Tweet
Inside of the glove or not, that's a perfect example of the reactions of how good Floyd was at 38... when it's a reaction type punch it's much harder to control turning it over, we've all seen guys get hurt by less as well. It's a scoring punch and that's what counts.
What bothers me about this whole thread, and most of these threads lately is it brings out the racists, the haters, and all of the other detractors of either Floyd and/or Lomachenko.
Floyd is an top ATG, end of story. Where history places him, idk. I don't care what age he was when he fought fighter x,y, or z. He's there, that's all there is to it.
Lomachenko? He started pro later, but has accumulated 2 gold medals and is the best amateur likely in the history of the sport. He's ducked no one, and only seems to want the absolute best. His team seems to be smart and imo they understand with that many amateur fights and his activity level in the ring now will not lend to a long career in the pros. If he fought and beat 5 or even 8 of the best guys he could get, and beat them all, not only would he be a first ballot HOFer, but he would be considered by many to also be an ATG... that's right in case anyone takes issue with it... I said could be an ATG with 5-8 more class wins. His resume has cut out many of the bums that other guys who come up slow with less experience come up with... golovkin couldn't seem to get big challenges, yet he stayed at 160 anyway. He's small, he's this, he's that... that's just bull**** from loser fans who aren't interested in pure skilled type fighters who WANT the best. Golovkin is 38-0-1 with TWO quality fighters... one very close win, and a draw, 3 if you want to count WW Kell Brook, and if you're REALLY fuggin ******, you'll count SMW Vanes with a 2 year lay off.... so 35 bums and no hopers. Now based on that, how in the MOTHERF**K would one have him #1 p4p over Lomachenko? That's beyond hilarious.
Point being... call me racist because I've made points for a dark fighter, and a not as dark fighter... and why another fighter doesn't deserve to be put in the same sentence with either. Don't like it? Go f**k yourselves.
What bothers me about this whole thread, and most of these threads lately is it brings out the racists, the haters, and all of the other detractors of either Floyd and/or Lomachenko.
Floyd is an top ATG, end of story. Where history places him, idk. I don't care what age he was when he fought fighter x,y, or z. He's there, that's all there is to it.
Lomachenko? He started pro later, but has accumulated 2 gold medals and is the best amateur likely in the history of the sport. He's ducked no one, and only seems to want the absolute best. His team seems to be smart and imo they understand with that many amateur fights and his activity level in the ring now will not lend to a long career in the pros. If he fought and beat 5 or even 8 of the best guys he could get, and beat them all, not only would he be a first ballot HOFer, but he would be considered by many to also be an ATG... that's right in case anyone takes issue with it... I said could be an ATG with 5-8 more class wins. His resume has cut out many of the bums that other guys who come up slow with less experience come up with... golovkin couldn't seem to get big challenges, yet he stayed at 160 anyway. He's small, he's this, he's that... that's just bull**** from loser fans who aren't interested in pure skilled type fighters who WANT the best. Golovkin is 38-0-1 with TWO quality fighters... one very close win, and a draw, 3 if you want to count WW Kell Brook, and if you're REALLY fuggin ******, you'll count SMW Vanes with a 2 year lay off.... so 35 bums and no hopers. Now based on that, how in the MOTHERF**K would one have him #1 p4p over Lomachenko? That's beyond hilarious.
Point being... call me racist because I've made points for a dark fighter, and a not as dark fighter... and why another fighter doesn't deserve to be put in the same sentence with either. Don't like it? Go f**k yourselves.
Comment