Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

People undervalue how lucky we are to see Rigondeaux as a pro

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Originally posted by SonOfCuba View Post
    but to say he's better than Rigondeaux in the pros or even less in the amateurs is just absurd.
    Stop talking ****, Lomachenko is getting better with every fight & he via lost a corrupt decision in only his second pro fight! Rigondeaux has a chin like candy floss & is a KO waiting to happen..

    As for there amateur careers..... They share a common opponent, Sultonov. Rigondeaux beat him 27-13 at the 2004 Olympics, four years later Lomachenko fought him at Beijing and won 13-1, knocking him down in the last round & Sultonov rates Lomachenko as the better fighter!

    Rigo had 12 losses and Lomachenko had 1.. & so on!

    You don't have to be all flash to be a great fighter. Ability to occupy space, use angles, fight with maximum efficiency, pace a fight, trigger opponents, test their weaknesses - Lomachenko possesses it all, and more.

    Its a close call but IMO Loma is the greater amateur & will be a greater pro over time, plus Lomachenko also has a Val Barker trophy which Rigo never won!

    Salildo LOL Go watch Rigondeaux get dropped & struggle to a SD over a far worse fighter (former Flyweight Cordoba) in his 7th fight .. Salido was a WW who needed dirty boxing & corrupt refereeing to win a SD over this 1-0 kid! Its Salido you should be criticising & Lomachenko you should be applauding for not lowering his art to a stinkfest & refusing to 'no mas' the endless low blows & ridiculous leniency of the ****** referee!

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by SonOfCuba View Post
      Papp can be considered the GOAT, but I would disagree because Stevenson could have won 4 had Cuba not boycotted one of the Olympics he was suppose to compete in.

      But none of those guys have the amateur resume that Felix Savon has, and him is who I consider the greatest amateur fighter of all times.

      No record comes close and I doubt one ever will. (see attached image)

      When Papp fought there was no WAC's or World Cups but I have no doubt he would have won many of them had they been around at that time.

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by 1g5a22 View Post
        Stop talking ****, Lomachenko is getting better with every fight & he via lost a corrupt decision in only his second pro fight! Rigondeaux has a chin like candy floss & is a KO waiting to happen..

        As for there amateur careers..... They share a common opponent, Sultonov. Rigondeaux beat him 27-13 at the 2004 Olympics, four years later Lomachenko fought him at Beijing and won 13-1, knocking him down in the last round & Sultonov rates Lomachenko as the better fighter!

        Rigo had 12 losses and Lomachenko had 1.. & so on!

        You don't have to be all flash to be a great fighter. Ability to occupy space, use angles, fight with maximum efficiency, pace a fight, trigger opponents, test their weaknesses - Lomachenko possesses it all, and more.

        Its a close call but IMO Loma is the greater amateur & will be a greater pro over time, plus Lomachenko also has a Val Barker trophy which Rigo never won!

        Salildo LOL Go watch Rigondeaux get dropped & struggle to a SD over a far worse fighter (former Flyweight Cordoba) in his 7th fight .. Salido was a WW who needed dirty boxing & corrupt refereeing to win a SD over this 1-0 kid! Its Salido you should be criticising & Lomachenko you should be applauding for not lowering his art to a stinkfest & refusing to 'no mas' the endless low blows & ridiculous leniency of the ****** referee!
        Stop it, He got beat by a veteran who found a way to win. A more experience fighter would have solved Salido's puzzle. For example like Mikey Garcia, who figured him out and took him apart.

        No one who follows amateur boxing would have in their right mind picked a 2008 Olympics Gold Medalist Lomachenko over a 2004 Gold Medalist Rigondaeux.

        Lomachenko is a great fighter with a lot of potential, no doubt about it, but he's not on Rigondeaux level yet. Don't let HBO and Top Rank fool you now that they want nothing to do with Rigondeaux. The exact same comments they are making about Lomachenko they were making about Rigondeaux two years ago before he destroyed their Pacquiao heir Donaire.
        Last edited by SonOfCuba; 12-30-2014, 09:23 PM.

        Comment


        • #54
          1) Rigo is old.
          2) Rigo is small.
          3) Rigo got a weak chin.
          4) Amateurs don't matter in the pros.
          5) Rigo's best win was an overrated Donaire and he has done nothing since.

          I think boxing would be better without Rigo, there's a reason no one wants to see him fight.

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by UpInThisYo View Post
            1) Rigo is old.
            2) Rigo is small.
            3) Rigo got a weak chin.
            4) Amateurs don't matter in the pros.
            5) Rigo's best win was an overrated Donaire and he has done nothing since.

            I think boxing would be better without Rigo, there's a reason no one wants to see him fight.
            hahaha ok.

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by SonOfCuba View Post
              hahaha ok.

              So you think Rigo is young, big, granitejawed, a good pro just because he was a good amateur and got better wins than Donaire, who got exposed badly by Walters afterward?

              1) Rigo is old.
              2) Rigo is small.
              3) Rigo got a weak chin.
              4) Amateurs don't matter in the pros.
              5) Rigo's best win was an overrated Donaire and he has done nothing since.

              Comment


              • #57
                Says the guy with Rigo in his avatar

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by UpInThisYo View Post
                  So you think Rigo is young, big, granitejawed, a good pro just because he was a good amateur and got better wins than Donaire, who got exposed badly by Walters afterward?

                  1) Rigo is old.
                  2) Rigo is small.
                  3) Rigo got a weak chin.
                  4) Amateurs don't matter in the pros.
                  5) Rigo's best win was an overrated Donaire and he has done nothing since.
                  If Rigondeaux is not a good pro then who is? Let's hear who you think is a great pro and why? Keep in mind Rigondeaux has only been a pro for 5 years.

                  Let's talk in terms of skills why Rigondeaux is not a good pro, let's hear it, tell him what his flaws are and give me an example of someone who does it better.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Rigondeaux gets no respect since he is a boxing wizard. All his life he wanted to defect from Cuba to start his pro career to fight the best world fighters and make some $$$$$. Instead he's been avoided like the plague. He's 34 old already old and still destroying young fighters can you imagine if Rigo started to fighting here in the US in his 20's, he would of ****ed up Morales, Rafeal Marquez, Vasquez, Tim Austin all the kingpins from 118-122

                    Has 14 professional fights with 9 KO's yet his boring???? He now has to fight 6 foot featherweight tomorrow in Japan but is making some good $$$$.

                    Why hasn't Santa Cruz, Frampton and Quigg even adknowledge the real champ at 122lb?? A victory over Rigo for them is coming out with a statement on the internet saying they are willing to fight Rigo but...............it's up to my promoter, manager, trainer, lawyer, their family approval that's why it hasn't happen.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      He's a very slick boxer

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP