Rigo was too small... period.

[Shape up]

No he says he's a great fighter but was too small. That's not insulting him. That's praising him.

Then explain why Loma didn't just prop in front of rigo for the whole fight

[Vasyl’s dad]

I dont know about weight, but Rigo was def too short, and stubby to get in close. It looked like he was fighting an older brother.

Is that like when Carlos Quintana fought the 4 inch taller and longer armed Paul Williams?

[Robbie Barrett]

How does that count in this situation when rigo didn't throw any punches, do you consider reach an advantage?

Of course it counts. Having the confidence that if you were to get hit you can take it is always there.

[Robbie Barrett]

That would be a valid argument if Lomachenko was walking right through Rigo's punches (like how GGG did against kell Brook in some of the rounds during their bout) without using any active responsible defense. That wasn't the case however! Lomachenko didn't rely on his greater punch resistance that comes from being heavier to beat Rigo. He boxed Rigondeaux exactly how he would've boxed against a similar sized opponent by hitting and not getting hit.

He also didn't make use of his greater potential punching power that comes from being the heavier man by landing constant heavy punches. He was mainly tapping Rigo (appeared like a conscious decision by Loma for not wanting to hurt Rigo much). A heavier man is most likely to have greater punching power than a lighter man if both throw their most powerful punches. However, a heavier boxer can also make an active decision to throw punches with the same power as who might even be a little child.

In summary, Loma didn't rely on punching power, punch resistance or physical strength to beat Rigo (all of which are related to someone using size advantage). Therefore, how can you claim Lomachenko won due to size?

So because Rigo wasn't throwing much the confidence that if he was to get hit he could take it is no longer there? WTF are you ******ed?

[Shape up]

Of course it counts. Having the confidence that if you were to get hit you can take it is always there.

So why didn't Loma prop in front of him, why didn't rigo use his reach

[Mr Objecitivity]

So because Rigo wasn't throwing much the confidence that if he was to get hit he could take it is no longer there? WTF are you ******ed?

You're arguing about abstract and immeasurable concepts like 'confidence'. How do you measure the quantity of confidence either boxer have, relative to the other?

How can Loma's 'confidence' in his size even be relevant if Lomachenko wasn't even relying on his punch resistance, or his punch power in the first place?

[Shape up]

So because Rigo wasn't throwing much the confidence that if he was to get hit he could take it is no longer there? WTF are you ******ed?

So by your thoughts, if rigo throws less punches then he will be hit with less, and your calling other posters ******ed, REALLY

[Robbie Barrett]

So by your thoughts, if rigo throws less punches then he will be hit with less, and your calling other posters ******ed, REALLY

WTF are you talking about you went full ******.

When did i say that?

I'm saying having size advantage gives you confidence to attack the smaller man, knowing that if you were to get hit you will more likely to take it than if you were fighting a bigger man. Is that too difficult for you to understand?

[Shape up]

WTF are you talking about you went full ******.

When did i say that?

I'm saying having size advantage gives you confidence to attack the smaller man, knowing that if you were to get hit you will more likely to take it than if you were fighting a bigger man. Is that too difficult for you to understand?

Did he attack him from in front or did he attack using angles

[Mr Objecitivity]

WTF are you talking about you went full ******.

When did i say that?

I'm saying having size advantage gives you confidence to attack the smaller man, knowing that if you were to get hit you will more likely to take it than if you were fighting a bigger man. Is that too difficult for you to understand?

Your argument is still flawed because if Lomachenko was as 'confident' as you're claiming. Surely, he would've just walked through Rigondeaux and threw non-stop punches without any conscious defensive responsibility? That wasn't the case!

Perhaps he wasn't as 'confident' as you thought he was?