Tweet
who was the greater amatuer?
-
-
Stats wise definitely Lomachenko -
How do you know who fought the better fighters tho?Originally posted by P4PLoser
Posted from Boxingscene.com App for AndroidComment
-
I have no idea. I've seen a few fights from both but would need to get more detail on who they fought.
I doubt anyone on this forum can even answer this question accurately.Comment
-
most would have to guess on this one
and my guess is rigo... because as a cuban amateur youre gonna end up fighting some pretty good farm fighters guaranteed, probably better than the russiansComment
-
Idk much about Lomachenko's amateur career but I'll throw some things out there for the sake of arguing.
Rigo beat Gamboa, who's an Olympic medalist and accomplished pro. Rigo also beat Mares who's an accomplished pro.
Anyone know any signature wins for Lomachenko?
Posted from Boxingscene.com App for AndroidComment
-
Loma - 2 Olympic Golds, 2 World Golds and a World Silver vs Rigo - 2 Olympic Golds, 2 World Golds
Equal!Comment
-
I lean towards Rigo,, he would have had 3 gold medals had he not defected,,
Plus he has alot more wins over future top level pros like maresComment
-
The correct answer is: BOTH.
Both were great amateurs.Comment
-
they are two of the greatest amateurs ever. the amateurs are very different from the way they once were. these guys [especially from cuba and former soviet countries] fight amateur into adulthood. when you're as little as those guys, you are in your prime as an amateur.
historically, an american amateur in the HW or LHW division wouldn't even be in the "man strength" years by the time he turned pro. guys would turn pro young to make money, even if it meant taking some losses early in your career.
a 132 or 125 lber will be at his physical peak in his early 20's. these guys were still amateurs at that time.Comment
Comment