Rumored Lopez vs Lomachenko 2

This is an odd tone to take when you just said Lomachenko would have easily won if he just started earlier.
Its over his head. He's busy trying to play remedial inception with a fight that already had a definitive outcome.
 
How is it an odd tone? I stated my analysis of it and was told by two people who were completely wrong in their analysis that it wasn't the case. If Lomachenko opens up sooner, we saw he was more skilled, the statistics show it. He would have taken more rounds. Outside of the retardation that is corrupt judging in boxing, he easily coasts away with that fight. Lopez keeps it relatively competitive. But being competitive doesn't mean you win the rounds. It's that simple.

You're whining about people being haters and lacking objectivity right after saying that a guy who conclusively lost would have won easily if he started a few rounds earlier. Some might call that inconsistent. I'd probably just call it funny.
 
You're whining about people being haters and lacking objectivity right after saying that a guy who conclusively lost would have won easily if he started a few rounds earlier. Some might call that inconsistent. I'd probably just call it funny.
I don't agree he conclusively lost, I think it was a draw tbh.

Why else are people interested in a fucking rematch? LOL
 
Loma haters = watching the fight and accepting the official results. That's how sensitive you are. If you got off your knees for 2 seconds and backed away from Loma you one day may be able to accept reality too. He lost the fight .
Would of could of should ofs dont mean anything kid. "If Loma started earlier he would of won" ...no different than saying "if Lopez finished like he started it would of been a shut out. "

You're right, Canelo dominated Floyd and GGG, said so on the scorecards.

shut the hell up lmao
 
I don't agree he conclusively lost, I think it was a draw tbh.

Why else are people interested in a fucking rematch? LOL

There are any number of reasons why people might want a rematch, even if Lopez clearly won. It was a close fight. Lomachenko was a top p4p fighter with a pretty vocal following (particularly online). Lomachenko had only lost once before in fairly controversial fashion. Lomachenko is still an elite LW. It's an in-house fight (now that Lopez appears to have dropped any delusions about going with Triller). The reasons can go on and on.

I do fail to see how someone could see Lomachenko winning easily on that particular night if he just started a little earlier. It was near consensus before the fight that Lopez was going to be extremely dangerous for the first 4 rounds and that Lomachenko was going to ease into the fight slowly. Now I agree he was overcautious, but the gameplan, at least on that night, was always going to involve Lomachenko easing into the fight and staying away early. When Lomachenko did turn it up, he wasn't exactly dominating from round 7 onwards even if he was getting rounds, and Lopez still had enough in the tank to emphatically win round 12 when Lomachenko really did go all out.

Maybe Lomachenko can win a rematch easily with a completely different approach, but with the way Lomachenko was always going to approach the fight on that night, and the way Lopez responded, winning easily was never in the cards for Lomachenko, even if he started in round 4 or 5 instead of 7. In fact, there's a certain amount of credence in the thought that things might have gone very poorly for Lomachenko had he started earlier.
 
Last edited:
You're right, Canelo dominated Floyd and GGG, said so on the scorecards.

shut the hell up lmao

Which trio of scorecards showed that Canelo dominated either guy?
 
Which trio of scorecards showed that Canelo dominated either guy?

118-110 by Byrd in the GGG fight

I don't think there was one that showed he dominated the Floyd, there was the 114-114 tho lmao, official score card.
 
118-110 by Byrd in the GGG fight

I don't think there was one that showed he dominated the Floyd, there was the 114-114 tho lmao, official score card.

What were the other scorecards and the official results?
 
Last edited:
Oh damn, you're being for real, lol
{<jordan}


Do I have a fan? Lol, how flattering.


What happened to this?
Bro, admit it.... you're just scared "how fast someone replies your posts."







...whatever that means...
 
Last edited:
Loma will need to get to work sooner. I don't doubt his engine but he is fighting as his ceiling weight, whereas Lopez is fighting at his starting weight (more or less). Lomachenko is past the peak age of 30 for a high output guy who applies energy and movement to pressure his opponent.

Loma needs to remove Lopez's ability to control range with his left hand by contesting it with his own lead right, and by turning him. Loma usually angles with his feet on the exit more than on the entry. Entering he uses, speed, timing, combos, and head movement, but he'll need to get the better angle.coming in with his feet. Lopez was content to post up and reposition, keeping Loma between his gloves.

It's an interesting fight. It's on Lomachenko to make the adjustments to win. Lopez can and probably will show up in the same way (unless he saw something and intends to blitz early).
 
You're right, Canelo dominated Floyd and GGG, said so on the scorecards.

shut the hell up lmao
Why even watch the fights at this point... just make your own narratives based off your attraction.
Cry some more. Its entertaining
 
118-110 by Byrd in the GGG fight

I don't think there was one that showed he dominated the Floyd, there was the 114-114 tho lmao, official score card.
But don't let your flat earth mentality distract you from the fact that the right guy won both of those fights.
 
There are any number of reasons why people might want a rematch, even if Lopez clearly won. It was a close fight. Lomachenko was a top p4p fighter with a pretty vocal following (particularly online). Lomachenko had only lost once before in fairly controversial fashion. Lomachenko is still an elite LW. It's an in-house fight (now that Lopez appears to have dropped any delusions about going with Triller). The reasons can go on and on.

I do fail to see how someone could see Lomachenko winning easily on that particular night if he just started a little earlier. It was near consensus before the fight that Lopez was going to be extremely dangerous for the first 4 rounds and that Lomachenko was going to ease into the fight slowly. Now I agree he was overcautious, but the gameplan, at least on that night, was always going to involve Lomachenko easing into the fight and staying away early. When Lomachenko did turn it up, he wasn't exactly dominating from round 7 onwards even if he was getting rounds, and Lopez still had enough in the tank to emphatically win round 12 when Lomachenko really did go all out.

Maybe Lomachenko can win a rematch easily with a completely different approach, but with the way Lomachenko was always going to approach the fight on that night, and the way Lopez responded, winning easily was never in the cards for Lomachenko, even if he started in round 4 or 5 instead of 7. In fact, there's a certain amount of credence in the thought that things might have gone very poorly for Lomachenko had he started earlier.

I'm not defending the cards or Lomachenko's strategy in the first fight. Anyway, Lomachenko usually starts early to get a feel for his opponent. He'll know when to step or shift weight, for example (duh, that's easy to spot). That will be out of the way in the rematch, and part of the reason a rematch is so interesting (to me anyway). That being said, I've been seeing a lot of bullshit verdicts on the cards lately, so I hope it ends in a finish, one way or the other. Judges are broken these days (I.e. the lopsided card for Charlo in his latest fight). They wreck the important fights,or screw prospects way too often in age where you aren't allowed to lose.

I don't think Lomachenko needs to do anything drastically different, but rather be mindful or how much he does, and when he does it. Lopez needs to make less changes, which sometimes means that such a fighter won't. We'll see. I don't have a prediction.

The longer it goes the better it will be for Lopez. I know that much.
 
I'm not defending the cards or Lomachenko's strategy in the first fight. Anyway, Lomachenko usually starts early to get a feel for his opponent. He'll know when to step or shift weight, for example (duh, that's easy to spot). That will be out of the way in the rematch, and part of the reason a rematch is so interesting (to me anyway). That being said, I've been seeing a lot of bullshit verdicts on the cards lately, so I hope it ends in a finish, one way or the other. Judges are broken these days (I.e. the lopsided card for Charlo in his latest fight). They wreck the important fights,or screw prospects way too often in age where you aren't allowed to lose.

I don't think Lomachenko needs to do anything drastically different, but rather be mindful or how much he does, and when he does it. Lopez needs to make less changes, which sometimes means that such a fighter won't. We'll see. I don't have a prediction.

The longer it goes the better it will be for Lopez. I know that much.

I'm actually on board with the idea that Lopez could come in complacent and over-confident, even if I'm mostly basing that on him and father's demeanour. I see it as a winnable fight for Lomachenko (he can't just cede 5 or 6 rounds like the first fight, granted), but I don't think he can really do things drastically different. Engaging with Lopez early will always be very dangerous. He has to make the rounds down the stretch count a lot more next time.
 
You did check the scorecards...We all did.
What do fights with 1 bad card but ultimately the right decision have to do with Lopez Loma.
There was no scoring controversy. Your own argument is Loma chose to give away 6 rounds because he's such a great guy.

You believe it to be the right scorecard, I can freely disagree. I gave Loma 6 rounds and the statistics show it :p
 
You believe it to be the right scorecard, I can freely disagree. I gave Loma 6 rounds and the statistics show it :p
Fights aren't fought on paper and scoring is subjective. You have statistics for ALL the scoring criteria???
Nerds counting punches in slow motion replay is not how fights are scored or how winners are determined.
 
Fights aren't fought on paper and scoring is subjective. You have statistics for ALL the scoring criteria???
Nerds counting punches in slow motion replay is not how fights are scored or how winners are determined.

That doesn't mean bad decisions don't exist
 
Back
Top