Would Lomachenko be a top 100 ATG with this resume?

[VG_Addict]

What if Lomachenko retired with wins over Frampton, Garcia, Davis and the winner of Pedraza-Beltran? Where would you rank him on the ATG list?

[Madison Boxing]

Highly if he does all that. That resume with his current work is better than Roy Jones Jr who.some people have top 5

[Larry the boss]

Highly if he does all that. That resume with his current work is better than Roy Jones Jr who.some people have top 5

who the hell has Roy Jones top 5?

[chrisJS]

Depends whom you ask. If he simultaneously held all four titles from 135-160 and then jumped up to Heavyweight and unified he'd still not get credit from some fans and then there's some fans that will go overboard and put him top 5 based on those wins of which only Garcia would be really good. Davis is good, but nothing special, Beltran-Pedraza winner is solid but mainly just a filler with the added bonus of unification and Frampton would be good too but nothing truly special IMO.

I think he'd need a few more years of performing as he has been and adding those names and unique achievements to reach the top 50. Boxing has a HUGE history and it's hard to rank fighters these days favorable against guys that fought more in 3-4 years than dudes do in a career now.

He's on the path to greatness currently. I'm just gonna enjoy it and evaluate his place in history at the end.

[Madison Boxing]

who the hell has Roy Jones top 5?

I've seen some posters even saying he's the GOAT

[The Big Dunn]

What if Lomachenko retired with wins over Frampton, Garcia, Davis and the winner of Pedraza-Beltran? Where would you rank him on the ATG list?

That resume would barely make the top 50.

[chrisJS]

That resume would barely make the top 50.

IMO it wouldn't make the top 50. I think it would require another 3-4 years of virtuoso performances and an absolute dominance of a single division (say 135) to be a top 50 career/fighter.

I don't think people understand just how deep boxing history is and how far back it goes. They also tend to write off fighters of previous era's too quickly.

Standards are different for different folks I guess. I wouldn't have such modern greats as Trinidad, Lewis, Barrera, Morales, Calzaghe, Tyson, Benitez, McCallum etc; in my top 50 either.

[The Big Dunn]

IMO it wouldn't make the top 50. I think it would require another 3-4 years of virtuoso performances and an absolute dominance of a single division (say 135) to be a top 50 career/fighter.

I don't think people understand just how deep boxing history is and how far back it goes. They also tend to write off fighters of previous era's too quickly.

Standards are different for different folks I guess. I wouldn't have such modern greats as Trinidad, Lewis, Barrera, Morales, Calzaghe, Tyson, Benitez, McCallum etc; in my top 50 either.

I was giving Loma every benefit of the doubt. I agree that people don't realize the depth of some resumes and what really should constitute a top 50 ATG.

A while ago I laid out a resume where Loma IMO could be a top 10-15 ATG.I got to find that post.

[-Kev-]

The mythical, non-existent, boxing ATG list is a hot mess of opinions.

The actual IBHOF is even worse. Because it exists and it is full of fighters who you wouldn't think belong in there.

Therefore, Lomachenko being a top 100 ATG is literally up to you.

[j0zef]

How the hell does that qualify him for an ATG list? Davis is like 23 years old and hasn't done a damn thing. Mikey Garcia is a highly respected and well liked fighter, but his best win is Broner. He doesn't make most people's top5 P4P, and barely makes top10. Garcia still has a LOT to prove. Frampton doesn't really move the needle for me. Good fighter, but Loma should beat him easily due to styles and size.

Loma's path to ATG ranks lies in dominating 135 + 140 and putting in an excellent showing at 147.