An Expert’s Take the Day BEFORE Lomo-Rigo

[CubanGuyNYC]

One has to accept that thoroughly educated people don't always agree with each other. Which means that thoroughly educated people are not always right.

Seeing as the writer didn't really break down what would happen in the fight with any kind of accuracy, and given how the fight turned out, I'm happy enough to say that he was simple mistaken.

Rigo was not by far the better fighter. The writer was wrong. I would be interested to see if they have corrected themselves with the benefit of hindsight.

I agree with the first paragraph, but I question the logic in the second. To quote Bertrand Russell, “When the experts are agreed, the opposite opinion cannot be held to be certain.”

Every expert source I’ve seen, including this one, gave Lomachenko the nod due to primarily three advantages: 1. size, 2. age and 3. activity. I don’t recall anyone saying Lomachenko was the superior fighter. Indeed, the only chance Rigo was allowed was by virtue of his fighting ability.

[CubanGuyNYC]

Here's a link to the guy's page for all who are interested.

Gotta give him a bump.

https://kinja.com/charlesfarrell

Nice! I see a few articles there that look very interesting. Thanks, bro.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Nice! I see a few articles there that look very interesting. Thanks, bro.

Sure, man!

[Lomasexual]

I agree with the first paragraph, but I question the logic in the second. To quote Bertrand Russell, “When the experts are agreed, the opposite opinion cannot be held to be certain.”

Every expert source I’ve seen, including this one, gave Lomachenko the nod due to primarily three advantages: 1. size, 2. age and 3. activity. I don’t recall anyone saying Lomachenko was the superior fighter. Indeed, the only chance Rigo was allowed was by virtue of his fighting ability.

I have only seen one boxing expert so far saying that Rigo was 'by far' the superior fighter. I'm pretty sure that if you checked with all of the boxing analysts with impressive depths of knowledge that the concept of Rigo being 'by far' the superior boxer would be uncommon.

In hindsight, we can also see that he wasn't 'by far' the superior fighter. Even with every variable considered, we can rule the idea of him being an obviously superior boxer just straight out of the window.

I know it is easy to talk like an expert after a fight, and after we all know the outcome. I'm not trying to talk down to an analyst who didn't have that benefit at the time of writing.
However we do have that advantage, and we can see that the writer was clearly wrong.

Frankly, there is no-one who is 'by far' the superior boxer to Loma. If there is anyone who is better, then it would only be by a narrow margin.

[CubanGuyNYC]

I have only seen one boxing expert so far saying that Rigo was 'by far' the superior fighter. I'm pretty sure that if you checked with all of the boxing analysts with impressive depths of knowledge that the concept of Rigo being 'by far' the superior boxer would be uncommon.

In hindsight, we can also see that he wasn't 'by far' the superior fighter. Even with every variable considered, we can rule the idea of him being an obviously superior boxer just straight out of the window.

I know it is easy to talk like an expert after a fight, and after we all know the outcome. I'm not trying to talk down to an analyst who didn't have that benefit at the time of writing.
However we do have that advantage, and we can see that the writer was clearly wrong.

Frankly, there is no-one who is 'by far' the superior boxer to Loma. If there is anyone who is better, then it would only be by a narrow margin.

I did not mean to say others also considered Rigo a better fighter “by far.” My point was that many seemed to consider him the more skilled fighter, as practically everyone’s prediction was based on the three advantages listed.

For whatever it’s worth, I do not myself see an obvious gap in skills. I’m simply not sophisticated enough for that. But although you’re right that hindsight is 20-20, I don’t think there was enough real action in the fight to determine true skill. There was so much clinching by Rigo, and so much bending at the waist, I don’t see how any appreciable assessment could be made.

[eco1]

great read! Green sent.

[Lomasexual]

I did not mean to say others also considered Rigo a better fighter “by far.” My point was that many seemed to consider him the more skilled fighter, as practically everyone’s prediction was based on the three advantages listed.

For whatever it’s worth, I do not myself see an obvious gap in skills. I’m simply not sophisticated enough for that. But although you’re right that hindsight is 20-20, I don’t think there was enough real action in the fight to determine true skill. There was so much clinching by Rigo, and so much bending at the waist, I don’t see how any appreciable assessment could be made.

I think it is a pity that we didn't get to see the two of them fight at an ideal weight and with both in their primes. I don't think Loma has even reached his peak yet.

It seems like the window of opportunity for that fight to happen just never appeared or was too small.

For whatever reasons it seemed like we never got a chance to really see the best of Rigo in his career, and I don't think we will see him in many more top level fights.

Hell, with less than 30 pro fights between them, it is hard to make any kind of call at all.

[CubanGuyNYC]

I think it is a pity that we didn't get to see the two of them fight at an ideal weight and with both in their primes. I don't think Loma has even reached his peak yet.

It seems like the window of opportunity for that fight to happen just never appeared or was too small.

For whatever reasons it seemed like we never got a chance to really see the best of Rigo in his career, and I don't think we will see him in many more top level fights.

Hell, with less than 30 pro fights between them, it is hard to make any kind of call at all.

Indeed a pity. Not sure we could ever have seen these two on an even platform, even at the same age. Rigo is small enough to fight at 118, possibly lower. He didn’t get to showcase his full potential, partly through his own fault. At least he has the Donaire fight.

Lomachenko is a special talent. I don’t believe he’s peaked yet either. I’d say that'll probably be at around age 32, where he’ll be both at his physical prime, and the prime of his professional career.

It’s my belief that very few athletes are still prime after age 35. Sure, some are still the best in their field, but that doesn’t mean they’re at their best. Based on Vasyl’s style, which reminds me of a prime Gamboa (only better), I would say he must make the most of the next three or four years. Once the inevitable decline in speed and reflexes sets in, he’ll be overtaken by lesser mortals. In the meantime, let’s enjoy the ride.

[CubanGuyNYC]

great read! Green sent.

Thanks, brotha. Glad you enjoyed!

[CubanGuyNYC]

Here's a link to the guy's page for all who are interested.

Gotta give him a bump.

https://kinja.com/charlesfarrell

Have you read any of Farrell’s other articles yet? I scanned the one on the state of the heavyweight division. Good stuff, but a little outdated, as it's about a year and a half old. But the article on fixing fights was pure gold. I believe there’s truth in his stories, although one has to wonder exactly how much. It was almost like reading pulp fiction. In that respect, at least, it was highly entertaining.

I’ve said this before: professional boxing isn’t too far removed from professional wrestling. That piece not only confirmed my beliefs, but made it blindingly obvious.