Debunking myth about any 'UNFAIR' cheating by Lomachenko or Rigondeaux in their bout

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Rigo started all the dirty tactics.

Loma called him out to the ref.

On top of that, he cheated back.

He really learned a ton from Salido.

[Mr Objecitivity]

You guys w/ this "2 wrongs make a right" mentality have the minds of children. No where in the rules of boxing does it imply this and your very statement is defeated by the fact that every fight has a REFEREE who decides and disciplines, it's not up to the fighters to decide.

The TRUTH, which many can't handle, is that Loma is ok being a gritty/dirty fighter. When he headbutted, that was his own doing, not something "Rigo made him do" . When he ground his forearm on the back of Rigo's neck to push him down and neutralize him, that was his choosing. I have nothing against it because that's how pros fight. They get mean and push the rules a bit. If you resent dirty tactics, you resent Loma. Deal with it bytches.

You guys w/ this "2 wrongs make a right" mentality have the minds of children.

You're committing a straw man fallacy. That isn't my position. My position is totally different. Which is: 'an even playing field makes right and an uneven playing field makes wrong'

No where in the rules of boxing does it imply this

When one boxer commits a foul and the referee doesn't do what is required to stop that boxer from committing that foul again. Then 'abiding' by the rules becomes irrelevant. The opponent of that boxer must find a way to even out the playing field. Even if it means committing a foul of his own.

and your very statement is defeated by the fact that every fight has a REFEREE who decides and disciplines, it's not up to the fighters to decide.

The referee doesn't create the rules. The referee's job is to only enforce the rules that have already been established by the rule makers. Thus, if the referee doesn't enforce those rules for one boxer and the other boxer is abiding by the rules, then there exists an uneven playing field where the boxer abiding by the rules is at an 'UNFAIR' disadvantage. Thus, that boxer has every right to also commit fouls in response to even the playing field if the referee doesn't do so.

It's simple. If there exists an unfair and an uneven playing field. The boxer's job is to inform the referee about it. If the referee doesn't do anything about it. Then it's up to the boxer to even the playing field himself. This is common sense!

When he headbutted, that was his own doing, not something "Rigo made him do"

Yes, Rigo did make him do it. Rigondeaux initiated fouls and created an uneven playing field. Lomachenko responded by committing fouls of his own. Thus leveling the playing field again. It's either:

1) both boxers have to abide by all the rules.

2) Or both boxers are allowed to equally break rules.


Either is acceptable to me. Provided this standard applies to both boxers and not one of them over the other.

If you resent dirty tactics, you resent Loma.

I don't resent dirty tactics. I resent uneven playing fields.

[Mr Objecitivity]

Let's just end it here...

Floma and pops never wanted that catchweight at 124. Klimas never reported that Loma would concede to 125 even though Floma was already hitting half a pound over that in several weighins at Featherweight...

I advice you to take your irrelevant nonsense elsewhere. This thread has nothing to do with catch weights or weight. Both boxers agreed to compete at 130 pounds and that's that. Vasyl Lomachenko (to my knowledge) never pointed a gun towards Rigondeaux's head and forced him to move up and box against him at 130 pounds. Nor is it Lomachenko's fault that Rigondeaux is naturally the smaller man, to the point where Lomachenko is unable to make the weight which would've been most ideal for Rigondeaux.

If Rigondeaux was capable of moving up to 130 pounds at age 37. Why didn't he move up one division up to 126 pounds to take on Lomachenko at a younger age?

[Mr Objecitivity]

Your complaining about "ducking below the waist?" :gay: So that compares to hitting behind the head & punching WAY after the bell?

Guillermo Rigondeaux was hit in the back of the head BECAUSE he was ducking below the waist. It was Rigondeaux's fault for exposing the back of his head. Why was Rigondeaux exposing the back of his head?

As for punching after the bell. Rigondeaux was trying to hold and hit Lomachenko (as he did to Moises Flores). He also tried to elbow Lomachenko. Lomachenko retaliated by landing a soft punch after the bell. So what?

[Mr Objecitivity]

I kinda/sorta agree. If Rigondeaux was bending over and Lomachenko accidentally hit him in the back of the head then that's ok. If Rigondeaux is bending over and Lomachenko was targeting the back of his head then that's a foul. Lomachenko blatantly targeted the back of his head especially when he did the hammer fist. That's illegal and he should have been warned.

I don't think there was anything unfair about the fight. We know some referees will allow some fouls to take place and some won't. As a fighter you should also be aware of the tendencies of each referee. Lomachenko made a concerted effort to point out every foul he thought Rigondeaux was getting away with while committing fouls of his own. I can't respect him for that. However, I'm definitely not saying the fight was unfair.

Fair enough! As long as we can both agree that the result wasn't unfair or unacceptable.

I agree that at two points, Lomachenko did deliberately target Rigondeaux's head. As you mentioned with the hammer fists. However, Rigondeaux was not only bending below the waist in those situations, but he stayed in that same, bent down position for multiple seconds. That's also unacceptable! It's one thing for a boxer to bend below the waist and then come up immediately. It's another thing for a boxer to stay there for multiple seconds. Even other boxers who occasionally bend below the waist, such as Floyd Mayweather Jr for example would come up immediately.

Lomachenko targeted Rigondeaux's head in those situations to prevent him from ducking below the waist like that in the future. As Rigondeaux was deliberately exposing the back of his head. Thus, if he gets hit there in that manner, then it is his fault. Just like if a boxer deliberately turns away from his opponent, looks to the opposite direction and exposes his back to his opponent. Then it is his fault if his opponent lands a punch on his back. Since the opponent of the boxer is merely aiming his punches on the areas that are available. If a punch was going to land on the midsection if the boxer was looking forward. However, if that boxer has his back towards his opponent (for multiple seconds) and ends up getting hit in the spine, then that's his fault.

As the other poster Asgath already mentioned. If one boxer fouls. The other boxer needs to foul back in order to even the playing field. In addition to potentially prevent them from fouling in the future. If my opponent is constantly ducking below the waist (which is a foul). Then I will deliberately throw one or two shots to the back of their head. So that in the future, they rethink committing that same foul again.

Lomachenko was telling the referee all the fouls which he wasn't calling that Rigondeaux was committing. Once he realized that the referee was unwilling to call those fouls. That's when he started fouling himself.

Ultimately, all of it seems fair to me!

[Lester Tutor]

I advice you to take your irrelevant nonsense elsewhere. This thread has nothing to do with catch weights or weight. Both boxers agreed to compete at 130 pounds and that's that. Vasyl Lomachenko (to my knowledge) never pointed a gun towards Rigondeaux's head and forced him to move up and box against him at 130 pounds. Nor is it Lomachenko's fault that Rigondeaux is naturally the smaller man, to the point where Lomachenko is unable to make the weight which would've been most ideal for Rigondeaux.

If Rigondeaux was capable of moving up to 130 pounds at age 37. Why didn't he move up one division up to 126 pounds to take on Lomachenko at a younger age?

If Rigondeaux was capable? Maybe you didn't notice, but he bulked up in muscle. Should Flomachenko starts lifting weights so he is "capable" of making 147? At a younger age? Floma went to 130 in 2016, was fighting at 126 from 2013-2016, same time frame that Rigo, the small Super Bantamweight, had a narrative of being the most avoided boxer. getcho dumbass username outta herez

[Lomasexual]

A fighter who constantly ducks like that deserves to be punched in the back of the head. Cheating fucks.

Can't believe we still have whinging bitches crying about how Rigo's cheating, ugly ass got handed to him.

Seriously - just lock yourselves in a room, and get all of that crying out of your systems. Cry for a couple of months if you have to. When you feel like you can act like men again, then come back and post.

[Mr Objecitivity]

If Rigondeaux was capable? Maybe you didn't notice, but he bulked up in muscle. Should Flomachenko starts lifting weights so he is "capable" of making 147? At a younger age? Floma went to 130 in 2016, was fighting at 126 from 2013-2016, same time frame that Rigo, the small Super Bantamweight, had a narrative of being the most avoided boxer. getcho dumbass username outta herez

If Rigondeaux was capable? Maybe you didn't notice, but he bulked up in muscle.

Well that's my point! If he was able to do that in order to move up to 130 pounds at age 37. Why couldn't he do the same thing (or less) in order to move up only one division to 126 pounds at a younger age?

Should Flomachenko starts lifting weights so he is "capable" of making 147?

Lomachenko didn't claim he wanted to fight at 147 pounds against a 147 boxer. So he doesn't have to do any of that. Nor did he even claim he wanted to fight Rigondeaux in the first place. It was Rigondeaux who was calling Lomachenko out. Thus, the onus was upon Rigondeaux to ensure he can fulfill the criteria to box against Lomachenko.

Floma went to 130 in 2016, was fighting at 126 from 2013-2016,

So! What's your point?

same time frame that Rigo, the small Super Bantamweight, had a narrative of being the most avoided boxer.

Again, what's your point?

[HarvardBlue]

At the end of the day this was a very disappointing fight where the most compelling thing about it were fouls. Most reasonable people expected Lomachenko to win. At the same time most people expected this to be one of the best fights this year. It wasn't even close. Good discussion!

Unless you meant to do it, I still can't get past the misspelled username though. LOL.

[Lester Tutor]

Well that's my point! If he was able to do that in order to move up to 130 pounds at age 37. Why couldn't he do the same thing (or less) in order to move up only one division to 126 pounds at a younger age?



Lomachenko didn't claim he wanted to fight at 147 pounds against a 147 boxer. So he doesn't have to do any of that. Nor did he even claim he wanted to fight Rigondeaux in the first place. It was Rigondeaux who was calling Lomachenko out. Thus, the onus was upon Rigondeaux to ensure he can fulfill the criteria to box against Lomachenko.



So! What's your point?



Again, what's your point?

What is all this garbage that Floma didn't claim to want a 147 boxer? Dude keep it simple, Rigo BEEN wanting Floma since 2015, not just any boxer or any other body at 126 or 130, he wanted Floma at a catch. Santa Cruz and Frampton left 122...