Boxing Forums


.



User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  2
Likes Likes:  20
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 48

Thread: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

Share/Bookmark
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    56,407
    Mentioned
    1450 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2691
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    Have you heard the one about Roberto Duran knocking out a horse?
    Do not let success go to your head and do not let failure get to your heart.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,377
    Mentioned
    64 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    381
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenster View Post
    What Loma's achieved in 15 fights is unprecedented. 15 fights at championship level. One reason some "genuine" fans don't appreciate Loma is they're so used to seeing "padded" records. 35-0 looks more impressive that 14-1... until you look under the bonnet.

    Lets start by comparing Crawford's first 15 fights with Loma's? It is laughable. Crawford had 15 fights against club fighters/"bums" (which is the norm). 19 fights before his first 10-rounder. 22 before his first "world" title shot.

    If Crawford had Loma's schedule when he started, he'd have fought Nate Campbell for the WBO title in his 2nd fight, Juan Guzman in his 3rd, Edwin Valero in his 8th and Juan Manuel Marquez in his 11th or 12th. I kid you not.

    Crawford has faced 7 former "world" champs in 12 years.
    Loma has faced 9 former "world" champs in 6 years.

    Crawford's light-welter unification - Dulorme (WBO), Postol (WBC), Indongo (IBF/WBA).
    Loma's lightweight unification - Linares (WBA), Pedraza (WBO), Campbell (WBC) ..... *And either Commey/Lopez (IBF).*

    Crawford is a great fighter, HOFamer, however, even without the "eye test," there's no comparison between the two. Loma is special level talent. (now I read a thousand accusations of "liar" and "dickrider" and "KKK member" )
    Nobody needs to accuse you. You expose yourself.

    You use the fake thing of how fast, because you are presenting a fake argument because you are fake. They are the same age, they fought for titles on the same day, Loma lost. Get at me when Crawford loses to someone with 14 losses. Won’t happen.

    So you’ll come back and excuse his loss because “so fast” about a 26 year old man with over 400 fights. You’ll talk about another fake number of 2 pro fights. Ignoring the 6 pro fights he had with WBS. Ignoring that he was an amateur so long because he was PAID TO FIGHT as an amateur too. So fast builds him and is also plot armor for him. Because it is a plot, it’s not truth, it’s a story. So of course you’re here to tell it.

    Tell us how he’s small too because I’d like to see you make all the fake points

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The Edge Of Nowhere
    Posts
    20,724
    Mentioned
    778 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1012
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    To be totally honest and fair. While Loma may be a little over-rated by some you do seem to have a massive issue with him Ron. It is not just begrudging respect from you, more like a bit of a desperate search for excuses to dismiss many of his achievements so far, which does leave me scratching my head a little.
    Hidden Content

    "You're a big man, but you're in bad shape. With me it's a full time job. Now behave yourself..."

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,377
    Mentioned
    64 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    381
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    Quote Originally Posted by Beanz View Post
    To be totally honest and fair. While Loma may be a little over-rated by some you do seem to have a massive issue with him Ron. It is not just begrudging respect from you, more like a bit of a desperate search for excuses to dismiss many of his achievements so far, which does leave me scratching my head a little.
    Explain, what achievement do I diminish? The time thing is fake, clearly, he fought as a pro and it’s completely ignored. And even if it wasn’t fake it doesn’t mean anything. What he has done by 31 is what he has done

    FTR, I have him number 2 P4P.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The Edge Of Nowhere
    Posts
    20,724
    Mentioned
    778 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1012
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Swanson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Beanz View Post
    To be totally honest and fair. While Loma may be a little over-rated by some you do seem to have a massive issue with him Ron. It is not just begrudging respect from you, more like a bit of a desperate search for excuses to dismiss many of his achievements so far, which does leave me scratching my head a little.
    Explain, what achievement do I diminish? The time thing is fake, clearly, he fought as a pro and it’s completely ignored. And even if it wasn’t fake it doesn’t mean anything. What he has done by 31 is what he has done

    FTR, I have him number 2 P4P.
    It is way too early for him to be given some of the accolades he has, but there is no denying the meteoric nature of his rise. You diminish that by pretending losing to Salido was any indication of his quality and by elevating Crawford into something he isn't yet. It took Crawford 22 fights before he was ready to go 12 rounds with Ricky Burns. God bless the guy, heart of a lion, but Ricky Burns was still dong Saturdays at his local shop at the time. You can't carry on pretending that the pro and amateur games are the same because of something like money either or that everyone is more gullible or less knowledgeable than you, or worse still, racist because they disagree. It undermines your whole argument.

    If you believe in such an abstract thing as P4P and have him at 2 anyway I don't even see what your argument is really.
    Hidden Content

    "You're a big man, but you're in bad shape. With me it's a full time job. Now behave yourself..."

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,377
    Mentioned
    64 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    381
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    Quote Originally Posted by Beanz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Swanson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Beanz View Post
    To be totally honest and fair. While Loma may be a little over-rated by some you do seem to have a massive issue with him Ron. It is not just begrudging respect from you, more like a bit of a desperate search for excuses to dismiss many of his achievements so far, which does leave me scratching my head a little.
    Explain, what achievement do I diminish? The time thing is fake, clearly, he fought as a pro and it’s completely ignored. And even if it wasn’t fake it doesn’t mean anything. What he has done by 31 is what he has done

    FTR, I have him number 2 P4P.
    It is way too early for him to be given some of the accolades he has, but there is no denying the meteoric nature of his rise. You diminish that by pretending losing to Salido was any indication of his quality and by elevating Crawford into something he isn't yet. It took Crawford 22 fights before he was ready to go 12 rounds with Ricky Burns. God bless the guy, heart of a lion, but Ricky Burns was still dong Saturdays at his local shop at the time. You can't carry on pretending that the pro and amateur games are the same because of something like money either or that everyone is more gullible or less knowledgeable than you, or worse still, racist because they disagree. It undermines your whole argument.

    If you believe in such an abstract thing as P4P and have him at 2 anyway I don't even see what your argument is really.
    If people don’t see the blatant racism in boxing I genuinely pity them.

    But that’s beside the point. Again, 22 fights, 2 fights, it doesn’t matter if they are both 26. Suggesting 2 26 year olds should be judged differently giving one guy both CREDIT for and a FREE PASS FROM is a double standard!

    Time is not different, both 26, both fought for titles on the same day. Same is same, it’s not different.

    This is why I find it frustrating. I am stating simple facts. Two guys that are the same age are the same age, this is not deniable.(technically there is like 5 months difference in age but c’mon, that’s the same) The same day is the same day, this is not deniable. The amount of time between 3/1/2014 and now is the same for both. These are undeniable facts

    My argument is not against his greatness. My point is people shouldn’t give value to fake things like fast. This should be really simple to see “what you have done by 31 is what you have done”, it should not be an argument. But somehow it is. Not only do I have to give him credit for what he has done but also bonus points for something meaningless. My issue is entirely on the fake bonus, you see every argument is about the fake bonus.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    london
    Posts
    5,469
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    726
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    Not a fan of Tim Bradley on the commentary..how dare he not know which Fury was fighting Povetkin?!

    Hughie is future PPV.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The Edge Of Nowhere
    Posts
    20,724
    Mentioned
    778 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1012
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Swanson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Beanz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Swanson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Beanz View Post
    To be totally honest and fair. While Loma may be a little over-rated by some you do seem to have a massive issue with him Ron. It is not just begrudging respect from you, more like a bit of a desperate search for excuses to dismiss many of his achievements so far, which does leave me scratching my head a little.
    Explain, what achievement do I diminish? The time thing is fake, clearly, he fought as a pro and it’s completely ignored. And even if it wasn’t fake it doesn’t mean anything. What he has done by 31 is what he has done

    FTR, I have him number 2 P4P.
    It is way too early for him to be given some of the accolades he has, but there is no denying the meteoric nature of his rise. You diminish that by pretending losing to Salido was any indication of his quality and by elevating Crawford into something he isn't yet. It took Crawford 22 fights before he was ready to go 12 rounds with Ricky Burns. God bless the guy, heart of a lion, but Ricky Burns was still dong Saturdays at his local shop at the time. You can't carry on pretending that the pro and amateur games are the same because of something like money either or that everyone is more gullible or less knowledgeable than you, or worse still, racist because they disagree. It undermines your whole argument.

    If you believe in such an abstract thing as P4P and have him at 2 anyway I don't even see what your argument is really.
    If people don’t see the blatant racism in boxing I genuinely pity them.

    But that’s beside the point. Again, 22 fights, 2 fights, it doesn’t matter if they are both 26. Suggesting 2 26 year olds should be judged differently giving one guy both CREDIT for and a FREE PASS FROM is a double standard!

    Time is not different, both 26, both fought for titles on the same day. Same is same, it’s not different.

    This is why I find it frustrating. I am stating simple facts. Two guys that are the same age are the same age, this is not deniable.(technically there is like 5 months difference in age but c’mon, that’s the same) The same day is the same day, this is not deniable. The amount of time between 3/1/2014 and now is the same for both. These are undeniable facts

    My argument is not against his greatness. My point is people shouldn’t give value to fake things like fast. This should be really simple to see “what you have done by 31 is what you have done”, it should not be an argument. But somehow it is. Not only do I have to give him credit for what he has done but also bonus points for something meaningless. My issue is entirely on the fake bonus, you see every argument is about the fake bonus.
    I agree it is much harder to make it to the top if you are a European.


    I think the fake bonus thing is not so much fake as over emphasized. The guy had way less professional fights to get to were he is and that is more than just a little unusual. You can't just pretend it isn't there. It is indisputable. Campbell removed some of that shine but again I think his problems adjusting to the pro game has made him under-rated. His loss to Mendy led to many just dismissing him but boxing does not work like that.
    Hidden Content

    "You're a big man, but you're in bad shape. With me it's a full time job. Now behave yourself..."

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    6,013
    Mentioned
    69 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    422
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Swanson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Beanz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Swanson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Beanz View Post
    To be totally honest and fair. While Loma may be a little over-rated by some you do seem to have a massive issue with him Ron. It is not just begrudging respect from you, more like a bit of a desperate search for excuses to dismiss many of his achievements so far, which does leave me scratching my head a little.
    Explain, what achievement do I diminish? The time thing is fake, clearly, he fought as a pro and it’s completely ignored. And even if it wasn’t fake it doesn’t mean anything. What he has done by 31 is what he has done

    FTR, I have him number 2 P4P.
    It is way too early for him to be given some of the accolades he has, but there is no denying the meteoric nature of his rise. You diminish that by pretending losing to Salido was any indication of his quality and by elevating Crawford into something he isn't yet. It took Crawford 22 fights before he was ready to go 12 rounds with Ricky Burns. God bless the guy, heart of a lion, but Ricky Burns was still dong Saturdays at his local shop at the time. You can't carry on pretending that the pro and amateur games are the same because of something like money either or that everyone is more gullible or less knowledgeable than you, or worse still, racist because they disagree. It undermines your whole argument.

    If you believe in such an abstract thing as P4P and have him at 2 anyway I don't even see what your argument is really.
    If people don’t see the blatant racism in boxing I genuinely pity them.

    But that’s beside the point. Again, 22 fights, 2 fights, it doesn’t matter if they are both 26. Suggesting 2 26 year olds should be judged differently giving one guy both CREDIT for and a FREE PASS FROM is a double standard!

    Time is not different, both 26, both fought for titles on the same day. Same is same, it’s not different.

    This is why I find it frustrating. I am stating simple facts. Two guys that are the same age are the same age, this is not deniable.(technically there is like 5 months difference in age but c’mon, that’s the same) The same day is the same day, this is not deniable. The amount of time between 3/1/2014 and now is the same for both. These are undeniable facts

    My argument is not against his greatness. My point is people shouldn’t give value to fake things like fast. This should be really simple to see “what you have done by 31 is what you have done”, it should not be an argument. But somehow it is. Not only do I have to give him credit for what he has done but also bonus points for something meaningless. My issue is entirely on the fake bonus, you see every argument is about the fake bonus.
    Now I’m very close to your View on Loma and some of the points you made. But to bang on about “Blatant Racism in Boxing” is wrong.
    Nearly all the greatest ever fighters are black, nearly all the richest fighters ever are black. I’m not sure where the racism is?
    I certainly see racism in many other sports , and certainly in certain aspects of life in general, but not really in Boxing.
    I genuinely think the problem is with the media. There is so much money in the sport right now, and consequently in order to “justify” that , along with the sports biggest ever earner exiting stage left, they need to manufacture a “Legend”
    Loma is a lovely fighter, and I don’t think you’ve been disrespectful to him in any way. I just believe he has been overhyped.
    He’s arguably the greatest Amateur that has ever lived, but in order to make that legacy, it is to the detriment of his pro career, because he simply won’t have time to reach greatness in my opinion.
    I don’t believe he will ever be p4p #1 . But hey, I might be wrong.
    Former Undisputed 4 belt Prediction champion. Still P4P and People’s Champion.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    363
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    293
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    Loma has packed plenty of names into his short pro career.
    The hype has been way OTT, but at least Loma walks it, despite the hype not coming from him or his training camp.

    Fans enjoy the fights of his short Pro career while it lasts.Young boxers enjoy his demonstrations e.g the one he gave recently at a London club.

    Racism? Kindly elaborate for discussion.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    On the levee
    Posts
    38,395
    Mentioned
    331 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    4711
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    Loma from the get go was about instant super stardom and all the rewards from fighter to promoter that came with it. I don't see this particular racism angle in regards to Crawford v Loma. Honestly I wasn't fond of Loma and the microwave type push he had rolled out to him based on Amatuer and Gold medal accolades from the beginning. It was surreal to see a guy handed a title shot as headliner on HBO in only his second 'pro' fight. He was HBO ppv in debut. I remember De La Hoya making his post Gold medal debut as some 6 rounder v the guy running the beer stand at the Great Western Forum. But honestly and with respect to some ok'ish guys over his first year..you could have skipped them all and gone 1-0 right into his 1st trinket too. It's padding as much as it's a normal mostly excepted process for a fighter of high caliber to showcase..market..grow seats and fans before having it handed a trinket on a silver platter. The learning craft and honing skills feels secondary for some early on. No sane individual can deny Lomas skill and he is very much a pleasure to watch aside from some clowning and mocking from time to time. But rarely if ever has a fighter been given the opportunities, for the sake of a promoter too, that he has been given. Every record in history can be torn apart but truth be told aside from Walters and Russell Jr, Linares on the rebound just to get ko'd next, where were these fresh undefeated top division threats he vanquished. Rigo again two divisions is two divisions. Feel the same way about it as with Mikey up for Spence, Brook up for GGG so on and so forth. I don't mind Loma at all but make no mistake right now he and Arum more so are about collecting trinkets, not being involved in super fights.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    This Lunatic Asylum
    Posts
    22,751
    Mentioned
    397 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2813
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spicoli View Post
    Loma from the get go was about instant super stardom and all the rewards from fighter to promoter that came with it. I don't see this particular racism angle in regards to Crawford v Loma. Honestly I wasn't fond of Loma and the microwave type push he had rolled out to him based on Amatuer and Gold medal accolades from the beginning. It was surreal to see a guy handed a title shot as headliner on HBO in only his second 'pro' fight. He was HBO ppv in debut. I remember De La Hoya making his post Gold medal debut as some 6 rounder v the guy running the beer stand at the Great Western Forum. But honestly and with respect to some ok'ish guys over his first year..you could have skipped them all and gone 1-0 right into his 1st trinket too. It's padding as much as it's a normal mostly excepted process for a fighter of high caliber to showcase..market..grow seats and fans before having it handed a trinket on a silver platter. The learning craft and honing skills feels secondary for some early on. No sane individual can deny Lomas skill and he is very much a pleasure to watch aside from some clowning and mocking from time to time. But rarely if ever has a fighter been given the opportunities, for the sake of a promoter too, that he has been given. Every record in history can be torn apart but truth be told aside from Walters and Russell Jr, Linares on the rebound just to get ko'd next, where were these fresh undefeated top division threats he vanquished. Rigo again two divisions is two divisions. Feel the same way about it as with Mikey up for Spence, Brook up for GGG so on and so forth. I don't mind Loma at all but make no mistake right now he and Arum more so are about collecting trinkets, not being involved in super fights.
    Loma's had it "handed on a platter?" If what he's done is so "easy" why haven't others done it? Why waste their time with all the training camps and obligations whilst receiving peanuts when they can jump in the deep end? He's not half the star in America guys like Oscar was when he turned pro. There are literally dozens of American fighters who could CHOOSE Loma's path and get the same TREATMENT from Bob, Eddie, Al, Oscar, any top promoter.

    You'd prefer Loma had "earned" a title shot by having 15-20 fights against the guy who runs the beer stand? Then maybe a championship rated fighter or two - like Ramirez - before the alphabet org allowed him the honour of paying for a shot?

    He didn't bypass "learning the craft and honing skills" against club fighters because he was "handed it on a silver platter," the risk/gamble paid off. He proved to be the real deal, not just an outstanding amateur.

    Robeisy Ramirez? Heard of him? Two-time olympic gold medalist? Massive bidding war between promoters to sign him, went with Bob. Last month he got knocked down 30 seconds into his debut and lost the fight against a 4-2-2 hotdog seller.
    3-Time SADDO PREDICTION COMP CHAMPION.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    This Lunatic Asylum
    Posts
    22,751
    Mentioned
    397 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2813
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Swanson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenster View Post
    What Loma's achieved in 15 fights is unprecedented. 15 fights at championship level. One reason some "genuine" fans don't appreciate Loma is they're so used to seeing "padded" records. 35-0 looks more impressive that 14-1... until you look under the bonnet.

    Lets start by comparing Crawford's first 15 fights with Loma's? It is laughable. Crawford had 15 fights against club fighters/"bums" (which is the norm). 19 fights before his first 10-rounder. 22 before his first "world" title shot.

    If Crawford had Loma's schedule when he started, he'd have fought Nate Campbell for the WBO title in his 2nd fight, Juan Guzman in his 3rd, Edwin Valero in his 8th and Juan Manuel Marquez in his 11th or 12th. I kid you not.

    Crawford has faced 7 former "world" champs in 12 years.
    Loma has faced 9 former "world" champs in 6 years.

    Crawford's light-welter unification - Dulorme (WBO), Postol (WBC), Indongo (IBF/WBA).
    Loma's lightweight unification - Linares (WBA), Pedraza (WBO), Campbell (WBC) ..... *And either Commey/Lopez (IBF).*

    Crawford is a great fighter, HOFamer, however, even without the "eye test," there's no comparison between the two. Loma is special level talent. (now I read a thousand accusations of "liar" and "dickrider" and "KKK member" )
    Nobody needs to accuse you. You expose yourself.

    You use the fake thing of how fast, because you are presenting a fake argument because you are fake. They are the same age, they fought for titles on the same day, Loma lost. Get at me when Crawford loses to someone with 14 losses. Won’t happen.

    So you’ll come back and excuse his loss because “so fast” about a 26 year old man with over 400 fights. You’ll talk about another fake number of 2 pro fights. Ignoring the 6 pro fights he had with WBS. Ignoring that he was an amateur so long because he was PAID TO FIGHT as an amateur too. So fast builds him and is also plot armor for him. Because it is a plot, it’s not truth, it’s a story. So of course you’re here to tell it.

    Tell us how he’s small too because I’d like to see you make all the fake points
    I know for a fact you wont know who these people are (I don't give a fuck how old you are, means nothing on boxing forums, middle-aged men are just as moronic as kids) If Crawford fought Nate Campbell, Juan Diaz, Joan Guzman or Edwin Valero in his first few fights, is there a chance he'd have lost?
    3-Time SADDO PREDICTION COMP CHAMPION.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    58,200
    Mentioned
    509 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2973
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    OK hate on Loma for getting a title shot immediately, then where's the hate for Guillermo Rigondeaux for getting one so quickly? Where's the hate for Zhou Shiming?

    Lomachenko was a stud amateur. Being a stud amateur doesn't mean for certain you'll be any good at all as a pro, but Loma has delivered on the big stage. If anything staying in the amateurs SHOULD have limited his development as a fighter not made him better.

    There have been plenty of "Golden Boys" out there, cash cows who get fat off of bums and then fold when the going gets tough...that's not Lomachenko. He's a good fighter as far as record goes and a great fighter by what I've seen in the ring, but that is a label you place on someone at the end of their career so as of now I can only say he LOOKS great in fights but he's yet to become a great fighter, we'll see what happens.

    Who should he have fought by now? People hating on him think he's picking his opponents because he can beat them? Floyd did that his entire career and BLATANTLY later on in his career, but he's still great. I don't see the need to put down Bud Crawford either he's a heck of a figther too, Bud being phenomenal and Loma being phenomenal aren't mutually exclusive. Errol Spence is damn impressive too!


    Bottom line, Lomachenko is an exciting fighter and people (not just the hardcore fans) love watching him work in the ring....enjoy it.
    "Drown in a vat of whiskey.....death where is thy sting?" - W.C. Fields.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    On the levee
    Posts
    38,395
    Mentioned
    331 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    4711
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Why I’m hard on Loma, fair or foul?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenster View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Spicoli View Post
    Loma from the get go was about instant super stardom and all the rewards from fighter to promoter that came with it. I don't see this particular racism angle in regards to Crawford v Loma. Honestly I wasn't fond of Loma and the microwave type push he had rolled out to him based on Amatuer and Gold medal accolades from the beginning. It was surreal to see a guy handed a title shot as headliner on HBO in only his second 'pro' fight. He was HBO ppv in debut. I remember De La Hoya making his post Gold medal debut as some 6 rounder v the guy running the beer stand at the Great Western Forum. But honestly and with respect to some ok'ish guys over his first year..you could have skipped them all and gone 1-0 right into his 1st trinket too. It's padding as much as it's a normal mostly excepted process for a fighter of high caliber to showcase..market..grow seats and fans before having it handed a trinket on a silver platter. The learning craft and honing skills feels secondary for some early on. No sane individual can deny Lomas skill and he is very much a pleasure to watch aside from some clowning and mocking from time to time. But rarely if ever has a fighter been given the opportunities, for the sake of a promoter too, that he has been given. Every record in history can be torn apart but truth be told aside from Walters and Russell Jr, Linares on the rebound just to get ko'd next, where were these fresh undefeated top division threats he vanquished. Rigo again two divisions is two divisions. Feel the same way about it as with Mikey up for Spence, Brook up for GGG so on and so forth. I don't mind Loma at all but make no mistake right now he and Arum more so are about collecting trinkets, not being involved in super fights.
    Loma's had it "handed on a platter?" If what he's done is so "easy" why haven't others done it? Why waste their time with all the training camps and obligations whilst receiving peanuts when they can jump in the deep end? He's not half the star in America guys like Oscar was when he turned pro. There are literally dozens of American fighters who could CHOOSE Loma's path and get the same TREATMENT from Bob, Eddie, Al, Oscar, any top promoter.

    You'd prefer Loma had "earned" a title shot by having 15-20 fights against the guy who runs the beer stand? Then maybe a championship rated fighter or two - like Ramirez - before the alphabet org allowed him the honour of paying for a shot?

    He didn't bypass "learning the craft and honing skills" against club fighters because he was "handed it on a silver platter," the risk/gamble paid off. He proved to be the real deal, not just an outstanding amateur.

    Robeisy Ramirez? Heard of him? Two-time olympic gold medalist? Massive bidding war between promoters to sign him, went with Bob. Last month he got knocked down 30 seconds into his debut and lost the fight against a 4-2-2 hotdog seller.
    Yes handed on a platter. The immediate championship opportunity that is. I didn't say easy, not his opposition not his dedication...but the professional doors afforded and maybe I'm thick..ok I'll spot you that one.. but I don't think their are dozens that could simply dictate demands for roll out multi title shots as they please. Let alone be literally promised a title fight by a 2nd pro start. Even if you lose, you'll get matched for it again right away v a guy not even ranked by say the Ring. What fighter doesn't have risk/reward. And it paid off on the second try. Loma was fortunate to have outside guarantees from the fat cats. He is the exception..in skill as well as his professional start.

    Yeh maybe I'm old fashion but I like a guy to build up. Not talking 20-30 gimmes but what is so wrong with a guy regardless of stature actually being required to have a few fights where the lights are a little less blinding. Loma in a way is a representation of our want for immediate gratification and how the sport has changed exposure and media wise. Beer vendors have to work to. Journeymen and contenders have to eat too. Guys like Narciso Valenzuela have to make money grubbers like Bob Arum choke on those hot dogs for a split second when they drop Oscar on his arse. And fans of every ilk want to see the next coming. Oscar may have been huge coming out but guys then didn't have the easy amatuer fan following and point and click of today. Fans would have called foul if an Oscar would have been allowed to jump right into a title. Shat you can't even get fans to find a consensus on what actually constitutes a 'pro' fight vs an amatuer bout today. But I get it..times change and honestly man I'm not hating on the individual or faulting the man for maximizing advantages and shooting for history. Jebus the last thing I want is to defend trinket syndicates or fooking Oscar types but yeh if you're whole thing is covering yourself in those same trinkets like a gawdy Christmas tree than why shouldn't one be expected to get in line. What I want from a guy many are calling an all time great ffs are career defining fights. More so for fans, a super fight but as of late Arum looks content of some big showcases where Loma as expected will dazzle.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-23-2016, 01:50 AM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-14-2012, 05:42 PM
  3. Hopkins vs Dawson NO FOUL?!
    By outspoken in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 10-18-2011, 04:31 PM
  4. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-23-2011, 11:11 AM
  5. Replies: 56
    Last Post: 01-11-2007, 07:00 AM

Bookmarks

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  





Boxing | Boxing Photos | Boxing News | Boxing Videos | Boxing Forum | Boxing Books | Boxing Posters | Learn to Box | Advanced Fighting Methods | Boxing Rankings | Boxing Schedule | Auctions | Fun and Games | Boxing Equipment

Copyright © 2000 - 2019 Saddo Boxing - Boxing