Lomachenko In The Firmament Of All Time

[Rusty Tromboni]

Loma is no different than any fighter who performs exceptionally at the present time. I would put Fury in that category because, both men show incredible skill, on film. It is empirical, it can be compared and contrasted to other great fighters.

But as far as how they measure through the lens of history... that is yet to be determined.

So for those of us planted here on planet Earth, how long must one wait until a fighter's ability is matured for evaluation?

Can we start evaluating Mayweather? Whitaker? Ray Leonard?

Do fighters get better the further out we find ourselves from their retirement?

Looking at fighters like Marciano and Gans, who are highly regarded here, I am far less impressed than others. But apparently I cannot evaluate them simply based on how they appear on film or the quality of opposition they faced. Apparently there's an equation to perform which accounts for the distance in time. Could you provide it?


Wouldn't it be funny if scouting worked like this?


"The kid throws a 93 mph fastball at 17 years old. But I want to wait another 10 years before deciding if that's impressive or not. Another one on that same team bats around 250. But 1 out of 4 doesn't mean anything right now; I need three years to reflect on whether or not that a good average or not."

[billeau2]

So for those of us planted here on planet Earth, how long must one wait until a fighter's ability is matured for evaluation?

Can we start evaluating Mayweather? Whitaker? Ray Leonard?

Do fighters get better the further out we find ourselves from their retirement?

Looking at fighters like Marciano and Gans, who are highly regarded here, I am far less impressed than others. But apparently I cannot evaluate them simply based on how they appear on film or the quality of opposition they faced. Apparently there's an equation to perform which accounts for the distance in time. Could you provide it?


Wouldn't it be funny if scouting worked like this?


"The kid throws a 93 mph fastball at 17 years old. But I want to wait another 10 years before deciding if that's impressive or not. Another one on that same team bats around 250. But 1 out of 4 doesn't mean anything right now; I need three years to reflect on whether or not that a good average or not."

Do you know how many kids can throw a 93 an hour fastball? Psychologically some of them cannot deal with getting their pitch hit...some of them cannot find the target under duress, etc. And that is in baseball, which has fewer variables than a fight sport.

Its not like history will discriminate against the present... One day old timers will mention Mayweather the way Jeffries was mentioned...and one day, like Jeffries, the sands of time will erase Mayweather.

Evaluating fighters is one thing. Using historical context just depends on letting time pass. And no... we should not assume skills are better when historically validated, that is not my point.

[Rusty Tromboni]

Do you know how many kids can throw a 93 an hour fastball? Psychologically some of them cannot deal with getting their pitch hit...some of them cannot find the target under duress, etc. And that is in baseball, which has fewer variables than a fight sport.

Its not like history will discriminate against the present... One day old timers will mention Mayweather the way Jeffries was mentioned...and one day, like Jeffries, the sands of time will erase Mayweather.

Evaluating fighters is one thing. Using historical context just depends on letting time pass. And no... we should not assume skills are better when historically validated, that is not my point.

The point is, no matter how much you try to avoid it, you can't give reason for why Lomachenko isn't already an ATG of the highest degree.

How many belts had Robinson won in 12 fights? Langford? Ray Leonard? Joe Gans?

What other Featherweight champions became established Lightweight champions?

When have you seen a performance like Lomachenko-Rigondeaux or Linares?

He's eclipsed Jimmy Britt as the most prodigious Boxer in history; and Jofre and Duran as most complete.

[The Old LefHook]

ATGness is spread out like other classes. Not all ATGs are equal; some just made it, others were shoo-ins. If a fighter has not been in extraordinarily tough fights, then we cannot know him as deeply as we need to, can we? If fighters whose class was "solid," but not great gave you fits, as Maidana and Castille did Mayweather, it factors into the historical knowledge base on you.

Chenko needs to win a few more defining fights so we can have more thorough information. If we see him cream the cream, we will know it. He needs to beat that great big ol' nasty mexican soundly, put a foot on him, and flex his muscles for milkmen everywhere...

[billeau2]

The point is, no matter how much you try to avoid it, you can't give reason for why Lomachenko isn't already an ATG of the highest degree.

How many belts had Robinson won in 12 fights? Langford? Ray Leonard? Joe Gans?

What other Featherweight champions became established Lightweight champions?

When have you seen a performance like Lomachenko-Rigondeaux or Linares?

He's eclipsed Jimmy Britt as the most prodigious Boxer in history; and Jofre and Duran as most complete.

First of all, I never mentioned any specific category of greatness. I simply said that history has its own process for evaluating fighters... But certainly ATG status should have some historical context.

Belts and other trinkets mean little with no context for competition, and other such things. Let me guess to your dumb a s s Adrien Broner is an ATG fighter because he won multiple belts right?

your last paragraph is yet another Trombonism. Duran was eclipsed by Lomo lol.

idiot.

[Rick Taylor]

The point is, no matter how much you try to avoid it, you can't give reason for why Lomachenko isn't already an ATG of the highest degree.

he lost to a fat mexican bum doe

and he ducks top guys. unless they have a style that suits him.

jus look at the commey/teofimo situation.

He's eclipsed Jimmy Britt as the most prodigious Boxer in history; and Jofre and Duran as most complete.

How so?

[QueensburyRules]

he lost to a fat mexican

- -Fat Mex weight and PED cheat held a long time title.

Sorta like U hold U limply dreaming of a BARNEY hug.

[Rick Taylor]

- -Fat Mex weight and PED cheat held a long time title.

Sorta like U hold U limply dreaming of a BARNEY hug.

a fat bum...










😂

[Rusty Tromboni]

First of all, I never mentioned any specific category of greatness. I simply said that history has its own process for evaluating fighters... But certainly ATG status should have some historical context.

Belts and other trinkets mean little with no context for competition, and other such things. Let me guess to your dumb a s s Adrien Broner is an ATG fighter because he won multiple belts right?

your last paragraph is yet another Trombonism. Duran was eclipsed by Lomo lol.

idiot.

Show me where Duran dissected a fighter like Rigondeux. Or cut down a taller champion like Linares or Campbell.

[Willie Pep 229]

The Honduran mexican is a bullying braggart. But the red's star power will grow exponentially if he can whip the bean rassler, because of the size disparity. This is Davey & Goliath. The mexican will someday probably fight as high as the junior middleweight division. He's a big 'un. Loma just a teeny weeny man. I could almost hold him in my palm.

So this post is the point to post in case you need excuses to protect your self proclaimed 'expert' status.

Why don't you put your **** on the table and show us this supposed expertise at it best, make a pick, waffler!

Half-wits like me need to know . . . it will give you a chance to throw a few more unnecessary racist remarks out there; make a pick expert!