Do you consider him an elite fighter?
I have him at #3.
I think he's clearly in the top 5.
Printable View
Do you consider him an elite fighter?
I have him at #3.
I think he's clearly in the top 5.
I'd say 3 or 4...
1 or 2 is ward or kovalev, I think they are pretty equal so it doesnt matter which way round you have either
then lomachenko or crawford just behind them.
Great win for lomachenko he just doesnt have the victories against the top guys yet to justify number 1 a few more and he could be p4p number 1 in my opinion.
although looking at the rings top 10 p4p list there are some great fighters there, golovkin, gonzalez and so on, it's hard to pick a list right now
Great foot work, punch selection, work rate, good power and nice on the eye, p4p for me top 3 a few more fights then no1 can't really fault him.
P4p is getting tough to call. Chocolatito is still really good, but kovalev and ward both showed how legit they were. Loma just did too. GGG to me is falling a bit because others are just surpassing him. Then Crawford is on the outside looking in. If I had to say though, I would say number 4 after kovalev, ward, and chocolatito.
Talent is as clear as day but need to see more against some adversity. p4p is very much a marketing tool and in addition to skill there is a reason 8 of the current 10 are HBO fighters. Just like them pitching Loma vs Crawford :-X.
I think peoples lists are crazy. Chocolatito, Loma and Rigo are far far better than Ward or Kovalev. Granted they are right at the top but there is a big gap between the top 3 and Ward/Kovalev.
And each is multiple weight champions. It's not like they are unproven. Maybe they don't get quite the stage but they are better. And better is what P4P should be.
Lomachenko is leaps above Ward or Kovalev in terms of skill. I would have those two in the lower part of the top 10 and Lomachenko towards the top. He has a sublime skillset. His movement is poetry, he can throw punches in bunches, and doesn't get hit too much. Ward and Kovalev look like dinosaurs by comparison which is what happens when fighters get bigger, but Lomachenko is obviously one of the best.
I think Errol Spence is going to crack that P4P list soon.Crawford is excellent himself.Anthony Joshua could be in the P4P top 10 soon as well. He needs to fight better opposition though.
I especially hate posting about it due to my silly username:p I agree with Ron though, the term is supposed to mean who is the best fighter, in terms of technical ability and physical gifts relative to their size, and I have his same top 3. When people say someone doesn't have the wins to be ahead of someone they are clearly better than, it makes the discussion a bit silly. Loma currently has no possible way of surpassing Ward by that measure, because nobody within a reasonable weight of him is as worthy as some of the guys Ward beat years ago. It's a bit hazy when you have a guy who is coming up and truly untested, I get that also, so I agree Spence maybe can't be in the top 5 for now, even though I'm fairly sure he will be whenever he gets a big fight.
Loma could very well be headed toward ATG territory. But I have a problem talking p4p about someone with 9 professional fights.
SKill wise, he's wayyy above every other fighter still active at the moment, save perhaps for GGG who's some special kind of beast too. 2 gold medals, world championship after 3 bouts... that's something very impressive, especially because he's quite active. Before saying he's no 1 though, I'd like to see him active against 2 or 3 other top boxers but the kid has mad talent and he can't be written off the top 5 p4p at the moment and he's very well nearing the top 1 or 2.
Ward was my number 1b a few years back with mayweather. The only reason I didn't have him above mayweather was because he never lost it. Ward in the top few best fighters that I've watched for the past 15 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Swanson
He has declined a little but showed against kovalev that he is still really good. No other guy on your top 3 has moved up in weight to fight anyone anywhere near the level of kovalev.
Chocolatito has won titles in 4 divisions. He's already fighting people far bigger than him.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncherWard was my number 1b a few years back with mayweather. The only reason I didn't have him above mayweather was because he never lost it. Ward in the top few best fighters that I've watched for the past 15 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Swanson
He has declined a little but showed against kovalev that he is still really good. No other guy on your top 3 has moved up in weight to fight anyone anywhere near the level of kovalev.
I give Ward respect for moving up to fight Kovalev but 3 out of 4 people think he lost. How you perform matters. Loma isn't turning a boxing match into a tussle because he's getting pounded when he tries to box. Nobody wants to box with Rigo. Chocolatito doesn't need to use tricks, he'll just throw 1000 punches always with perfect balance, perfect timing, perfect selection from perfect positioning.
4 years ago the gap would be closer, but Ward was never as good as these guys. These guys are special.
Those guys are special but so was ward. Rigo actually didn't really start impressing until after the donaire fight. Also, he has to fight more to rank him that high. Loma is good but he is probably three wins away from the top spot. Chocolatito moved up a lot of weight classes but in reality it isnt much weight. Also, those weight classes lack as much talent.
I rank kovalev number 1. Then ward. Kovalev has been absolutely dominant and against good competition.
Of the guys mentioned, there are two that are busy and dominant: Chocolatito and GGG. Crowd-pleasers, too.
Kovalev is a notch below, the bad fight judging notwithstanding.
Ward is too inactive, and is riding the coat tails of the Super Six. When he does engage, he fouls too much.
Loma had an illustrious amateur career, but with 9 wins I'm not ready to concede p4p status yet.
This is what so many people seem to omit, and I don't understand it. Why else even talk about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonChocolatito has won titles in 4 divisions. He's already fighting people far bigger than him.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncherWard was my number 1b a few years back with mayweather. The only reason I didn't have him above mayweather was because he never lost it. Ward in the top few best fighters that I've watched for the past 15 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Swanson
He has declined a little but showed against kovalev that he is still really good. No other guy on your top 3 has moved up in weight to fight anyone anywhere near the level of kovalev.
I give Ward respect for moving up to fight Kovalev but 3 out of 4 people think he lost. How you perform matters. Loma isn't turning a boxing match into a tussle because he's getting pounded when he tries to box. Nobody wants to box with Rigo. Chocolatito doesn't need to use tricks, he'll just throw 1000 punches always with perfect balance, perfect timing, perfect selection from perfect positioning.
4 years ago the gap would be closer, but Ward was never as good as these guys. These guys are special.
He's top 5 and could easily be number 1 in the next year depends who he gets next
I've always said P4P rankings are a complete waste of time and a crock of shit after working out the Best fighter on the Planet and maybe #2 & #3. It's so subjective and there are too many parameters. I would probably say.
1. Chocolatito
2.Ward
3.Crawford
I would stop there. everything else is meaningless bollocks. GGG is nowhere near it, not all his fault, but he hasn't fought enough quality opposition and he has only operated at one weight. I wouldn't have Kovalev either , because he did lose to Ward whether we like it or not. and even if he beat Ward, we did see him struggle to impose his fight on him. And I wouldn't have Rigo for the same reasons that I didn't have Ward a while back..... a lack of meaningful fights. Again, not all his fault, but to be the best on the Planet means constantly proving that.
P4P is subjective and different (in my opinion) than historical ranking. I rank P4P based on who I think would beat every other fighter if we could somehow magically shrink/grow them all to the same size while maintaining proportional speed, power, reflexes...etc. Historical ranking to me is based on resume' and accomplishment.
With that in mind, when I look at what Loma did to Walters, and what Rigo did to Donaire, I place them as my 1 and 2. Kov and Ward are tough as nails, great boxers, and worthy of P4P ranking, but neither would be able to handle what Loma Rigo do in the ring. Ward is a little more willing to grapple/make things ugly, but I don't think even that would matter due to Loma/Rigo footwork.
GGG and Crawford are impressive in their own way. GGG is an aggressive, technically sound boxer with scary power in both hands. He's great at cutting off the ring, but he has never faced the skills Loma/Rigo bring and think the would both have him walking into big shots for as long as the fight lasts. Crawford may be on par with both, but I haven't seen him in the ring with a fighter as good as Donaire/Walters (Gamboa was small and rusty).
Chocolatito is solid and looks to be a smaller version of GGG to me. Very aggressive, solid fundamentals, applies constant pressure and looks for the ko in every fight. I feel like he does have better movement/footwork than GGG, so I feel like he presents additional dimensions/concerns for other fighters and can see a solid case for ranking him above Loma/Rigo. That being said, I have him #3 on my list behind Rigo/Loma.
This brings me to my toughest dilemma: how to rank Loma/Rigo against each other. Hard to be unbiased in this one because we (fight fans) tend to rank/admire offensive fighters higher than more defensive fighters due to aesthetics. Think Julio Ceasar Chavez and Pernell Whitaker.
Loma is much more aesthetically pleasing and exciting in the ring, has great defense, and is able to shut down elite fighters' offense. Rigo is a freak of nature athletically, not as offensive minded or explosive, but likely better at shutting down and frustrating an opponent. These two are unbelievably skilled and talented, but if I have to pick between them I guess I will have to go with Loma due to his offensive capabilities and punch output. So... I place Loma at #1 right now.
To me, P4P is not simply about who you think has the best skills, it's also about achievement.
Vasyl has achieved a lot in his short career. I imagine he's achieved more in 8 fights than anyone in boxing history. But I think he needs to win more big fights to achieve that #1 spot.
It's hard to rank him above a guy like Andre Ward, who has spent years beating the top contenders and just pulled off the victory of a life time over Kovalev. As much as I feel Kovalev won, it was a very close fight and Ward got the judges nod in the end, so the result must be respected.
Most people are the same when it comes to ranking fighters. They look at the last few fights and see this unstoppable fighter that can't be beaten and forget about their struggles.
I remember when pac was having his impressive run, there were people asking if he were the best fighter ever. It was ridiculous, but at the time, he was looking really good. Now that everything has settled down, most people have understood that he is an ATG, but nowhere near the best ever.
This is the case with Loma and rigo. I remember watching rigo struggle earlier in his career and seeing him get hurt/knocked down. He looked good but not great. Then he beats donaire and a few other guys and people see him as this guy who literally shuts out every guy he has ever fought. That's just not true. He hasn't beaten enough good competition for me to say that he is the best boxer. I don't have enough evidence.
Loma is the same. He struggled with salido, and even struggled at times against Russell. I scored that fight 8-4 for Loma. Loma couldn't just make him quit like he did with Walters. It was still an impressive win, but he lost rounds still and showed vulnerabilities.
But as I said before, when someone has a few really impressive fights in a row, we tend to forget their struggles previously and act as if they shut out all of their opponents.
Therefore, kovalev and ward are the best on my list because they have both proven to be dominant for a long time and against a lot more opponents.
I agree with everything you said.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
A lot of very good points made, Gents...
Especially poignant is that its kind of hard to measure by accomplishments, being all the fighters started at different times with different levels of competition around them. Ward gets credit for the super six. How many fighters are presented with that kind of tournament opportunity, where your opponents are of the upper echelon in your division and are just lined up and brought to you with no haggling.
I also agree with Ron's point about how a fighter performs. So the spoiling costs ward some style points in my opinion. But also by that same token, GGG also loses points for getting punched in the face on purpose in order to walk down and corner the inflated brook for the sake of "big drama fight". Crawfords late round antics against postol also fall under this category, for me. Capable of better, committed to worse.
Chocolatito, seemed more tested in his last fight. As did Kovalev . Loma should have been but the axeman became the tin man but that's not Loma's fault.
So based the criteria of primarily skill, bringing honor to the sport (after all this is supposed to represent the best boxing has to offer) and then longevity at a high level and
- Chocolatito (skills, all business and no douchey personas, etc. His time at the top beats Loma because hes been active. His careers on hold now to take care of his trainer --so we'll see what happens)
- Lomanchecko (Skills abound-- can't say enough, was willing to pay an opponent from his own purse to get competition, is so far above his competition)
- Golovkin (He has a lot of Skill, but doesn't always use it - The disparity in skill under the super skillful Rigo unfortunately is just a hair smaller than GGG's edge in activity over rigo)
- Rigo - Serious skills and an improved style should have him in at number 3 he has the longevity edge over loma- but his Longevity is offset by his inactivity, and his fighting in obscurity when he does fight do to contract and money issues. He can leapfrog GGG if his activity catches up to his mouth.
- Kovalev -Not as skillful as Gonzalez, Loma, Rigo or even GGG... but Just as active as GGG (unfortunately the gap between his and Rigos skillset in rigos favor is larger than the difference in their activity levels), Kovalev beats stiff competition, and has most of the belts and tried to get stevenson in the ring on multiple occasions - His unofficial victory over ward should have him ranked higher but that would be including the accomplishments/opportunity others may have not been privy to.
- Ward (Fights his fight and had a good skillset - Spoiling costs him as we've seen with Dawson, he doesn't have to resort to it as much), has longevity (cut short by self imposed layoff), Looked rusty against brand; desperate against kovalev and cares more about his money and power than he does about the actual fights)
Honorable Mention: Crawford (Good skillset, but i'm not sure he's in the same class as the seemingly naturally gifted Gonzalez, Loma and Rigo. He's ready to leapfrog Ward if he can keep the glory hound inside him at bay and outclass good fighters the way he has. I believe size advantage has played a factor in how good he's looked thus far... which is why Molina is a good fight as many of molina's accomplishments have come off his ability to curt weight. Should be a skill fight...except molina may be a little shopworn) Just my two cents..
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
Wait, the little guys get marked down for struggling and marked down for losing rounds but Ward and Kovalev don't get marked down for struggling/losing rounds and for Wards inability to box with Kovalev and Kovalevs inability to infight? Kovalev was literally holding Wards head down and lifting one leg to block body shots. Not just once, I can show multiple pictures. That is crap, and completely wildly illegal, infighting. But no mark down for that clear missing skillset? Why are there different criteria?
My post may sound very argumentative, I'm not so good at expressing myself online. Often my tone is not exactly as it comes off in text.(I joke often and I'm sure people read it as very harsh) I'm really just asking because we've seen Ward struggle and lose riunds, we've seen Kovalev struggle and lose rounds.
My current top 10
1. Roman Gonzalez
2. Andre Ward
3. Vasyl Lomachenko
4. Guillermo Rigo
5. GGG
6. Naoya Inoue
7. Terrence Crawford
8. Carl Frampton
9. Sergey Kovalev
10. Saul Alvarez
Aside from the ward/kovalev fight, ward rarely ever lost rounds. He basically shut people out and if did lose a round, it was an early round where not much was happening. Kovalev rarely loses rounds either. The chilemba match was I think an anomaly but he basically destroys all of his opponents. Even an old Hopkins was a good fighter and kovalev beat him every single round. Because both ward and kovalev are so good, they made a close fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonQuote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
Wait, the little guys get marked down for struggling and marked down for losing rounds but Ward and Kovalev don't get marked down for struggling/losing rounds and for Wards inability to box with Kovalev and Kovalevs inability to infight? Kovalev was literally holding Wards head down and lifting one leg to block body shots. Not just once, I can show multiple pictures. That is crap, and completely wildly illegal, infighting. But no mark down for that clear missing skillset? Why are there different criteria?
My post may sound very argumentative, I'm not so good at expressing myself online. Often my tone is not exactly as it comes off in text.(I joke often and I'm sure people read it as very harsh) I'm really just asking because we've seen Ward struggle and lose riunds, we've seen Kovalev struggle and lose rounds.
For example, if rigo and Loma fought each other to a draw, I can't say that they are both docked points in my mind because they lost rounds to an exceptional fight. If anything, it shows how good they both are.
Think of Floyd vs pac. Pac losing most rounds to Floyd doesn't show how bad pac is but how good Floyd is. So as in ward and kovalev, I think that fight showed how good they both were and not how bad either one is.
I think I answered your question.
Anyways, I see what you are saying with a pure who you think is better, but if I thought that Loma was the best p4p right now, I would say he is most likely a sure top 5 ever by the end of his career and I'm not willing to accept that at the moment.
I can see your point, but I tend to look at it from the perspective that 3 of those 9 were Russell, Salido, and Walters. I've watched boxing for 30 years and I've NEVER seen a guy with 9 pro fights fighting ANYONE NEAR the level of those three. I've never even heard of anyone fighting that level of comp so early. Evander would be the closest when he fought Qawi in his 15th fight, but that still leaves him two shy. Loma will be an ATG, I have no doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
Number one with no hesitation.
I think highly of both Ward and Kovalev. Although I really need to see a rematch to see if deficiencies were just in the moment or part of who they are. As the fight progressed Ward had Kov following him like a dog. Does Ward use this knowledge to exploit him in a rematch? Does Kovalev use this knowledge and cut off the ring? Or is Ward forced to muddy the waters again. And if Ward does muddy the waters does Kovalev come back with some plan to fight on the inside. These questions and their answers are critical to their placement for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncherAside from the ward/kovalev fight, ward rarely ever lost rounds. He basically shut people out and if did lose a round, it was an early round where not much was happening. Kovalev rarely loses rounds either. The chilemba match was I think an anomaly but he basically destroys all of his opponents. Even an old Hopkins was a good fighter and kovalev beat him every single round. Because both ward and kovalev are so good, they made a close fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonQuote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
Wait, the little guys get marked down for struggling and marked down for losing rounds but Ward and Kovalev don't get marked down for struggling/losing rounds and for Wards inability to box with Kovalev and Kovalevs inability to infight? Kovalev was literally holding Wards head down and lifting one leg to block body shots. Not just once, I can show multiple pictures. That is crap, and completely wildly illegal, infighting. But no mark down for that clear missing skillset? Why are there different criteria?
My post may sound very argumentative, I'm not so good at expressing myself online. Often my tone is not exactly as it comes off in text.(I joke often and I'm sure people read it as very harsh) I'm really just asking because we've seen Ward struggle and lose riunds, we've seen Kovalev struggle and lose rounds.
For example, if rigo and Loma fought each other to a draw, I can't say that they are both docked points in my mind because they lost rounds to an exceptional fight. If anything, it shows how good they both are.
Think of Floyd vs pac. Pac losing most rounds to Floyd doesn't show how bad pac is but how good Floyd is. So as in ward and kovalev, I think that fight showed how good they both were and not how bad either one is.
I think I answered your question.
Anyways, I see what you are saying with a pure who you think is better, but if I thought that Loma was the best p4p right now, I would say he is most likely a sure top 5 ever by the end of his career and I'm not willing to accept that at the moment.
Agreed
I have to disagree with you, both Ward and Kovalev lost rounds and struggled at times against Miranda and Bika respectively against Chilemba and Pascal in their first fight. Both Ward and Kovalev got knocked down ( at least Rigo got KD by a powerfull P4P fighter) but all this doesn't really matters because struggling/losing rounds/getting KD is not a measurement stick for greatness; even Floyd struggled, lost rounds and got hurt a few times. The only things that matters IMO to establish the current p4p rankings are the skills proved in the latest few years and of course against whom.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncherAside from the ward/kovalev fight, ward rarely ever lost rounds. He basically shut people out and if did lose a round, it was an early round where not much was happening. Kovalev rarely loses rounds either. The chilemba match was I think an anomaly but he basically destroys all of his opponents. Even an old Hopkins was a good fighter and kovalev beat him every single round. Because both ward and kovalev are so good, they made a close fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonQuote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
Wait, the little guys get marked down for struggling and marked down for losing rounds but Ward and Kovalev don't get marked down for struggling/losing rounds and for Wards inability to box with Kovalev and Kovalevs inability to infight? Kovalev was literally holding Wards head down and lifting one leg to block body shots. Not just once, I can show multiple pictures. That is crap, and completely wildly illegal, infighting. But no mark down for that clear missing skillset? Why are there different criteria?
My post may sound very argumentative, I'm not so good at expressing myself online. Often my tone is not exactly as it comes off in text.(I joke often and I'm sure people read it as very harsh) I'm really just asking because we've seen Ward struggle and lose riunds, we've seen Kovalev struggle and lose rounds.
For example, if rigo and Loma fought each other to a draw, I can't say that they are both docked points in my mind because they lost rounds to an exceptional fight. If anything, it shows how good they both are.
Think of Floyd vs pac. Pac losing most rounds to Floyd doesn't show how bad pac is but how good Floyd is. So as in ward and kovalev, I think that fight showed how good they both were and not how bad either one is.
I think I answered your question.
Anyways, I see what you are saying with a pure who you think is better, but if I thought that Loma was the best p4p right now, I would say he is most likely a sure top 5 ever by the end of his career and I'm not willing to accept that at the moment.
The only significant fighter Ward has fought in the last 5 years was Kovalev and he got a very controversial decision , same argument works for Kovalev , on the the other side Loma and Rigo destroyed p4p fighters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwng100
This is so NOT true.
No way you can compare Ward's resume the past 5 years to Kovalev's.
Night and day.
I don't know about night and day.. Kovalevs been a hell of a lot more active obviously, but if you take an ancient Hopkins out of the mix he hadn't fought anyone all that special until Ward either. Sullivan Barrera may prove himself to be just as good as anyone else Kovalev beat, Rogriguez was decent, etc.
I think Kovalev beat Ward don't get me wrong, but this rematch needs to happen and hopefully it's a more pleasing outcome this time all round.
You are absolutely right, in the last 5 years Kovalev was much more active and he beat better fighters, but Ward was the only one in the top 10 p4p list, my bad, "significant fighter" wasn't a good choice , I should have wrote p4p rated fighter instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by iwng100
This is so NOT true.
No way you can compare Ward's resume the past 5 years to Kovalev's.
Night and day.
Rigo beat donaire who was a p4p fighter but Loma never beat any. He has beaten some good fighters. Anyways, everyone struggles, but I have to go by skill against all types of fighters. The more fights you have, the more you prove you can beat all types of fighters.Quote:
Originally Posted by iwng100I have to disagree with you, both Ward and Kovalev lost rounds and struggled at times against Miranda and Bika respectively against Chilemba and Pascal in their first fight. Both Ward and Kovalev got knocked down ( at least Rigo got KD by a powerfull P4P fighter) but all this doesn't really matters because struggling/losing rounds/getting KD is not a measurement stick for greatness; even Floyd struggled, lost rounds and got hurt a few times. The only things that matters IMO to establish the current p4p rankings are the skills proved in the latest few years and of course against whom.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncherAside from the ward/kovalev fight, ward rarely ever lost rounds. He basically shut people out and if did lose a round, it was an early round where not much was happening. Kovalev rarely loses rounds either. The chilemba match was I think an anomaly but he basically destroys all of his opponents. Even an old Hopkins was a good fighter and kovalev beat him every single round. Because both ward and kovalev are so good, they made a close fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonQuote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
Wait, the little guys get marked down for struggling and marked down for losing rounds but Ward and Kovalev don't get marked down for struggling/losing rounds and for Wards inability to box with Kovalev and Kovalevs inability to infight? Kovalev was literally holding Wards head down and lifting one leg to block body shots. Not just once, I can show multiple pictures. That is crap, and completely wildly illegal, infighting. But no mark down for that clear missing skillset? Why are there different criteria?
My post may sound very argumentative, I'm not so good at expressing myself online. Often my tone is not exactly as it comes off in text.(I joke often and I'm sure people read it as very harsh) I'm really just asking because we've seen Ward struggle and lose riunds, we've seen Kovalev struggle and lose rounds.
For example, if rigo and Loma fought each other to a draw, I can't say that they are both docked points in my mind because they lost rounds to an exceptional fight. If anything, it shows how good they both are.
Think of Floyd vs pac. Pac losing most rounds to Floyd doesn't show how bad pac is but how good Floyd is. So as in ward and kovalev, I think that fight showed how good they both were and not how bad either one is.
I think I answered your question.
Anyways, I see what you are saying with a pure who you think is better, but if I thought that Loma was the best p4p right now, I would say he is most likely a sure top 5 ever by the end of his career and I'm not willing to accept that at the moment.
The only significant fighter Ward has fought in the last 5 years was Kovalev and he got a very controversial decision , same argument works for Kovalev , on the the other side Loma and Rigo destroyed p4p fighters.
I'm not saying Loma won't get there, but he needs a few more wins to prove to me that he really is that good.
I'll prob get shit on but here's my top 5 p4P....
1. ROMAN GONZALEZ
WBC JR. BANTAMWEIGHT
COUNTRY: NICARAGUA
46-0-0 (38 KOS)
2. GENNADY GOLOVKIN
IBF, WBA, WBC MIDDLEWEIGHT
COUNTRY: KAZAKHSTAN
36-0-0 (33 KOS)
3. CARL FRAMPTON
WBA FEATHERWEIGHT
COUNTRY: U.K.
23-0-0 (14 KOS)
4. SERGEY KOVALEV
COUNTRY: RUSSIA
30-1-1 (26 KOS)
5. TERENCE CRAWFORD
RING, WBC, WBO JR. WELTERWEIGHT
COUNTRY: U.S.
29-0-0 (20 KOS)
No "shitting on", I don't care what anyones list is, but Loma could still make 126 I'm sure, do you honestly feel that Frampton could ever beat him? I think Frampton is really good and would be somewhere in my top 10, but that is a borderline mismatch from the get go.
One thing we can say for sure is Kovalev has beaten 3 Ring top lt heavyweights and sent another into literal witness protection with zero interest in a fight ;D. Dunno on Rodriquez because he and Ward stunk it out. In hindsight it was his peak to plummet moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by p4pking
Plus Frampton straight ducked Rigo and said he will never fight him. Having him above Rigo is madness.Quote:
Originally Posted by p4pking