Comments Thread For: Barry Hearn 'Slightly Disappointed' With Lomachenko, Explains

[samy787]

oh wow, i have no words for this idiocracy lol

lol ok i apoligize for my comments hes not a hypejob he has accoplished amazing stuff in boxing . But i strongly feel he did not win that fight on saterday. But he is special

[thack]

This about sums this clown up ....he thinks Luke only lost four rounds max.The Hearns have put some great shows on in recent times and for that they need the nod BUT throughout the 90's Barry Hearn stopped some great fights happening and just chose to match Eubank sr. with low level opposition from USA when there were great names ready and willing like Mike McCallum and James Toney but like Wilder until they were bubbled Hearn never mentioned thier names!If he thinks the above is correct then he's more of a prat than even I had him down for.

[ShoulderRoll]

I don't think Barry Hearn is out of line here.

To obtain legendary status requires legendary performances against great opponents.

For some fighters, anyway. Others seem to be given more of a pass.

[UNBIASED BOXING]

"A great effort [from Campbell]. I didn't have the gap anywhere near as wide as [the judges], I thought Luke lost four rounds maximum, I thought he boxed brilliantly, perhaps didn't go for gold enough," Hearn told iFL TV.

Is anyone going to listen to this senile old ****?

He's basically implying Campbell won the fight with this nonsense line.

[Corelone]

When you compare Loma to the greats, he comes up short. Hammering Hank Armstrong held 3 titles in an age of one title per division, featherweight, lightweight, and welter. Loma is nowhere close. Manny has him beat in his own age as p4p.

[factsarenice]

Every fighter, every fan saw the fight and knows the significance of Lomachenko's accomplishment. Everyone but Barry and Tofimo Lopez Sr.

Barry needs to stop, shut up and stay out of it.

[Bigchip]

You do realize he was in there with a super welterweight with at least a 6-inch advantage in reach. I won’t get into the height.

And don’t go running to boxrec who gets heights and reaches wrong as often as the ice-cream truck comes around during the summer.

Guy wins 9 or 10 out of 12 rounds (with an extra point for dropping his huge opponent) and people’s opinions change overnight.

Give me a break...

[factsarenice]

ATG? Loma has already made history and being mentioned with Manny & Armstrong means he's special. Loma's career isn't over yet, lets see how the chapter unfolds but so far he's on the right track.

When you compare Loma to the greats, he comes up short. Hammering Hank Armstrong held 3 titles in an age of one title per division, featherweight, lightweight, and welter. Loma is nowhere close. Manny has him beat in his own age as p4p.

[GlassJoey]

Is anyone going to listen to this senile old ****?

He's basically implying Campbell won the fight with this nonsense line.

If this is from the IFL interview taken at end of fight, Barry Hearn didn’t say “Luke only lost 4 rounds maximum”.

He said “I had him winning by 4 rounds maximum” which was what I had. Judges were too busy getting team sky’s jizz out of their eyes to watch the fight properly

[angkag]

Barry Hearn said Campbell lost four rounds maximum.

That means he scored it 116-112 Campbell or wider.

Why would I care what he thinks of Lomachenko knowing that?

He kind of invalidated everything with that 4 round comment.

Not sure what his intention was - he talks up his own fighter on one hand, then talks down the opponent - which surely talks hus own fighter down too (even if he had Cambell winning 8 rounds).

I suspect he was just on the juice again - been a couple of interviews where he was well oiled.