even just one fight beating a prime top opponent, the fans will watch your next fight, guaranteed. And if they see it wasn't a fluke, and that you really are that good now, you will become a pretty big star. The loss has very little bearing on that.

People forget how unforgivable boxing can be on your health. Mma is safer. You can go against the #1 mma fighter and get embarrassed. You can go against the #1 boxer and never be the same again

Lomachenko, Usyk are examples to the contrary. There's also a good number of lighter Japenese fighters that have won world titles before their 10th fights. They both turned pro after a long amateur career.