What fights are we missing?

859 posts / 0 new
Last post
Re: What fights are we missing?

Thank you so much! I have been getting into Panamanian boxers (not named Duran) recently, they are slick!

Re: What fights are we missing?

No problem!
I'll add more today!

Re: What fights are we missing?
Re: What fights are we missing?
Re: What fights are we missing?
Re: What fights are we missing?
Re: What fights are we missing?
Re: What fights are we missing?

Thank you so much again for adding all these fights!

Re: What fights are we missing?

My pleasure!

Re: What fights are we missing?

What's your prediction for the big fight tonight?

Re: What fights are we missing?

Obviously with his age and size advantage, Lomachenko is favoured to win.

Most of us are excited about this fight because both men are arguably going to face the toughest opposition in each of their careers, and because both men are the most decorated amateurs in modern boxing history.

No doubt this fight is going to be highly technical, but I don't think it will happen the way some people imagine.

Both Lomachenko and Rigondeaux are technicians with some unique styles. However, their unique styles are unlikely to be apparent in this fight, at least not immediately.

Sometimes, Rigondeaux is practically a left-handed fighter. Jabs are hard to land in southpaw-orthodox match-ups, so instead of trying to land his right jabs Rigodeaux just paws slowly with his right and lull his opponent into a slow rhythm, before jolting them with quick and hard left hand.

Rigodeaux's modus operandi is not going to be as effective here as Lomechenko himself is another southpaw.

Sometimes Rigodeuax's defense involves bending at the waist to avoid punches.

While bending at the waist gives you upper body mobility, it sacrifices feet mobility, which might be dangerous against an opponent like Lomachenko who is active at taking angles.

Lomachenko is a fighter with a very high output, which is partly why casuals embraced him while they denigrate Rigondeaux as boring. However, among Lomachenko's output, many of them are pitter-patter punches for Lomachenko hide his hard shots amidst a sea of light punches. Watch any highlight reels of Lomachenko, most of it will be him raining punches on an opponent desperately trying to cover up with a high guard. Many of his opponents intimidated by his high output just put up a high guard. Ironically, the more you cover up the more Lomechenko will batter you, for his light punches obscures vision (which is already obscured when you put up an earmuff) and distracts kinesthetic senses, allowing him to set up his hard shots which most opponents had no idea where it would come.

Lomachenko cannot intimidate Rigondeaux with such a strategy. Rigondeaux does not use a high guard, in fact I rarely see him ever use any kind of guard. Such was his mastery of distance. Furthermore, I think a master boxer like Rigondeaux should be able to tell when Lomachenko is bluffing with his hands and when Lomachenko is really going to punch hard. So if Lomachenko bluffed too much or too obviously with his pitter-patter punches he would be countered to death by Rigondeaux.

Another reason why Lomachenko is so beloved is his fancy footwork. The hype surrounding it is making me sick. 'Is this the matrix fighter from the future' et cetera. Right now I feel it is hard to tell how much of his footwork is substance and how much is flash. If I am not mistaken Gary Roach is somewhat of a critic of Lomachenko's footwork, and personally sometimes I feel he moved more than necessary. Lomachenko does showboat occasionally and do some unnecessary moves, he should not showboat against Rigondeaux. The downside of Lomachenko's angles and pivots is that if Rigondeaux sees them coming, Rigondeaux can time them and nail Lomachenko. I cannot think of a better time to nail Lomachenko than that, if Loamachenko got hit with a hard shot mid-pivot he can be knocked down.

For all the differences in their usual strategies they have one stunning similarity: absolute confidence in one's own ability and absolute disdain for their opponents'. Rigondeaux does this by fighting down to his opponent's level, doing the barest minimum to cruise to a decision he is 100% certain he will win. Lomachenko does this with his showboating, which puts him at unnecessary risk.

Ultimately, both fighters have such distinct styles because they are fighting against inferior boxers and almost all these boxers are orthodox fighters.

Long story short, expect the fight to start conventionally and both fighters to fight more conventionally for their usual styles or strategies will not be effective against each other. Southpaw-southpaw match-ups are basically orthodox-orthodox match-ups in mirror image, so that means a battle of right jabs at the beginning. Both fighters are counter-punchers at heart, so whoever can bait the other to lead will have the upper hand.

I suppose one strategy that might work against Lomachenko is to run.

Uninformed casual fans call Rigondeaux a 'runner' but a runner he is not. Rigondeaux is extremely economical with his movements, he mostly takes small steps forward or backward or occasionally make pivots around his left foot.

If Rigondeaux really starts back-pedaling and move laterally with his back on the ropes he could give Lomachenko fits. Every boxing prospect or titlist looks awesome until the fans realise he cannot cut off the ring. Erislandy Lara gave Canelo fits simply because Canelo has no idea how to cut off Lara. As far as I am aware of in Lomachenko's short career so far his ring-cutting ability has not been really tested.

Of course, it is unlikely for Rigondeaux to break character and starts running, as Rigondeaux is a man of absolute integrity in his approach to boxing; he never breaks character. But if Floyd Mayweather could break character and fight Conor like a Mexican, why not Rigondeaux?

As to what strategies they will actually employ against each other, I have no idea. No doubt, this fight will involve a lot of feints. Feints are keys to finding out an opponent's habits and from there they can devise their own game plan. Just very generally speaking, which I think applies to just about every fight, whoever trained more appropriately and was smarter in the ring will come out of winner.

However, even if Rigondeaux proves to be the superior boxer he might still be overpowered by Lomachenko.

The Cuban is going up two weight classes, while he clearly bulked up physically whether his power and stamina carries up is another question. In recent memory, Juan Manuel Marquez fared disastrously when he climbed to meet Floyd Mayweather. We are far removed from the days of Harry Greb whipping opponents who outweighed him by like 20 pounds. If Rigondeaux cannot make Lomachenko respect his power, he is going to be in deep trouble. Rigondeaux is also pushing 40, and he is a smoker, plus he is climbing 2 weight classes, if he starts having stamina issues or starts slowing down he is a sitting duck.

Furthermore, there is that Bob Arum factor. The saying goes 'WBO' stands for 'Whatever Bob Orders'. If Arum somehow found a way to mess up Pacquiao-Horn scorecards as some boxing fans seem to believe, then Arum can potentially mess with the scoring of this fight too. My pessimistic gut feeling is that, if the fight does to a decision and if Rigondeaux does not dominate Lomachenko in a Donaire-esque performance then Rigondeaux will be badly screwed on the scorecards.

Which goes back to why I said Lomachenko is favoured to win.

However, I desperately want Rigondeaux to win this one. The man is an absolute maestro, the finest boxer to grace the pro scene since Floyd Mayweather. He left his entire life behind in Cuba just to pursue a career in the world of pro-boxing, and yet pro-boxing f***s him over. He put on a masterful performance against Nonito Donaire, only for be dismissed and insulted by reporters and his former promoter Bob Arum. They called him 'boring' and 'a pain in the ass to deal with' blah blah blah. Absolutely disgusting, reporters are supposed to understand the intricacies of boxing! How can watching a master ply his craft be boring? A promoter is supposed to promote his fighters! Arum's comments and actions against Rigondeaux are utterly disgraceful. Then there is all the ducking shenanigans, the Featherweight division is full of cowards who wanted no part of Rigondeaux.

On the other hand, I want to like Lomachenko but I am having a hard time liking him. The morbid marketing hype surrounding him and his fans who eat up the marketing wholesale is putting me off. He is not the greatest fighter since Muhammad Ali, he is not the next Pernell Whitaker, he is not a revolutionary fighter from the future. Dude only has 10 pro-fights under his belt, sure he is a two-divison world champion but titles come more easily in this era of alphabet soups, please stop comparing his greatness to all-time greats in the past when his career is still in its infancy. Lomachenko does have some interesting footwork, but cutting angles is nothing new under the sun, Orlando Canizales was doing it way before it was cool and I am sure there are even older fighters I do not know who can cut angles too.

If Rigondeaux beat Lomachenko, despite all the disadvantages, I would consider Rigondeaux Pound-for-Pound number one. If Lomachenko beats Rigondeaux, I would say good job he finally had a good name on his career.

I am really just ranting now, so I'll stop here.

Tl;dr-Both fighters fight conventionally, a good tactical battle, Lomachenko likely to win.

Re: What fights are we missing?

Easton zahradnik

Re: What fights are we missing?

Missing Haye vs. Maccarinelli and Haye vs. Fury should be removed

Re: What fights are we missing?

Please add:
Emile Griffith vs Joey Arhcer I
Jose Napoles vs Curtis Cokes I
Roberto Duran vs Ernesto Marcel
Ernesto Marcel vs Antonio Gomez
Orlando Canizales vs Kelvin Seabrooks I
Miguel Canto vs Kimio Furesawa
Charley Burley vs Oakland Billy Smith II
Hilario Zapata vs Fidel Bassa II
Hilario Zapata vs Shigeo Nakajima II
Eusebio Pedroza vs Pat Ford
Eusebio Pedroza vs Jorge Lujan
Eusebio Pedroza vs Cecilio Lastra
Eusebio Pedroza vs Spider Nemoto
Eusebio Pedroza vs Royal Kobayashi
Eusebio Pedroza vs Bernard Taylor
Eusebio Pedroza vs Johnny Aba
Eusebio Pedroza vs Bashew Shibaca
Eusebio Pedroza vs Jose Caba
Eusebio Pedroza vs Rocky Lockridge II
Eusebio Pedroza vs Juan Domigo Malvarez
Eusebio Pedroza vs Barry McGuigan
Eusebio Pedroza vs Tomas Rodriguez
Eusebio Pedroza vs Mauro Gutierrez

Sorry for being so demanding, but there's a lot of old fights I want to score (especially Pedroza's lengthy title reign). Thank you!

EDIT:added one more fight to my request list.

Re: What fights are we missing?

They might take a bit of time, but before too long, I'll add those fights.

Re: What fights are we missing?

Thank you.

Re: What fights are we missing?
Re: What fights are we missing?
Re: What fights are we missing?
Re: What fights are we missing?
Re: What fights are we missing?

Ryochi Taguchi vs Milan Melindo

Re: What fights are we missing?

Need Morales vs. Zaragoza given it's a significant crossroads fight between two hall of famers.

Re: What fights are we missing?

Manny Pacquiao - Jorge Eliecer Julio
Manny Pacquiao - Emmanuel Lucero
Manny Pacquiao - Serikzhan Yeshmagambetov
Manny Pacquiao - Fahsan 3K Battery
Manny Pacquiao - Tetsutora Senrima
Manny Pacquiao - Wethya Sakmuangklang
Manny Pacquiao - Reynante Jamili
Manny Pacquiao - Arnel Barotillo
Manny Pacquiao - Medgoen Singsurat
Manny Pacquiao - Chatchai Sasakul
Manny Pacquiao - Gabriel Mira
Manny Pacquiao - Todd Makelim
Manny Pacquiao - Chokchai Chockvivat
Manny Pacquiao - Acasio Simbajon

Re: What fights are we missing?

David Lemieux - Joachim Alcine
David Lemieux - Marco Antonio Rubio
David Lemieux - Fernando Guerrero
David Lemieux - Glen Tapia
David Lemieux - Cristian Fabian Rios
Danny Jacobs - Ishe Smith
Danny Jacobs - Giovanni Lorenzo
Danny Jacobs - Jarrod Fletcher
John Duddy - Howard Eastman
John Duddy - Billy Lyell
Amir Khan - Paul McCloskey
Omar Figueroa - Arturo Quintero
Kell Brook - Ionut Dan Ion
Joe Calzaghe - Stephen Wilson
Joe Calzaghe - Warren Stowe
John Molina - Martin Honorio
David Haye - Lolenga Mock

Re: What fights are we missing?

Lennox Lewis vs. Andrew "the GOAT" Golota. Short but significant fight, Bowe didn't want any of Lewis after this fight.

Re: What fights are we missing?

That ended inside 1 round, so that is a completely blank scorecard, waste of time.

Request denied.

Re: What fights are we missing?

There are other 1 round fights on the site that are significant e.g. Louis vs. Schmeling II, Tyson vs. Spinks. Maybe if Boxing Knowledge asks you then you will make it?

Re: What fights are we missing?

This site is what it is, any fights you want adding, where there is actually something to score, I will upload, but I do not do first round KOs, that's the deal. Do you have any fights which actually contain Data?

Re: What fights are we missing?

Ok then who should I talk to who would be willing to add it? Because someone added those other first round KO's

Re: What fights are we missing?

Ask anybody you like about adding pointless ones.
See what they say.

Re: What fights are we missing?

Don't make this all personal, this site is boxing discussion, and also scoring fights, you be the judge, a scorecard with no rounds is a blank one, it is that simple, why would I waste my time adding fights which can't contain any scores?

Re: What fights are we missing?

Because the fight represents a significant moment in a significant era of Heavyweight boxing? There is a good amount of discussion that can be made on the fight even with its length. Golota was held in high regard as a fighter even with his mental issues, the fight was a near pick-em betting line. There was even conversation before the fight on HBO about how Golota's jab was better than Lewis's and could be the best at heavyweight which would be unthinkable to say with today's hindsight. This fight put people on notice that Lennox Lewis was a legit player at Heavyweight even versus Holyfield and Bowe.

Re: What fights are we missing?

Again, if you have any fights which you can't make a scorecard out of, then I will happily add them, now you can not say that isn't reasonable.

Re: What fights are we missing?

Might as well remove Tyson vs. Spinks

Re: What fights are we missing?

Haha, you have a lot of time on your hands if you have what it takes to cry and fuss about trivial crap like this.

Re: What fights are we missing?

Well hopefully Boxing Knowledge wants it somewhere down the line so I can comment on it

Re: What fights are we missing?

What do you Americans call people who winge and moan about nothing? Bitches I believe.

Re: What fights are we missing?

If I was able to I'd add the fight myself, but I can't so I have to go through an unreasonable person such as yourself. To quote Boxing Knowledge "Please Sir, Can I Have Some More Porridge."

Re: What fights are we missing?

Could you please add Rungvisai versus Cuadras?

Re: What fights are we missing?

I will do shortly.

Re: What fights are we missing?

You may be interested in watching it, Rungvisai looks pretty limited. It was a while ago but it makes me lean more towards Chocolatito being ripe for the picking versus Rungvisai being some monster fighter.

Re: What fights are we missing?

Interesting. Rungvisai has 44 wins, 40 by knock out, he can punch!, but you make a good point, 3 lbs is a lot for a flyweight. I'll watch the fight.

Re: What fights are we missing?

Versus Cuadras he does hurt Cuadras at one point I remember, I think towards the beginning of the 4th but I could be wrong. The thing you have to take into account with Rungvisai's high KO percentage is that almost all of his fights were in Thailand, not to say those guys aren't tough, but they likely aren't anywhere near on the level of world contenders. The problem for Rungvisai in this fight is that he comes in on a straight line a lot without setting his punches up and/or cutting off the ring, Cuadras moves well most of the time both laterally and coming in and out to throw combinations for the majority of the fight. Rungvisai's limited success comes from crowding Cuadras occasionally and/or getting wild. It was in 2014 though so Rungvisai may have improved some instead of it being entirely Chocolatito being ripe for the picking.

Re: What fights are we missing?

I just added the fight.

Your talking from a critic's stand point, that isn't at all a bad thing, it is constructive, but he did not fight at that low a level, e.g, not a particularly high amount opponents with losing records, and he has an outstanding KO ratio, I'm not repeating my points, I'm saying, look at that number, that is a statistic you have time recognise. Gonzalez I think was 'Ripe for Picking' (good phrase) the second time, but in the first fight, he was facing a guy who stood out because of his power, and at that time, he was being ruined as a fighter, rather than that already being the case, that's why he lost an MD, then he got sparked in 4, I think.

I can't see Rungvisai vs Estrada live, very disappointed.

Re: What fights are we missing?

We'll have to agree to disagree about Rungvisai's opponents, a lot of Thai boxers have incomplete records on boxrec so it's hard to say what level they were all at, just that domestic Thai boxing is not as challenging as world contender level. I agree he has good power though and that Rungvisai beating on Chocolatito in the very first fight at least pushed Chocolatito over the edge of having too many miles on him to compete in the second fight.

I heard none of the UK channels were picking the card up which is a shame for you guys. There should be streams out there though but I don't know how you feel about that.

Pages