Why do people praise guys with long amateur careers?

[Motorcity Cobra]

nah..your making my point. Duncan staying 4 years while Ben Simmons coming out after 1 year is the equivalent as Loma going to 2 olympics and turning pro at 24 like errol spence and oscar valdez as Duncan and a guy like Verdejo coming out at 19 the equivalent as Verdejo

So why is Lomacheko the exception and not the rule? Name the top 100 fighters and tell me how many waited until they were 25 to turn pro.

[stefl14]

Nobody respects a fully grown 24 year old beating up on teenagers. That's why everybody is against pros fighting in the Olympics.

You don't know boxing. Half of the people here have never sparred. Boxing is about skills and weight. All these people thinking a bit of 'man strength' means a 24 year old has a big advantage over an 18 year old doesn't know boxing. Now, one could argue that such a guy would have had more time to develop skills, but that doesn't make it unfair in my opinion. I actually know what I'm talking about because I've had over 80 amateur fights and quite a lot of success. I'm 22 almost 23, have won over 60 bouts and there are some 17 year old top kids who compete in the nationals and give me more than enough trouble in sparring. Don't listen to all these idiots who've never boxed.

[killakali]

So why is Lomacheko the exception and not the rule? Name the top 100 fighters and tell me how many waited until they were 25 to turn pro.

i did. look at errol spence and oscar valdez. almost the same age as lomachenko when they turned pro

[Motorcity Cobra]

i did. look at errol spence and oscar valdez. almost the same age as lomachenko when they turned pro

And they are the exception as well. Three out of 100 is 3%. Guys that turn amateur at a later age are usually guys who started fighting later. Guys who are decent amateurs but wouldn't really be a good pro. Cubans who have no other choice. And guys who are good enough to be pros but for some reason they want to beat up on younger competition and lower skill level. That's why I'm not impressed about the dominant reign of Cuban gold medalist who beat up teens. They didn't have a choice but fighting guys below your skill level doesn't impress me. We saw what happened when a praised amateur got into the ring with a journeyman who knew every trick in the book. Amateur's don't prepare you for that. Fighting lesser skilled journeyman early on your pro career preparers you for that.

[killakali]

And they are the exception as well. Three out of 100 is 3%. Guys that turn amateur at a later age are usually guys who started fighting later. Guys who are decent amateurs but wouldn't really be a good pro. Cubans who have no other choice. And guys who are good enough to be pros but for some reason they want to beat up on younger competition and lower skill level. That's why I'm not impressed about the dominant reign of Cuban gold medalist who beat up teens. They didn't have a choice but fighting guys below your skill level doesn't impress me. We saw what happened when a praised amateur got into the ring with a journeyman who knew every trick in the book. Amateur's don't prepare you for that. Fighting lesser skilled journeyman early on your pro career preparers you for that.

depends. there are lots of guys who turn pro late and do very well like loma and rigo and spence and valdez look to be on their way to doing so. wilder is another example.

Using your example we should ridicule Tim Duncan and Peyton Manning for staying in school 4 years and facing inferior competition instead of turning pro earlier to get better competition and schooling. smh

[deathofaclown]

It's not that rare for fighting to turn Pro in their mid 20's these days? I know Froch was about 25. The likes of Postol, Wilder, Kovalev and many more were all around mid 20's, give or take a few years. It's not that uncommon

Anyway, i totally understand the point you're trying to make though but the likes Loma and Rigo were great amateurs even when they were the young fighter fighting and beating the older men, that's why they're praised and why they won so many medals and competition. They had been winning since they were the kids, which is they they're such decorated fighters.

Could they have turned pro earlier and competed? yeah, of course but it's not their fault that younger amateurs weren't coming through and better than them, like they did as kids.

You're taking the words "amateur" and "professional" a bit too literally maybe. You could easily translate your logic all the way to the professional game and just say "why should Andre Ward get any praise for any win, when he's clearly just more skilled than all his opponents so far??" - well, that's not his fault is it?

With that said, i don't think pro's should be allowed in the olympics. A lot of amateurs get their funding and motivation to go to the olympics and it can springboard their careers into the pro game, so i don't think it's fair for a guy already in the pro game to take a step back and take the place of somebody who needs it more.

[The Akbar One]

People saying Pros competing in the Olympics is dangerous etc don't seem to realise there's fighters as good as the best Pros competing in the amateurs anyway. Lomachenko is a good example, so is Rigondeaux. "Amateur" and "Pro" has nothing to do with skill level.

Agree. Both guys would have spanked any pros that could make the same day weigh in at their weight classes.