If Loma really is P4P #1 in the world.......

[O Prophet]

Thank you for pointing out what the ignorant TS fails to understand.

Shut your BYTCH ass up and stop stalking me. Dumb ass kid.

[Real King Kong]

I’d rather see loma vs mikey or loma vs tank.

[Marchegiano]

You said according to 'traditions' Crawford was a true champion, and that Loma is nothing but a claimant, until he steps up in weight or becomes undisputed.

Do I need to remind you that Lomachenko holds the ring magazine belt at lightweight? or that he held the same belt Crawford did as a lightweight and laid claim to championship status?

You talk like a big swinging ****, but your lack of knowledge is apparent to anyone who knows boxing.

Muhammad Ali 'only' held the WBC title in 1967, and unified with Ernie Terrell to have both belts? According to your 'traditional' 'olden' standards, Muhammad Ali was not the true champ before defeating Ernie Terrell?

As I said, STFU you're speaking with a boxing historian. Quit calling people children, it's easy to see that you are one.

The **** does Ring have to do with traditions that are much older than Ring?

"knows boxing" but still don't seem to understand what I'm saying to you.

Real boxing historian over here....conflating Ring with lineal as if that's not a common misconception.

The **** does Loma got to do with lineal? Nothing historically accurate.

The **** does Ali got to do with Ring? Nothing of historical significance.


I don't give a **** if it makes your ***** tingle or not. Tradition dictates Loma's a claimant. Terrell was a claimant, Loma is a claimant. You're not even affiliated with a historical society let alone anything resembling any kind of historian.


**** man, even people here who hate me learn from me all the time. The **** did you teach this forum? Your opinions?

Why is it I'm the guy posting **** like who retired the most, what exactly the lineage is, the history of fight sales, and so on? Where the **** is any evidence you know anything more than any other ******* who from time to time pops into a history section?

Kid, you ain't even close.

[thedarkdragon11]

Since he's with Top Rank, why not Crawford at 140 instead?

[LacedUp]

The **** does Ring have to do with traditions that are much older than Ring?

"knows boxing" but still don't seem to understand what I'm saying to you.

Real boxing historian over here....conflating Ring with lineal as if that's not a common misconception.

The **** does Loma got to do with lineal? Nothing historically accurate.

The **** does Ali got to do with Ring? Nothing of historical significance.


I don't give a **** if it makes your ***** tingle or not. Tradition dictates Loma's a claimant. Terrell was a claimant, Loma is a claimant. You're not even affiliated with a historical society let alone anything resembling any kind of historian.


**** man, even people here who hate me learn from me all the time. The **** did you teach this forum? Your opinions?

Why is it I'm the guy posting **** like who retired the most, what exactly the lineage is, the history of fight sales, and so on? Where the **** is any evidence you know anything more than any other ******* who from time to time pops into a history section?

Kid, you ain't even close.

Oh you're saying lineal is the true champion Even dumber than I thought.

[Marchegiano]

Oh you're saying lineal is the true champion Even dumber than I thought.

Once again, I don't give a **** if you agree with traditions, they are what they are.....and yes...traditionally lineal was the true champ, it was the only champ. You don't have a title outside of it until 1910. You, yourself recognize lineal champions....you recognize the same tradition you're calling me ****** for pointing out.

Everything I posted was explaining a historical perspective. It isn't my fault that your silly ass skimmed until you caught a word play that hurt your *****. It's not my fault you started running that ****sucker before you realize what I was saying and it isn't my fault you are too ****** to separate the man from the message.

I'm an informer, you're a **** with an opinion, that's the juxtaposition so far.


There is no such thing as a HW p4p. There is no such thing as a lineal who isn't HW. Both those things came after sanctioning bodies existed and in no way reflect the traditions they invoke but rather the twist Ring placed on them.

Maybe, and i know this is a rough concept for a ****head who does nothing but argues about his own opinion all ****in' day, but, maybe I could care less about what you dumb****s think and am more interested in having solid information made easily available. I give y'all excellent search points to dig deeper with. Why the **** do you think I used Dempsey-Sully as an example? So that the rare student of the sport can actually look **** up and make an informed opinion.

Because all i ever read out of you ****suckers is wrong on both sides. Not just wrong, but, exactly what you were told to believe by a ****ing magazine. Dumb****.

[Lomadeaux]

Pound for pound best is how good a boxer is for his weight class or his pounds. Therefore the lighter he is the better Loma is pound for pound. If he moves up to 140 he is not as dominant as he is at 135 so he is less good PFP. Some 140 pound boxer like Prograis might beat him. At 135 it looks like nobody can beat him. He said his best fighting weight is 130 so he should go back down to 130 where he is even more dominant and better pfp.

Yea, I'm not sure why it's so hard for certain people to understand what Pound for Pound is. It's really strange to me. It's one of the easiest concepts ever.

Take every fighter out there. Mythical put them in the same weight class. Who wins?

So damn simple.

[mick1303]

Since he's with Top Rank, why not Crawford at 140 instead?

Let's see. Loma was a champion at 126, 130, 135. Crawford was a champion at 135, 140, 147. Why should they fight at a weight which is much closer to Crawford optimal weight than to Loma's?
Crawford can't make 135 anymore? Then tough luck, don't call him p4p best.

[New England]

that was probably the plan for arum. but he lost manny.

ideally that's what arum wanted for garcia. he could have turned him into a star. then you fight crawford on pay per view and it really means something, winner might be pound for pound.

but arum didn't have a deep enough stable and these guys weren't willing to wait around. hell, tim bradley fought manny pacquiao three times.

[New England]

You said according to 'traditions' Crawford was a true champion, and that Loma is nothing but a claimant, until he steps up in weight or becomes undisputed.

Do I need to remind you that Lomachenko holds the ring magazine belt at lightweight? or that he held the same belt Crawford did as a lightweight and laid claim to championship status?

You talk like a big swinging ****, but your lack of knowledge is apparent to anyone who knows boxing.

Muhammad Ali 'only' held the WBC title in 1967, and unified with Ernie Terrell to have both belts? According to your 'traditional' 'olden' standards, Muhammad Ali was not the true champ before defeating Ernie Terrell?

As I said, STFU you're speaking with a boxing historian. Quit calling people children, it's easy to see that you are one.

that guy is a blowhard and an idiot, btu you are far from a boxing historian. let's be honest.