Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

[h=2][/h]After his classy performance in dismantling awkward Cuban Guillermo Rigondeaux, in what many expected to be a close scrap, Vasyl Lomachenko’s stock has never been higher. Undoubtedly the biggest win of his short but impressive professional career to date, the Ukrainian made the former undefeated two-time Olympic gold medallist quit after the sixth round, after thoroughly outclassing him.

Page not found - - Boxing News - Ring News24

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

Yes, definitely. Crawford may have the boxing iq and can fight, but he doesn't have Loma's amazing speed and reflexes, no way! Loma is like Spiderman of boxing. :boxing:

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

Depends how you interpret P4P Bud. On this forum P4P lists seem to be, in reality "favourite fighter" lists. But if you apply the strict/classical definition of P4P = ignore weight class completely, (so a bantamweight can fight a heavyweight etc etc) -

...with his skillset would fighter A beat fighter B, C, D etc

then he isn't far off the top. Amount of pro fights shouldn't enter into the equation, even though he's lost one of them!

If you look at Boxrec's P4P List http://boxrec.com/ they have him second, but they have Horn at 10th so fuck knows what criteria they are applying....!? Horn doesn't beat the 9 above him and he doesn't even beat Pac on a level playing field. 2 below him.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

If you're going by resume, then Loma isn't even close yet.

Who has he beaten?

Rigo was great once, back when I had hair and gas was $1.15 / gallon.

But that guy that gave up vs Loma in basically the second round? I think that was "Rigon-Faux."

Loma needs to beat Mikey (I think he will) and then step up against a few guys like Crawford.

If he's still drawing breath at that point, THEN we can start talking P4P.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

Depends how you interpret P4P Bud. On this forum P4P lists seem to be, in reality "favourite fighter" lists. But if you apply the strict/classical definition of P4P = ignore weight class completely, (so a bantamweight can fight a heavyweight etc etc)

I believe that is what the origins of lbs 4 lbs actually was. Weight aside, based on skillset, fighting style & power (relative to weight class).

But it seems people now go off resume as well, who they have fought and beat. So in this case you might get a phenominal fighter (the best anyone has ever seen) in a piss poor weight class, and they wouldn't top people's lists because he hasn't been in with anyone half as decent :whistle:

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

If you're going by resume, then Loma isn't even close yet.

 

Who has he beaten?

 

Rigo was great once, back when I had hair and gas was $1.15 / gallon.

But that guy that gave up vs Loma in basically the second round? I think that was "Rigon-Faux."

 

 

Loma needs to beat Mikey (I think he will) and then step up against a few guys like Crawford.

 

If he's still drawing breath at that point, THEN we can start talking P4P.

It's not just about who he has beaten. Some people win big fights but they don't win them impressively, right? Loma was very impressive against a guy nobody looked remotely close to impressive against. Even if that guy is getting on in age and is naturally smaller, but that doesn't matter much when it comes to boxing iq. The point is: Lomachenko has shown us stuff that not many in recent years have shown us. And that one loss means shit. It wasn't even a clear loss or anything. He never should have fought Salido back then.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

Here we go again same old P4P arguments because no one, but no one, applies the correct criteria...

P4P is going to be a banned expression on this forum same as Adfly and Asy***

Cable: start a thread "My least fave boxer Loma"

Boz: start a thread: "My fave boxer Loma"

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

The trouble I have is I try to stick to the original criteria, which is "Discounting weight, who's skillset is enough to suggest they could beat anyone else in the world?" But if they look good fighting nobody, how do we really know? Some fighters are amazing while things are going their way, but can't handle resistance(Tyson is often cited as such)

. I thought Ward looked great making Froch and Kovalev look like plodding goons, others complained he never left home and had things too much his own way.

Presently, it has to be between Lomachenko and Crawford I think, and I think it's a coin-toss, but both men are lacking a really great opponent on their CV.

I suppose there's nothing to stop us having two fighters at the top.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

I believe that is what the origins of lbs 4 lbs actually was. Weight aside, based on skillset, fighting style & power (relative to weight class).

 

But it seems people now go off resume as well, who they have fought and beat. So in this case you might get a phenominal fighter (the best anyone has ever seen) in a piss poor weight class, and they wouldn't top people's lists because he hasn't been in with anyone half as decent :whistle:

You HAVE to include resume, in fact that has to be the most important factor. Otherwise, in a NON P4P "all time great" list, you'd have to put Butterbean in the top 5.

Mind you, I LOVE me some 'Bean, but let's get real here.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

 

Presently, it has to be between Lomachenko and Crawford I think, and I think it's a coin-toss, but both men are lacking a really great opponent on their CV.

 

I suppose there's nothing to stop us having two fighters at the top.

I think, resume-wise, Usyk trumps them both. (but I GOTTA' stop using that word. Heck, they should officially remove it from the English language.)

Glowacki, Mchunu, and Huck tru - eh, "are more impressive wins than" Postol, Diaz & Indongo, IMO.

- Though I can easily see an argument for the other way around. It's bloody close.

And Usyk has similar apparent skills to Crawford & Loma. And certainly more P4P power than Loma.

The battle is clearly between Crawford & Usyk, with Loma waaaaay back in the running for now. (Even though he's the most likely to hold the title in 2 years)

If Usyk wins the Super Series, which is likely, then I dunno what Crawford can possibly do in 2018 to tru - eh, to beat that. He'd have to fight and beat both Thurman and Garcia. Even then, would that be more impressive than Dorticos & Briedas? The WW division is stacked pretty good right now, but the CW division is like Thor & Zeus, battling it out with thunder & lightning, to see who gets to fight Godzilla.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

--- Pleased as punch Loma exposed the sleazy side of pro boxing by whooping Salido while getting fouled repeatedly by Salido and Laurence Cole.

Only other guys in p4p mix would be Josh, and some abhor heavies, esp as big as he is as p4p. The other is Crawford who has equally demolished his stiffest foes with little effort. Loma has had that extra something special in his technique that has thus far not only proven devastating, but beyond the skills I've ever seen so obviously displayed, almost like an alien interloper.

All get exposed eventually as they fight on, but those are the top 3. I'd also include Manny who's been getting robbed of late, but he's not an up and comer and can only fight once a year now because of congressional duties.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

Only other guys in p4p mix would be Josh, and some abhor heavies, esp as big as he is as p4p.

Joshua is learning all the time but you wouldn't put him up there with the most skilled fighters in the world.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

oh god p4p bollocks does my nut in, bunch of delusional mongs dreaming who can beat who if weight wasn't a factor.....

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

Here we go again same old P4P arguments because no one, but no one, applies the correct criteria...

 

P4P is going to be a banned expression on this forum same as Adfly and Asy***

 

Cable: start a thread "My least fave boxer Loma"

 

Boz: start a thread: "My fave boxer Loma"

:haha: Maybe you are right. It is still too soon to determine wether he is the best p4p fighter but he is in the mix for sure.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

I never said he sucked.

He's brilliant.

But he's not P4P worthy at the moment, and I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

oh god p4p bollocks does my nut in, bunch of delusional mongs dreaming who can beat who if weight wasn't a factor.....

:haha: Please post more often!!

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

You HAVE to include resume, in fact that has to be the most important factor. Otherwise, in a NON P4P "all time great" list, you'd have to put Butterbean in the top 5.

 

Mind you, I LOVE me some 'Bean, but let's get real here.

Indeed someone must have had to have had a fight to judge their skill. But there are times when a boxer is still pretty untested but has all the skill and ability in the world, and could be judged, in ones opinion (which all this bollox merely is) that he could beat others around him who have fought a who's who of talent.

Case in point, at the start of the original super 6 we have 4 "big" names, recognisable names, and then 2 relative prospects in Ward & Andre Dirrell. If my memory serves me well not many were looking beyond Kesller or Froch, but Ward proved to be the best of the lot, and he probably already was before it kicked off. But just because he hadn't fought many people before that he is exempt from a P4P list.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

Terence Crawford is the best I've seen at the moment.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

Indeed someone must have had to have had a fight to judge their skill. But there are times when a boxer is still pretty untested but has all the skill and ability in the world, and could be judged, in ones opinion (which all this bollox merely is) that he could beat others around him who have fought a who's who of talent......

No doubt, and I do it all the time myself.

- But I would not make the leap to "P4P" best. That's very different from saying that a young fighter appears to be elite, or that he's da' goods, or that he may well hold all the belts one day ..... "P4P" (forgetting the silliness of the thing) is an absolute. It MUST have "proof" behind it.

- And I say this with absolute authority, because as you know, I originally came up with the term "P4P."

I also invented the internet.

And duct tape.

And single malt whiskey.

Happy holidays to all.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

Out of Loma and Bud i'd say for now, but hopefully next year answers a few more questions about untested fighters!

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

--- The fightnews poll had Loma in a huge runaway, and I'd also gather any other p4p public poll Loma will take at least this year. The suits at espn chose Crawford.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

Joshua is learning all the time but you wouldn't put him up there with the most skilled fighters in the world.

--- I already did include him in the mix. Reread for content...

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

--- I already did include him in the mix. Reread for content...

Then you really do live in a reality all your own.

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

Here we go again same old P4P arguments because no one, but no one, applies the correct criteria...

 

P4P is going to be a banned expression on this forum same as Adfly and Asy***

 

Cable: start a thread "My least fave boxer Loma"

 

Boz: start a thread: "My fave boxer Loma"

Ban it, it was a pile of bollocks when it was invented for Benny Leonard and the likes of Sugar Ray Robinson and its even worse now, the logic is so flawed it doesn't even need to be discussed, 'skillset regardless of weight'

Re: Is Vasyl Lomachenko pound for pound number one?

--- Well, it goes like this:

Science was founded on disagreement through criteria, dialogue, debate, and trial and error experiments. Maybe on no brainer theories gravity they might agree at a 90% level at best because there are many different theories about gravity that over lap, and some are not held in the same regard as other.

P4P is a sound theoretical concept that too often fails because there is no consensus on what it means or the criteria needed to fill it. No different than someone picking the #1 or # 10 in a division. Some would use some respectible criteria, but for others p4p mean popular 4 the people. End of the day means lots of fun dialogue mostly though some thin skins may feel their oxen gored good when their picks ain't acknowledged.