BoxRec

ReggieDiggs wrote:

tflanagan5 wrote:Beterbeiv is 29 already & has fought 0 guys with a winning record. He gots a big fight next, but with his resume I think its worth seeing what happens in that fight to suggest he's gonna be something big & even if he is he's got a short window @ his age.

Mekhontsev is 29 so he needs to sh!t or get off the pot soon too.

Hooper makes sense.

Gvozdyk (who I assume is who you're talking about) is 27 so he's more borderline.

Smith makes sense.

I'll take my 5 guys over these 5 guys on potential & overall pro accomplishments in boxing @ the end of the day all day every day lol.

And De La Cruz probably would be a excellent pro, but he's Cuban so he may not ever get a chance to fight pro unless he paddles to Florida @ night so idk why you'd even bring him up.

even at 30 these guys are fresh and have at least 8-9 years left in them at the top

the guy you have mentioned have acheived nothing apart from beating bums and journeymen, all the guys iv mentioned were top amatuers and have already looked good as pro

you also failed to mention Joe Ward , id rate him a probebly the best prospect on that list

8 or 9 years @ the top....okay. First off neither of those 29 year old guys are on top & I doubt they got nearly a decade @ the top when or if they get there just cuz most mfers aren't on top for a decade, successful amateur or otherwise.

And none of these guys have done much as pros so idk what you're talking about. Amateur accomplishments mean dick in the pro game, but I believe every guy you & I mentioned was a successful amateur. And I didn't mention Joe cuz he's an amateur too, but he'll probably turn pro unlike De La Cruz.[/quote]


Lomachenko shows that amateurs don't mean dick,

and how can you say amateurs dont mean anything but give the guys you mentioned credit for beating up bums and journeymen?

some of the guys you mentioned were top amateurs but not in the league of Mekhontsev,Beterbeiv,Ward,Cruz, Gvodsyk,

tflanagan5 wrote:Lomachenko shows that amateurs don't mean dick,

and how can you say amateurs dont mean anything but give the guys you mentioned credit for beating up bums and journeymen?

some of the guys you mentioned were top amateurs but not in the league of Mekhontsev,Beterbeiv,Ward,Cruz, Gvodsyk,

What I mean is you gotta reprove yourself @ the pro level. Vasyl did that. Maybe some of these other guys will to. Its not a gift or guaranteed though. To some extent I'd even suggest that for certain boxers (not naming any names mind you) who've become savvy @ winning that nutty ass amateur point system type fight that they could have a harder time adapting to the pro game so being a high level amateur could even be a disadvantage.

ALL THESE GUYS HAVE ONLY BEAT BUMS & JOURNEYMEN brother lol. I'd even say my guys have collectively probably beaten better bums & journeymen than the bums & journeymen your guys have beaten. But debating that seems silly so if nothing else its a wash in the bum & journeymen department.

ReggieDiggs wrote:

tflanagan5 wrote:Lomachenko shows that amateurs don't mean dick,

and how can you say amateurs dont mean anything but give the guys you mentioned credit for beating up bums and journeymen?

some of the guys you mentioned were top amateurs but not in the league of Mekhontsev,Beterbeiv,Ward,Cruz, Gvodsyk,

What I mean is you gotta reprove yourself @ the pro level. Vasyl did that. Maybe some of these other guys will to. Its not a gift or guaranteed though. To some extent I'd even suggest that for certain boxers (not naming any names mind you) who've become savvy @ winning that nutty ass amateur point system type fight that they could have a harder time adapting to the pro game so being a high level amateur could even be a disadvantage.

ALL THESE GUYS HAVE ONLY BEAT BUMS & JOURNEYMEN brother lol. I'd even say my guys have collectively probably beaten better bums & journeymen than the bums & journeymen your guys have beaten. But debating that seems silly so if nothing else its a wash in the bum & journeymen department.

Smith has beaten better opostion than any of the guys you named

Beterbiev has a knock out win over Silakh a former world title challenger, better than anything the guys youve named have done

they have changed the scoring in amateur boxing and Joe Ward and Cruz have also fought and looked great in the WSB

the guy you have named are good prospects but there not as proven or as good as the ones at 175

tflanagan5 wrote:

ReggieDiggs wrote:

tflanagan5 wrote:Lomachenko shows that amateurs don't mean dick,

and how can you say amateurs dont mean anything but give the guys you mentioned credit for beating up bums and journeymen?

some of the guys you mentioned were top amateurs but not in the league of Mekhontsev,Beterbeiv,Ward,Cruz, Gvodsyk,

What I mean is you gotta reprove yourself @ the pro level. Vasyl did that. Maybe some of these other guys will to. Its not a gift or guaranteed though. To some extent I'd even suggest that for certain boxers (not naming any names mind you) who've become savvy @ winning that nutty ass amateur point system type fight that they could have a harder time adapting to the pro game so being a high level amateur could even be a disadvantage.

ALL THESE GUYS HAVE ONLY BEAT BUMS & JOURNEYMEN brother lol. I'd even say my guys have collectively probably beaten better bums & journeymen than the bums & journeymen your guys have beaten. But debating that seems silly so if nothing else its a wash in the bum & journeymen department.

Smith has beaten better opostion than any of the guys you named

Beterbiev has a knock out win over Silakh a former world title challenger, better than anything the guys youve named have done

they have changed the scoring in amateur boxing and Joe Ward and Cruz have also fought and looked great in the WSB

the guy you have named are good prospects but there not as proven or as good as the ones at 175

Idk wtf you're talking about. The best guy I see Beterbiev beating is Rayco f#cking Saunders (23-20-2 at the time).

Dick measuring guys with 20 or less fights is a silly ass discussion almost 100% of the time I know that much brother. I'll concede your guys are ahead if Cloud takes a L in a month though otherwise comparing who's beaten more guys with winning records or less guys with losing records is a mundane & meaningless task. We'll see who's guys have better careers eventually.

he knocked Silakh out in the amateurs with headgear on and heavy gloves, do some research

tflanagan5 wrote:he knocked Silakh out in the amateurs with headgear on and heavy gloves, do some research

That ain't got sh!t to do with the bums & journeymen he's fought as a pro.

Who ever said middleweight obviously doesn't watch or understand boxing lol. I think it's clearly WW and it's not even close and kind of silly to discuss.


Guerrero
Garcia
Mattysse
Rios
Provodnikov
Marquez
Bradley
Peterson
Madaina
Khan
Broner
Pacquiao
Mayweather
Algieri
Thurman
Alexander
Herrera
Postol
Brooke
Porter
Jessie Vargas

Plus other talented guys like Terrence Crawford who could be testing the waters at 140 and 147 in the near future. No other divisions really come close when it comes to potential great matchups and overall talent. Every guy I mentioned here, except for a select few have tested the waters against at least one or multiple top guys of their division.

There isn't as much talent from 154-HW (6 divisions) combined than there is at 140 - 147. That makes the selection of any other division crazy to say the least, but people on here tend to reach so it's not much of a surprise when you take that into consideration.

ReggieDiggs wrote:

tflanagan5 wrote:he knocked Silakh out in the amateurs with headgear on and heavy gloves, do some research

That ain't got sh!t to do with the bums & journeymen he's fought as a pro.

How doesn't it? Hahaha

tflanagan5 wrote:

ReggieDiggs wrote:

tflanagan5 wrote:he knocked Silakh out in the amateurs with headgear on and heavy gloves, do some research

That ain't got sh!t to do with the bums & journeymen he's fought as a pro.

How doesn't it? Hahaha

Cuz amateur fights don't count towards your pro ranking. It ain't that complicated.

A lot of great Amateur fighters who weren't successful in the pros.

its doesnt count when related to points scoring system

however if you brutally knock some out with soft gloves on anf headgear than it is an acurate reflection of how things would go in the pro ranks

you should box sometime and find out

NateJR wrote:A lot of great Amateur fighters who weren't successful in the pros.

your points being?

hundreds of thousands of bad amatuers made bad pros. some good amatuers made bad pros

the vast majority of top fighters im talking 99% were either very good amateurs or turned pro so young they never gave themselves a chance to become top amatuers which they would have became

tflanagan5 wrote:its doesnt count when related to points scoring system

however if you brutally knock some out with soft gloves on anf headgear than it is an acurate reflection of how things would go in the pro ranks

you should box sometime and find out

No one gives a f#ck brother.

ReggieDiggs wrote:

tflanagan5 wrote:its doesnt count when related to points scoring system

however if you brutally knock some out with soft gloves on anf headgear than it is an acurate reflection of how things would go in the pro ranks

you should box sometime and find out

No one gives a f#ck brother.

i think you have issues

tflanagan5 wrote:i think you have issues

I think youre f#cking retarded so we got something in common @ least

ReggieDiggs wrote:

tflanagan5 wrote:i think you have issues

I think youre f#cking retarded so we got something in common @ least

well i make valid point, you just show bias

tflanagan5 wrote:

ReggieDiggs wrote:

tflanagan5 wrote:i think you have issues

I think youre f#cking retarded so we got something in common @ least

well i make valid point, you just show bias

Your "valid point" makes no sense towards any of these guys pro career progress which have largely been vs bums & journeymen which is what we were discussing before you randomly decided to include amateur fights as part of ones pro career wins. My only bias is I think the 147lb guys I mentioned who are all young guys who had successful amateur careers in their own right are gonna have better pro careers than the 175lb guys you mentioned who are receding hairline cats who had more successful amateur careers but than again if Jose Benavides & Frankie Gomez had stayed amateur til they were 27, 28 they'd probably have more successful amateur careers to.

NateJR wrote:Who ever said middleweight obviously doesn't watch or understand boxing lol. I think it's clearly WW and it's not even close and kind of silly to discuss.


Guerrero
Garcia
Mattysse
Rios
Provodnikov
Marquez
Bradley
Peterson
Madaina
Khan
Broner
Pacquiao
Mayweather
Algieri
Thurman
Alexander
Herrera
Postol
Brooke
Porter
Jessie Vargas

Plus other talented guys like Terrence Crawford who could be testing the waters at 140 and 147 in the near future. No other divisions really come close when it comes to potential great matchups and overall talent. Every guy I mentioned here, except for a select few have tested the waters against at least one or multiple top guys of their division.

There isn't as much talent from 154-HW (6 divisions) combined than there is at 140 - 147. That makes the selection of any other division crazy to say the least, but people on here tend to reach so it's not much of a surprise when you take that into consideration.

You make a great case for the welters

Your "valid point" makes no sense towards any of these guys pro career progress which have largely been vs bums & journeymen which is what we were discussing before you randomly decided to include amateur fights as part of ones pro career wins. My only bias is I think the 147lb guys I mentioned who are all young guys who had successful amateur careers in their own right are gonna have better pro careers than the 175lb guys you mentioned who are receding hairline cats who had more successful amateur careers but than again if Jose Benavides & Frankie Gomez had stayed amateur til they were 27, 28 they'd probably have more successful amateur careers to.[/quote]
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

sure it makes sense.

today amateurs getting closer and closer to pro boxing. no headgear, smaller gloves etc.

and the amateur boxing stars from yesterday doing real fine in pros, so there are lots of similaritys when you are a great amateur that you gonne be a great pro.

rigondeaux outclassing a p4p top 5 boxer in only his 13 or 14 fight.

vasyl being champion in his third fight.

berbetiev boxing cloud and being the favourite to win against cloud, berbetiev got like 5 fights and cloud like 17.

jushua looks strong......etc

there is no huge difference between boxing amateur and pro, what matters is 1 thing and thats SKILLS

tiny_acres wrote:

NateJR wrote:Who ever said middleweight obviously doesn't watch or understand boxing lol. I think it's clearly WW and it's not even close and kind of silly to discuss.


Guerrero
Garcia
Mattysse
Rios
Provodnikov
Marquez
Bradley
Peterson
Madaina
Khan
Broner
Pacquiao
Mayweather
Algieri
Thurman
Alexander
Herrera
Postol
Brooke
Porter
Jessie Vargas

Plus other talented guys like Terrence Crawford who could be testing the waters at 140 and 147 in the near future. No other divisions really come close when it comes to potential great matchups and overall talent. Every guy I mentioned here, except for a select few have tested the waters against at least one or multiple top guys of their division.

There isn't as much talent from 154-HW (6 divisions) combined than there is at 140 - 147. That makes the selection of any other division crazy to say the least, but people on here tend to reach so it's not much of a surprise when you take that into consideration.

You make a great case for the welters

no he made not half of the guys are light weltzerweights

Chepppaaa wrote:Your "valid point" makes no sense towards any of these guys pro career progress which have largely been vs bums & journeymen which is what we were discussing before you randomly decided to include amateur fights as part of ones pro career wins. My only bias is I think the 147lb guys I mentioned who are all young guys who had successful amateur careers in their own right are gonna have better pro careers than the 175lb guys you mentioned who are receding hairline cats who had more successful amateur careers but than again if Jose Benavides & Frankie Gomez had stayed amateur til they were 27, 28 they'd probably have more successful amateur careers to.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

sure it makes sense.

today amateurs getting closer and closer to pro boxing. no headgear, smaller gloves etc.

and the amateur boxing stars from yesterday doing real fine in pros, so there are lots of similaritys when you are a great amateur that you gonne be a great pro.

rigondeaux outclassing a p4p top 5 boxer in only his 13 or 14 fight.

vasyl being champion in his third fight.

berbetiev boxing cloud and being the favourite to win against cloud, berbetiev got like 5 fights and cloud like 17.

jushua looks strong......etc

there is no huge difference between boxing amateur and pro, what matters is 1 thing and thats SKILLS

The main problem here is the guys mentioned had most if not all their fights during the headgear era. Not to mention the scoring was different & the strategy you need for a 10mim fight vs the strategy you'd need in a 30min fight is different.

And let's not act like amateur success automatically equals pro success. The skills that win in amateur fights can fail you in the pros.

ReggieDiggs wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote:Your "valid point" makes no sense towards any of these guys pro career progress which have largely been vs bums & journeymen which is what we were discussing before you randomly decided to include amateur fights as part of ones pro career wins. My only bias is I think the 147lb guys I mentioned who are all young guys who had successful amateur careers in their own right are gonna have better pro careers than the 175lb guys you mentioned who are receding hairline cats who had more successful amateur careers but than again if Jose Benavides & Frankie Gomez had stayed amateur til they were 27, 28 they'd probably have more successful amateur careers to.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

sure it makes sense.

today amateurs getting closer and closer to pro boxing. no headgear, smaller gloves etc.

and the amateur boxing stars from yesterday doing real fine in pros, so there are lots of similaritys when you are a great amateur that you gonne be a great pro.

rigondeaux outclassing a p4p top 5 boxer in only his 13 or 14 fight.

vasyl being champion in his third fight.

berbetiev boxing cloud and being the favourite to win against cloud, berbetiev got like 5 fights and cloud like 17.

jushua looks strong......etc

there is no huge difference between boxing amateur and pro, what matters is 1 thing and thats SKILLS

The main problem here is the guys mentioned had most if not all their fights during the headgear era. Not to mention the scoring was different & the strategy you need for a 10mim fight vs the strategy you'd need in a 30min fight is different.

And let's not act like amateur success automatically equals pro success. The skills that win in amateur fights can fail you in the pros.

I know that i am on a forum with hard headed childish people who rarely wanna say they are wrong, when i have 0 problems to tell i was wrong when somebody convinces me, so my answer wont change anything for you, i know that.

but truth is, close the same reasons why amateur boxers win in amateurs are the same reasons why they win in the pros.

that is the reason why all these cubans mostly always win gold medals, why? because they are slick, athletic and fast.

and why do russions or ukraines wni a lot in amateur boxing, because they are physicly very strong, durable and punch hard.

and these amateurs guys than become good pros like rigondeaux, lara, hernandez, klitschkos, golovkin etc

and past and present, is the same, nothing changed. felix savon was a tall athletic strong big hard pucnhing heavyweight, who beat tua and so many other guys, who would become top guys and he would have been dangerous with every top pro heavyweight.

lewis was a star amateur and became a star heavyweight. and so many other examples.

percentags wise, star amateurs have a bigger chance becoming very succesful in the pros, than non star amateurs, whoever says otherwise is stupid, because the skills and athletic ability you need to outscore your opponent and land more and make em miss, are the same you need in pros. sure there are some differences here and there but overall it is one thing and thats BOXING

if you take a p4p ranking of now, you will see that most top boxers, were either great or real good amateurs

floyd
ward
bradley
rigondeaux
marquez
canelo
froch
klitschko
golovkin

all top amateurs, maybe short amateur career like marquez, but dude won like 34 out of 35 fights, so he was real impressiv

only pacquiao didnt have a great amateur career, becaus he needed money fast because of him being very poor, and started pro around 16 years

so there you have it 1 out of 10.....guess ia m right

No one is saying many of the top pros weren't great amateurs. All I said is not every great amateur becomes a top pro. You sure did type a bunch of sh!t to disagree with something I didn't say lol.

ReggieDiggs wrote:No one is saying many of the top pros weren't great amateurs. All I said is not every great amateur becomes a top pro. You sure did type a bunch of sh!t to disagree with something I didn't say lol.

yeah, but why type that? if something is too damn obvious, than only somebody stupid would type it down, like "a apple is a fruit"

sure not every single out of 1000 top amateurs becomes a top pro, that obvious, but there is a very high percentage that when you are a top amateur you become a top pro.

but that answer of yours is nothing new to me, people out here always like to arrange the things how they straight need