Originally posted by observer
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Comments Thread For: Lomachenko's Weekend Dominance Will Leave a Historic Impression
Collapse
-
Originally posted by JonDelPrado View PostI knew somebody was coming back with that. Of course rigo is accurate and Campbell taller, but put all of those combined and that’s something Loma hasn’t seen. Rigo is small and slow, Campbell is big but also slow and not as strong, Russell fast but pillow fisted, so on and so forth. It’s a real challenge for Loma and don’t agree one bit that he’s going to steamroll Lopez.
Agreed, Teo is insanely athletic, the way he cracks pads is impressive, he sure isn't Anthony Crolla.
Maybe he will beat up Loma, kinda like Oscar did to Chavez, were Loma is overwhelmed by his power, speed and size. Who knows?
Sometimes the younger bigger fighter take over.
Comment
-
Originally posted by edgarg View PostWell maybe the cheater part wasn't done, but Peter Rademacher, the Olympic heavyweight champ of 1956, fought his first professional fight Against Floyd Patterson in 1957, for the Heavyweight Championship. He KD Patterson in rd 2 but Patterson KD him about 5-6 times before a KO in rd 7.
Rademacher was about 3 " taller, 30 lbs heavier and had a 7-8 inch reach advantage.... Didn't help.
And for the record, Loma is the best amateur of all time with multiple gold medals so he is clearly a special fighter. Many, many gold medalists are not.
Comment
-
Originally posted by R-Hand Southpaw View PostTake away your bias and you'll see that they are more alike than different especially in regards to how they managed their career.
The biggest difference is one is a generational talent and the other is not. Guess who is who.
There is no bias on my part. I’m able to look at something without investing a biased opinion.
I used to have with Hopkins. I disliked him so much at one point that I refused to look at his accomplishments without being critical. Today, I respect that man more than ever.
Floyd’s critique usually comes from the last 11 fights of his career. People either have no idea about his career before 2007 when he was 39-0 or just dislike him too much to care.
It’s like PAC Filipino fans. PAC can poop in public and they’ll tell you it’s cheese cake. He’s the only superstar they have so I understand it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Oregonian View Post——————
There is no bias on my part. I’m able to look at something without investing a biased opinion.
I used to have with Hopkins. I disliked him so much at one point that I refused to look at his accomplishments without being critical. Today, I respect that man more than ever.
Floyd’s critique usually comes from the last 11 fights of his career. People either have no idea about his career before 2007 when he was 39-0 or just dislike him too much to care.
It’s like PAC Filipino fans. PAC can poop in public and they’ll tell you it’s cheese cake. He’s the only superstar they have so I understand it.
I think PBF was the best boxing Floyd and then whatever happened messed everything up after. Too much ****ing drama once he moved north of 130-135. Maybe fame?
Mayweather was definitely the best of his era but his career just left such a bad taste in my mouth.
You have a guy with this talent and he goes out of his way to play these ****ing games. Do things he didnt need to do. Didnt take the hard fight when it was available.
I could list a whole bunch of ridiculous ****.
Like I'm past the Floyd/Pac debacle but that fight not happening and getting past due is no different than Canelo/GGG not happening.
So unsatisfying. When you're the cash cow you have the chance to forge your destiny and he did that?!
You're telling me you can't criticize Floyd?
Comment
-
Originally posted by R-Hand Southpaw View PostIm pretty neutral on that aspect. I love what Pac did in the ring but he has the same shortcomings I dislike Floyd for.
I think PBF was the best boxing Floyd and then whatever happened messed everything up after. Too much ****ing drama once he moved north of 130-135. Maybe fame?
Mayweather was definitely the best of his era but his career just left such a bad taste in my mouth.
You have a guy with this talent and he goes out of his way to play these ****ing games. Do things he didnt need to do. Didnt take the hard fight when it was available.
I could list a whole bunch of ridiculous ****.
Like I'm past the Floyd/Pac debacle but that fight not happening and getting past due is no different than Canelo/GGG not happening.
So unsatisfying. When you're the cash cow you have the chance to forge your destiny and he did that?!
You're telling me you can't criticize Floyd?
I think that question is pretty deep. I’ve always defended Floyd to the point where I cannot criticize him so that’s a mind blowing question. For me at least. Damn it!!! Why did you have to do that?
Alright. In 2008, Floyd should have fought Cotto who was undefeated at the time and Margarito who was the boogeyman at WW. I get that Floyd didn’t want Arum to benefit financially but he def should have pushed for those two fights. Both would have Agreed to a 70:30 split.
Two, Floyd should have never fought Berto. Berto was done at that point. It would have made sense had Floyd gotten to him before Ortiz.
Three, Floyd should have made that PAC fight in 2011 or 2012.
Lastly, Floyd should have fought Danny Garcia and Keith Thurman when they were both undefeated. And to just spite PAC, he should have gone after Jeff Horn, in Australia no less, and make it look easy just as a fück you to PAC-nüt-huggers.
My take is, those are fights Floyd would have won. Easy.
Maybe, because of that, I don’t critique him much.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Oregonian View Post————-
I think that question is pretty deep. I’ve always defended Floyd to the point where I cannot criticize him so that’s a mind blowing question. For me at least. Damn it!!! Why did you have to do that?
Alright. In 2008, Floyd should have fought Cotto who was undefeated at the time and Margarito who was the boogeyman at WW. I get that Floyd didn’t want Arum to benefit financially but he def should have pushed for those two fights. Both would have Agreed to a 70:30 split.
Two, Floyd should have never fought Berto. Berto was done at that point. It would have made sense had Floyd gotten to him before Ortiz.
Three, Floyd should have made that PAC fight in 2011 or 2012.
Lastly, Floyd should have fought Danny Garcia and Keith Thurman when they were both undefeated. And to just spite PAC, he should have gone after Jeff Horn, in Australia no less, and make it look easy just as a fück you to PAC-nüt-huggers.
My take is, those are fights Floyd would have won. Easy.
Maybe, because of that, I don’t critique him much.
Floyd could have won every single one of those fights but because he chose not to make them happen is why he gets the critism he does. At least from me.
Anyone can win a mythical match up but do we really know for example how Floyd would have done 100% against an undefeated pre plaster Cotto? Nope.
Just like I think Canelo would probably beat a lot of the top guys 160-168 but hes "uninterested" in all of them for different reasons some outside his control.
You literally listed almost everything I have a problem with lmao. No boxer is perfect but no boxer could choose their destiny like Floyd.
Comment
Comment