Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Evander
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 14049
Joined: 07 May 2005, 16:49

Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by Evander »

Do you think we'll see them looking relatively the same physically ?
victor-romeo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1633
Joined: 18 Sep 2004, 22:29

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by victor-romeo »

No I saw A photo Rigondeaux hitting mitts profile shot , I think it was his left shoulder looked huge, Wonder what kind of diet he is on..
jamamb
Lightweight
Posts: 14329
Joined: 17 Sep 2017, 05:37

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by jamamb »

rigo looked a little bulkier than normal from the pad work i saw. standing next 2 each other loma several inches taller than rigo.
Evander
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 14049
Joined: 07 May 2005, 16:49

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by Evander »

Who's the referee ?
victor-romeo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1633
Joined: 18 Sep 2004, 22:29

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by victor-romeo »

This is going to be a good fight, I have hunch Rigo first going to try and blast Lomachenko out of there early. I wonder if Loma cut healed from his last fight? Also I don't recall seeing Loma fight another south paw this is going to be interesting...
Evander
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 14049
Joined: 07 May 2005, 16:49

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by Evander »

They'll let cuts go to a certain extent I would have thought.
Evander
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 14049
Joined: 07 May 2005, 16:49

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by Evander »

It's a P4P Ranking fight.
victor-romeo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1633
Joined: 18 Sep 2004, 22:29

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by victor-romeo »

Loma Currently a 3 to 1 betting favorite...that means the free market definitely thinks Rigo has a shot..
Evander
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 14049
Joined: 07 May 2005, 16:49

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by Evander »

Live out here.
NateJR
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1181
Joined: 03 Jul 2012, 19:58

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by NateJR »

Have a friend who's a photographer and he got a picture yesterday with Lomachenko, Rigodeaux and Crawford together. Rigondeaux looks quite a bit smaller and Lomachenko and Crawford looked closer to the same size.
Blodhemn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2848
Joined: 04 Jun 2006, 20:30

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by Blodhemn »

NateJR wrote: 08 Dec 2017, 08:12 Have a friend who's a photographer and he got a picture yesterday with Lomachenko, Rigodeaux and Crawford together. Rigondeaux looks quite a bit smaller and Lomachenko and Crawford looked closer to the same size.
:lol:

Loma is only taller than Rigo, while Rigo has wider shoulders and reach. The two are nearly the same size.

jamamb
Lightweight
Posts: 14329
Joined: 17 Sep 2017, 05:37

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by jamamb »

am i seeing the right pic?loma and craw dont at all look closer in size.and craw has much longer reach than loma but loma doesnt have longer reach than rigo.
Jip
Super Lightweight
Posts: 2518
Joined: 04 Nov 2016, 03:30

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by Jip »

victor-romeo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1633
Joined: 18 Sep 2004, 22:29

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by victor-romeo »

Blodhemn wrote: 08 Dec 2017, 19:23
NateJR wrote: 08 Dec 2017, 08:12 Have a friend who's a photographer and he got a picture yesterday with Lomachenko, Rigodeaux and Crawford together. Rigondeaux looks quite a bit smaller and Lomachenko and Crawford looked closer to the same size.
:lol:

Loma is only taller than Rigo, while Rigo has wider shoulders and reach. The two are nearly the same size.

:TU:
victor-romeo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1633
Joined: 18 Sep 2004, 22:29

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by victor-romeo »

This fight is going to be a real nice chapter in Lomachenko's narrative win lose or draw ...will take Loma one step closer to PPV land..
Mexi-Box
Welterweight
Posts: 3963
Joined: 24 Jan 2016, 16:19

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by Mexi-Box »

I thought weight would be an issue, but people have been overstating Rigondeaux being small. A small fighter would look chubby if he moved up, i.e. Josesito Lopez vs. Canelo. Rigondeaux looked like a damn tank. He has a longer reach than Lomachenko too.
Evander
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 14049
Joined: 07 May 2005, 16:49

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by Evander »

Lomachenko definitely bigger.
Can see the weight around Rigondeaux's stomach, he looks wider.
victor-romeo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1633
Joined: 18 Sep 2004, 22:29

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by victor-romeo »

Mexi-Box wrote: 08 Dec 2017, 20:49 I thought weight would be an issue, but people have been overstating Rigondeaux being small. A small fighter would look chubby if he moved up, i.e. Josesito Lopez vs. Canelo. Rigondeaux looked like a damn tank. He has a longer reach than Lomachenko too.
Tank is the right word. Rigo looks like a little tank, I could see him KO'ing Loma, not probable , but could see it happening, Rigo is desperate as he is getting old and needs some big paydays, and motiviated because he thinks he has been dissed by boxing.. so this great fighter will be motivated and focused. His big problem is that Rigo doesn't have much of chin and Loma can find him, so most likely Loma will win.
caldo2025
Super Welterweight
Posts: 4417
Joined: 16 Dec 2014, 07:37

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by caldo2025 »

Forget about the height and reach comparison, the biggest statistic to me is age. 37.....man, i never realized Rigo was THAT freaking old. And you know, he's most likely older than that because the Cuban's are notorious for mucking up ages of their athletes.

Nah, I don't see any way Loma loses this one now. I love all underdogs but this one might be quick and fizzle out.
Badhusker
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4902
Joined: 19 Jun 2010, 23:57

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by Badhusker »

caldo2025 wrote: 09 Dec 2017, 08:35 Forget about the height and reach comparison, the biggest statistic to me is age. 37.....man, i never realized Rigo was THAT freaking old. And you know, he's most likely older than that because the Cuban's are notorious for mucking up ages of their athletes.

Nah, I don't see any way Loma loses this one now. I love all underdogs but this one might be quick and fizzle out.
Even more than his age is the fact that he has only boxed 3 rounds in the last 3 years. I still hope he wins.
Ruthless-RKO
Welterweight
Posts: 101499
Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by Ruthless-RKO »

They just weighed in again..

Loma is 137.4 and Rigo is 130..
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45213
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

A fair amount of weight in lower weight classes.

| think the thing which is most against Rigondeaux is his economical style, it's likely to cost him the fight if it is anywhere near close.
squiggy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2094
Joined: 04 Feb 2008, 03:35

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by squiggy »

victor-romeo wrote: 08 Dec 2017, 20:30
Blodhemn wrote: 08 Dec 2017, 19:23
NateJR wrote: 08 Dec 2017, 08:12 Have a friend who's a photographer and he got a picture yesterday with Lomachenko, Rigodeaux and Crawford together. Rigondeaux looks quite a bit smaller and Lomachenko and Crawford looked closer to the same size.
:lol:

Loma is only taller than Rigo, while Rigo has wider shoulders and reach. The two are nearly the same size.

:TU:
Really changes the vibe of a staredown to have the hot chicks inches away from the fighters.
KiwiRider
Super Lightweight
Posts: 26525
Joined: 11 Feb 2017, 22:25

Re: Weigh In Friday ... Rigondeaux Lomachenko

Post by KiwiRider »

caldo2025 wrote: 09 Dec 2017, 08:35 Forget about the height and reach comparison, the biggest statistic to me is age. 37.....man, i never realized Rigo was THAT freaking old. And you know, he's most likely older than that because the Cuban's are notorious for mucking up ages of their athletes.

Nah, I don't see any way Loma loses this one now. I love all underdogs but this one might be quick and fizzle out.
There are rumours abound that Rigo is a year or two older than his listed age. A bit like Ortiz, can't be proven, but some things going back to both's amateur career don't add up :maybe:
Post Reply