Loma will get their but ATM he is not p4p top ten: He has the skills lacks resume

[therealpugilist]

his competition isnt at the level necessary

He has all the tools in the world

the loss to salido isnt a decade ago, and he fights relatively the same. He is sitting down on his shots more and I love his footwork

Maybe salido was too rough, or possibly that is a style that could trouble Loma for the

As of today, he holds a win over rocky Martinez(good fighter but no one I'd consider elite, also Mikey Garcia blitzed him years ago).....Gary Russell Jr(good win, he is improving as a fighter) and the rest are relatively unknown

At the moment these are the top 10 fighters in the world. They are in no particular order but I weigh resume and level of opposition as heavily as skills and the eye test. Also notice that every single fighter ranked, is or were the # 1 guy in their respective division(others are new to a division but were # 1 in old division) and to get their you have to fight the best. The eye test only gets you so far. Any elite fighter will look like an ATG vs lesser opposition

Roman Gonzalez
Juan Francisco Estrada
Shinsuke Yamanaka
Andre Ward
Sergey Kovalev
Adonis Stevenson(say what you want, the man has talent, is the true 175 champ, 7 defenses and has skills, power and a good resume)
Guillermo Rigondeaux
Canelo Alvarez
Danny Garcia(kid is undefeated and finds ways to win)
Terrance Crawford


GGG, Loma, Inoue(I dropped him made room for crawford), Degale are one big win or two from breaking into the top ten

[Cinci Champ]

see people dont even realize what p4p means anymore. the idea of pound for pound is not who u have fought when u have fought its only supposed to mean at this moment in time who is the best p4p. i dont know its just my opinion but u got guys like ward, ggg, lomo etc being punished for resume and i get that train of thought but it is not what p4p is supposed to be.

[therealpugilist]

see people dont even realize what p4p means anymore. the idea of pound for pound is not who u have fought when u have fought its only supposed to mean at this moment in time who is the best p4p. i dont know its just my opinion but u got guys like ward, ggg, lomo etc being punished for resume and i get that train of thought but it is not what p4p is supposed to be.

p4p is....

1) who do you think could beat the most and best fighters if they were the same size/division

2) your level of opposition and success against them

3)the eye test and ability to deal with many different styles

4)you'll never know how good a fighter is if they are not fighting the best or world class fighters on the regular



I have ward listed...he has one of the best resumes in boxing, and probably the most complete tool set of skills...can fight anywhere anyhow in the ring


I cant put GGG and Loma over guys with comparable skills, but have proven themselves more fighting better competition. its not fair to the guys who have taken more risks and still remained at the top.

the eye test only means so much. An elite fighter can look like an ATG fighting the level of fighters GGG fights. Look at their resume and compare it to Chocolatito or even stevenson...its clear they all have talent but the other guys are more proven

[KingHippo]

see people dont even realize what p4p means anymore. the idea of pound for pound is not who u have fought when u have fought its only supposed to mean at this moment in time who is the best p4p. i dont know its just my opinion but u got guys like ward, ggg, lomo etc being punished for resume and i get that train of thought but it is not what p4p is supposed to be.

Level of opposition and dominance should be the only criteria by which fighters are ranked. Everything else is subjective.

I think Loma is top 10 skills wise, but I don't think defeats should be erased.

I also don't think past victories have an expiration date.

[therealpugilist]

Level of opposition and dominance should be the only criteria by which fighters are ranked. Everything else is subjective.

I think Loma is top 10 skills wise, but I don't think defeats should be erased.

I also don't think past victories have an expiration date.

great post, especially if the fighter is at or near their prime....posters try to erase things that guys Like Mikey garica, ward, and rigo did a few years ago...they still happened and add to their resumes


I also agree that level of opposition and dominance is the most important and the only way to know how good these fighters are

you dont get brownie points, for dominating overmatched opposition when its fighters out their with comparable or better skills dominating far better opponents

[bojangles1987]

Oh man, if I cared more I would find the post from not long ago where realpugilist had Loma in his p4p top 10. This was like a month or two ago as part of one of his many "Golovkin isn't p4p top 20" rants.

[therealpugilist]

Oh man, if I cared more I would find the post from not long ago where realpugilist had Loma in his p4p top 10. This was like a month or two ago as part of one of his many "Golovkin isn't p4p top 20" rants.

I took him out after consideration of all variables. His skills is why I had him ranked. You think I forgot I had him top ten

I said GGG isnt top ten and it still stands

last time I checked you can re-evaluate any list

A lot of big fights have happened in the last few months

and also, instead of wasting your time trolling, which you are not very good at, you could post your list and we can have a decent conversation on why we picked certain fighters

but you wont....because you probably couldnt name 10 fighters active today

[dannnnn]

see people dont even realize what p4p means anymore. the idea of pound for pound is not who u have fought when u have fought its only supposed to mean at this moment in time who is the best p4p. i dont know its just my opinion but u got guys like ward, ggg, lomo etc being punished for resume and i get that train of thought but it is not what p4p is supposed to be.

This.

Makes me laugh when I see people comparing resumes to determine their p4p status.

But if you care about resume so much, 396-1 is a hell of a resume if you ask me. Add to that a two weight world champion in fewer than 10 pro fights. Lomachenko is easily top 10 p4p right now, probably top 5.

[therealpugilist]

This.

Makes me laugh when I see people comparing resumes to determine their p4p status.

But if you care about resume so much, 396-1 is a hell of a resume if you ask me. Add to that a two weight world champion in fewer than 10 pro fights. Lomachenko is easily top 10 p4p right now, probably top 5.

the amatuers and pros are two different en****** entirely. Look at Mark Breland...possibly the most dominant amatuer of all time and he ended up as just a " good or very good" pro...many amatuer champions, golden gloves, etc guys dont even make it to become contenders let alone world champions while, guys who were ho hum amatuers became all time greats like Larry Holmes, and others.

Also, how do you know how good a figher is if they are not facing top opposition?

thats why resume matters. Everything else is just opinion and preference based.

who you beat and accomplishments matter the most.

Every elite fighter looks like an all time great until they start facing good and elite opposition.

[M Bison]

Oh man, if I cared more I would find the post from not long ago where realpugilist had Loma in his p4p top 10. This was like a month or two ago as part of one of his many "Golovkin isn't p4p top 20" rants.

He tries to turn all non related threads to GGG into a Golovkin thread he doesn't realize how much he is advertising for this guy I hope G pays him well.