Loma is a p4p champ and #Biased/#NewMedia doesn't like it

[Curt Henning]

I apply the same rules at all times. I am consistent! You can't possibly deduce who my favorite fighter is (or even if I have a favorite fighter in the first place).

show me a reply or thread where you apply objectivity to defend canleo, floyd, ward or cotto and i will take back what i said and aplogize

[Tom Cruise]

Lomachenko is P4P number 1 because if him vs any other fighter were the same size and weight, then he would win.

And we have enough evidence to say that is true

I dont think thats how most people grade P4Panymore tbh. Way too difficult.

Whats the point in asking the question of how Anthony Joshua (250lbs) and Wanheng Menayothin (105lbs) would look if they were same size? Impossible question.

For me, its about resume, with a healthy dose of 'what have you done for me lately'.

[Mr Objecitivity]

show me a reply or thread where you apply objectivity to defend canleo, floyd, ward or cotto and i will take back what i said and aplogize

It all depends on the criticism. If any of those boxers are unfairly criticized, then I will defend them.

[Mr Objecitivity]

I dont think thats how most people grade P4Panymore tbh. Way too difficult.

Whats the point in asking the question of how Anthony Joshua (250lbs) and Wanheng Menayothin (105lbs) would look if they were same size? Impossible question.

For me, its about resume, with a healthy dose of 'what have you done for me lately'.

I think the best way to establish the best P4P is by checking who has the best combination of offense + defense statistically. That is, who gets hit less in their division against the best possible opponents and who lands the most effective punches in total against the best possible opponents. That's how boxing 'skill' is established. The boxer with the best offense + defense should be ranked P4P number 1. Especially when two boxers have a resume that is of similar quality.

[LADIV]

We all have seen the videos come by now... Lomachenko detractors bashing every win he's got and making one excuse after the other excuse...

Fact is Lomachenko is the only one who beat a fellow p4p fighter and dominated him and made him quit... with skill, not size.

I thought it was a 50/50 fight and Most of the #NewMedia said Rigo would destroy Loma and he would NEVER quit, and look what happened once again..

Got ridiculous comments like 'yeah well if Lomachenko is so great why wont he go and fight Crawford at 147'. These guys are so desperate to see Loma lose again they want him to go up to fight a dude who is 20lbs bigger than him c'mon now lmao

You guys of the #Newmedia cant take your L's like a man... just as bad as all the Wardhaters and Kov Fanboys you called out, and probably even worse sore losers.

Am i the only one who thinks they just hate to see a european fighter at the top of the sport with great boxing skills?

No one is #1 p4p undisputed rn but Loma, Crawford, GGG and Canelo all can make claim to p4p, its between them at this moment.

The big youtubers are spreading lies and it's hurting boxing... it has become one big racial war, full off people who make it their own personal race war. Outright Disgusting.

Let's start with the excuse that Rigo was too small and inactive... these same people will claim Gamboa as a great win for Crawford (who is probably their #1 p4p), but yet he came up in weight too and was more beaten on size as he was stopped after being knocked down a few times... while Loma made rigo quit with embarassing him with his speed and skill.

Secondly "ohh yeah Walters was way too inactive, had a long lay off"
Another ridiculous excuse... Walters had a similar and even slightly longer lay off before and Ko'd the dude he was fighting. He had long lay offs regularly. And people also must tend to forget thst gamboa (Great win for terence) came off an even longer lay off than Walters... yet that isnt mentioned? A bit weird isnt it ?

Then Lastly Gary Russel was too green ? Hmmm...okay yet i've heard these same people calling Barrera a great win for Ward when Barrera hadnt faced anyone yet and became notable later. Russel became WBC Featherweight champion after the Loma loss and is one of the best in the division rn. So how was he too green but Barrera wasn't ?

All of it is hypocritical... both Lomachenko and Crawford are great fighters and belong at the top of the p4p list. The same Excuses are made by both sides.. and it's getting ridiculous. Just give both boxers their due props.

Okay rant over.

wtf...too much time needed to read all this

[Curt Henning]

It all depends on the criticism. If any of those boxers are unfairly criticized, then I will defend them.

sou you havent defended any of them applying objectivity? no trace anywhere huh?

just what i suspected lol

ill tell you what...ill give you some more time to run a search and u can show me a thread of you defending cotto, floyd ward or canelo using objectivity.....ill wait a littl bit....go ahead

[Pigeons]

Though I have him at #1, he just beat a tiny guy that came up 2 divisions. I can see why some are hesitant. There's legit arguments for GG and Crawford. Personally, I see Loma as #1.

Your thread might be more compelling if you weren't the troll that just accused Mikey Garcia of going to 140 to avoid Loma. Seriously ******.

There are absolutely zero arguments for Golovkin. His best win is Danny Jacobs by one point.

[Tom Cruise]

I think the best way to establish the best P4P is by checking who has the best combination of offense + defense statistically. That is, who gets hit less in their division against the best possible opponents and who lands the most effective punches in total against the best possible opponents. That's how boxing 'skill' is established. The boxer with the best offense + defense should be ranked P4P number 1. Especially when two boxers have a resume that is of similar quality.

Nah because I could fight my nan 6 times and get good +/- scores (she'd land though no doubt, mean left hook), wouldnt make me p4p no.1

Have to take into account resume. Who you beat > how well you beat them. If two guys have similar resume's then performance level matters more.

Edit: didnt read the last sentence there. Yeah performance level matters when you got similar resumes. But I wouldnt look too much into +/- stats tbh. Use your eyes, they are just as good as the guys pushing buttons for Compubox

[Tom Cruise]

There are absolutely zero arguments for Golovkin. His best win is Danny Jacobs by one point.

If you scored the Canelo fight for him, like I and many others did, then its perfectly reasonable. I have him and Canelo 1 and 2 respectively. That was a great fight fought at the highest level.

Loma and Crawford dont have particularly strong resume's either. Best wins are Postol and Walters...

[Mr Objecitivity]

Nah because I could fight my nan 6 times and get good +/- scores (she'd land though no doubt, mean left hook), wouldnt make me p4p no.1

Have to take into account resume. Who you beat > how well you beat them. If two guys have similar resume's then performance level matters more.

This is why I specifically wrote: 'against the best possible opposition'.

So we compare like for like. Undefeated opponents of Joshua vs undefeated opponents of Terence Crawford and check their offensive + defensive stats against those similar level of opposition.