Robeisy Ramirez v Abraham Nova

Post Reply
Evander
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 13994
Joined: 07 May 2005, 16:49

Robeisy Ramirez v Abraham Nova

Post by Evander »

Ramirez has some talent, pretty slick boxer.
Nova held his own most of the time but when Ramirez follows through he can be effective.
Cent0089
Super Middleweight
Posts: 3481
Joined: 03 May 2013, 13:02

Re: Robeisy Ramirez v Abraham Nova

Post by Cent0089 »

That was very impressive win by Ramirez. Nova seems to be 2 weights above him, undefeated, with power.
DrDuke
Lightweight
Posts: 13873
Joined: 29 Nov 2017, 09:15

Re: Robeisy Ramirez v Abraham Nova

Post by DrDuke »

Nice fight, Ramirez bossed Nova. There was a huge gap in level. Nova worked a lot, but his output had almost no effect. The smaller Ramirez simply walked through Nova.
Cent0089
Super Middleweight
Posts: 3481
Joined: 03 May 2013, 13:02

Re: Robeisy Ramirez v Abraham Nova

Post by Cent0089 »

What about a title shot for Ramirez after this? ....Who are champs at 126? That division seems to be pretty dead to me
Ruthless-RKO
Welterweight
Posts: 101028
Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59

Re: Robeisy Ramirez v Abraham Nova

Post by Ruthless-RKO »

AngryGoon38
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1837
Joined: 10 Jun 2008, 14:51

Re: Robeisy Ramirez v Abraham Nova

Post by AngryGoon38 »

Cent0089 wrote: 19 Jun 2022, 02:55 That was very impressive win by Ramirez. Nova seems to be 2 weights above him, undefeated, with power.
That's Exactly what I was thinking, yesterday during the stare-down.
I couldn't get over the visual perspective pertaining to the Very Noticeable blatant size difference.
It Really looked like a smallish featherweight taking on a Big Lightweight.
What was they're in-ring weights..?
I would guess, Ramirez-132 Nova-142. :maybe:
Dioufy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7351
Joined: 16 Sep 2006, 23:09

Re: Robeisy Ramirez v Abraham Nova

Post by Dioufy »

Nova was huge for feather tbh; wouldn’t have been out of place at 135.

Ramirez looked the business… so it’s hard to know what level Nova is at. Just didn’t seem to fight with his natural attributes and I thought for a bigger guy his jab was very flicky.

Ramirez gonna be a handful for many a feather… no doubt. Would love to see a better work rate, mind.
margaret thatcher
Featherweight
Posts: 39225
Joined: 22 Jul 2019, 15:43

Re: Robeisy Ramirez v Abraham Nova

Post by margaret thatcher »

surprisingly nova was ahead on the cards, i thought it was 3-1 or even 4-0 ramirez, guess the judges didnt like rammy's low work rate even though he was way more accurate and landed pretty much every notable shot
DrDuke
Lightweight
Posts: 13873
Joined: 29 Nov 2017, 09:15

Re: Robeisy Ramirez v Abraham Nova

Post by DrDuke »

margaret thatcher wrote: 23 Jun 2022, 20:35 surprisingly nova was ahead on the cards, i thought it was 3-1 or even 4-0 ramirez, guess the judges didnt like rammy's low work rate even though he was way more accurate and landed pretty much every notable shot
It's laughable, Nova's workrate had almost no effect, he looked bothered and took more clean shots.
Dioufy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7351
Joined: 16 Sep 2006, 23:09

Re: Robeisy Ramirez v Abraham Nova

Post by Dioufy »

margaret thatcher wrote: 23 Jun 2022, 20:35 surprisingly nova was ahead on the cards, i thought it was 3-1 or even 4-0 ramirez, guess the judges didnt like rammy's low work rate even though he was way more accurate and landed pretty much every notable shot
Bollocks!
If Nova was ahead then jeepers! I had it 3-1 to RR and I tend to score negatively against Robeisy’s lurking, low punch output, smirking, hands down, pedo foot work style.
Clash of styles always hard to score but this wasn’t.
locoxelbox
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1124
Joined: 04 Oct 2004, 12:26

Re: Robeisy Ramirez v Abraham Nova

Post by locoxelbox »

I think Boxrec has it wrong. Ramirez was up 39-37 on two cards and one had 38-38. All judges gave Ramirez Rds 1 and 4. All judges gave Nova Rd 3.
margaret thatcher
Featherweight
Posts: 39225
Joined: 22 Jul 2019, 15:43

Re: Robeisy Ramirez v Abraham Nova

Post by margaret thatcher »

that would make more sense
Post Reply