Jerrod Fletcher beat Adonis Stevenson and James DeGale

[Chollo Vista]

everyone knows amateurs does not equal the pros

That's not the status quo on boxingscene.

It's worthy of mentioning when you're talking about All Time Great amateurs like Rigondeaux or Lomachenko for example, to talk about their overall and remarkable body of work, and it obviously helps some of these guys fast track their careers, but that's about it.

Of course, it helps fast track their career, but when you have guys comparing professional fighters resume's and then they throw in "Oh BTW, Fighter A beat Fighter B in the AM's, so that should go on his resume", or "Fighter A beat Fighter B who beat Fighter C in the amateurs, so that should go on his resume", that's a foul.

So what's your point here? That "Dmitri Russian-sounding-Name's" amateur career gets mentioned and hyped alot more than it should

Yes, exactly.

When Eastern Euro's gets mentioned as the gospel, but Jerrod Fletcher can't go for Jacobs, yeah, there's biased there for me. If we're going to play this "amateurs" game, let's play in all scenarios, not when it meets the "Eastern Euro fighters are God's" scenario.

For instance, when folks can't mention anyone on GGG's resume, all of a sudden I hear folks bringing up his amateur record all of a sudden.

What I noticed, and maybe it's just me, but I notice the only times people talk about someones amateur background is if they had amazing, remarkable amateur careers, like the Rigondeaux's, the Lomachenko's of the world.

No, I'm hearing it when talking about resume's. It gets brought up for GGG's, Usyk (10 fights), Beterbiev, Korobov and many other Euro's. But no one says "Jacobs beat Porter, Murray, Estrada, etc" and rightfully so because AM victories don't mean much on the professional side

People aren't talking about Danny Jacobs amateur career as much probably because it wasn't anything remarkable

Actually, it wasn't bad. 137-7; something like that. Victories over Porter x2 and Murray x2 and Estrada. But when people say Jacobs has a bad resume, you don't see me saying "Jacobs beat Quillin, Fletcher, Smith, Mora, Porter x2, Murray x2 and Estrada in the amateurs", do you? No, but that's what guys like Eastcoast try to pull around here.

Andre Ward, I've seen countless times where people mention he has not lost a fight since he was 12 years old. Unless he was a pro at 12 I do believe that is referencing his remarkable amateur career, no?

Ward's amateur pedigree isn't talked about nearly as much as Usyk, Beterbiev, Golovkin, Loma and many others.

[therealpugilist]

I say judge a pro off of his accomplishments as a pro.

Judge an amateur off his accomplishments as an amateur. Kovalev got his ass knocked out as an amateur. That should never be brought up when talking about the professional Kovalev.

At no time, whatsoever, should a pro who didn't live up to expectations as a pro be able to live off what he did as an amateur. Never.

That's like Iverson saying "We talkin bout practice".

how the hell am I gonna make my teammates better going to practice

[Chollo Vista]

how the hell am I gonna make my teammates better going to practice

Not the game. The game that I'll live and die for; no, not that. We talkin bout practice

[therealpugilist]

Not the game. The game that I'll live and die for; no, not that. We talkin bout practice

Practice? Practice? Talking bout practice

That was classic

He took the crappiest team ever to the finals

[LoadedWraps]

Yeah, when you want to dissect a professional fighter you're not too familiar with and predict how a fight might play out against whomever they're on tap to fight in the future.

Sure, go back and review some tape that's a few years old from the amateurs.

But never should we be talking about Daniel Jacobs is a beast because he beat Shawn Porter twice, Martin Murray twice, and Shawn Estrada in the amateurs.

Professional fighters should be evaluated as professionals and amateurs as amateurs. That goes with anything. I know professional football/basketball players that were monsters in college, but terrible as professionals. MMA fighters that were great collegiate wrestlers, but journeymen as professionals.

It goes on and on.

Cormier beat Patrick Cummins, who was a great collegiate wrestler, but a flop as a pro. We shouldn't be calling Cormier a beast beast because he beat the great collegiate wrestler, no, he's a beast because he beat Johnson, Gust, Bigfoot, Barnett, etc.

The same should be said for boxing.

Right, well I agree for the most part but if doesn't have to be a fighter you are familiar with.

Obviously I wouldn't give "credit" on a professional level for a win over another professional fighters in the amateurs, but it is telling on how another fight between the fighters would go, depending on what's happened since then.

Fight analysis is fight analysis period.

I personally would never call any fighter a "beast" after one fight anyway. It's the accumulation of devastating beatings that make you a beast. Any one fighter can have a great night, just like any fighter can have a bad night.

[yngwie]

Absolutely. I've also seen AM's come up to discredit a fighter that they would want to lose in a fantasy matchup as well. They'll say "Fighter X would kill Fighter B because Fighter X beat the guy that beat Fighter B in the amateurs".

Before I forget, didn't Whyte beat Joshua in the AM's?

What's the guy's name that died from cancer (RIP) who was in SRL's generation/class. He had some of the fastest hands and was one of the top amateurs of all time who didn't turn out to be quite so good of a pro? Howard...

EDIT: Howard Davis

Well, Davis was really in his brightest moment in the Olympics, he didn't really cared about the sport after giving the gold medal to his mother who passed away a days earlier and even unfocused he was a really good pro, many people feels he deserved the decision in his fight with Rosario.

[yngwie]

Stevenson knocking down Fletcher in their fight.

[!! Shawn]

I've more than noticed

the only time I've seen amatuer results come up is when a puncher has a weak pro resume


i.e......GGG.....Beterbiev and a few others.


the ams dont mean shyt when it comes to who can win in the pros....different style, pace, etc.

So then why are most of the top Pro's amateur standouts?

Rigondeaux, Ward, Klitschko, Povetkin, Mayweather, Whitaker, De La Hoya, Kostya Tszyu, Lomachenko, GGG, Spence, Cotto, RJjr. etc...

If you go through the p4p rankings by year, you will be hard pressed to find a year where atleast 3 of the top 5 were not amateur standouts.