Eastern European boxing revolution
Collapse
-
I'm struggling to think of any pro who had more am experience than Loma.That part is true! However, there have been many other boxers who have had just as much amateur experience but didn't step up in competition in the pros anywhere near as fast as Lomachenko or Usyk have done. In fact, there have been boxers with even more amateur experience than Lomachenko that have taken far more pro fights before stepping up in competition and figthting against top or elite level opponents.
Rigo might have had something comparable and he has wasted his pro career. But who else is there?Comment
-
Comment
-
Wlad is in without question.
I think Loma gets in as he is-two gold medals, 396-1 amateur record, two-division champion already. And if he gets three, I mean, he's got to be a shoe-in.
At the same time, you can ask how many current fighters of any ethnic group are getting in and you're going to come up with a low number. Not a good question for measuring really.Comment
-
Comment
-
As you rightly mentioned, Guillermo Rigondeaux, along with Luis Ortiz, Alexander Povetkin, Kubrat Pulev, Erislandy Lara and Gennady Golovkin all have comparable amateur experience. After a boxer has had around 300 bouts, having any more bouts isn't necessarily of any greater benefit in terms of experience.
Only Lomachenko has had the resume and accomplishments under 10 bouts that he has had and none of those other boxers with comparable amateur experience do. That has to be taken into consideration!Comment
-
I don't think Lare, Ortiz, Povetkin or Pulev had anywhere close to the number of amateur fights and tournaments Loma had. Not even close.I cant get the exact number of fights for these guys but I don't think any of them came close to 300.As you rightly mentioned, Guillermo Rigondeaux, along with Luis Ortiz, Alexander Povetkin, Kubrat Pulev, Erislandy Lara and Gennady Golovkin all have comparable amateur experience. After a boxer has had around 300 bouts, having any more bouts isn't necessarily of any greater benefit in terms of experience.
Only Lomachenko has had the resume and accomplishments under 10 bouts that he has had and none of those other boxers with comparable amateur experience do. That has to be taken into consideration!
Loma had 397 I believe and many more tournaments under his belt.
This isn't a knock on Loma but it just backs up my point that guys like Loma have had very long amateur careers, something unusual in the US or UK.Comment
-
You can do the research. Even among highly experienced amateur boxers, Lomachenko's accomplishments in the pros in just 10 bouts is unique and unprecedented.I don't think Lare, Ortiz, Povetkin or Pulev had anywhere close to the number of amateur fights and tournaments Loma had. Not even close.I cant get the exact number of fights for these guys but I don't think any of them came close to 300.
Loma had 397 I believe and many more tournaments under his belt.
This isn't a knock on Loma but it just backs up my point that guys like Loma have had very long amateur careers, something unusual in the US or UK.
There have been many other amateurs with 300+ bouts who needed far more time before stepping up to the highest level of competition in their weight division than Lomachenko did. Golovkin being one example. I'll try and find examples of a few more boxers.Comment
Comment