I often get the impression that certain trainers get put on a pedestal, as if they're somehow superior individuals to the actual fighters they train.
A fighter pays a trainer for his services, not the other way around. If you're a trainer, your role is to pass information on to a fighter so that the fighter can improve his skills and techniques. However, that information and those skills are the subjective opinion of the trainer - they don't always get it right, and they don't always benefit the boxer as each fight transpires, as we've seen in many cases over the years - McGirt and Malignaggi, Steward and Taylor, Roach and Khan, Hatton and Graham to name a few prolific examples.
The fighter is the one who performs all the real work, putting themselves through rigorous training, often spending weeks away from family in seclusion, and finally putting themselves at risk by entering the ring to face the opponent.
But that's my own opinion. Who do you think deserves more respect, the fighter or the trainer?
A fighter pays a trainer for his services, not the other way around. If you're a trainer, your role is to pass information on to a fighter so that the fighter can improve his skills and techniques. However, that information and those skills are the subjective opinion of the trainer - they don't always get it right, and they don't always benefit the boxer as each fight transpires, as we've seen in many cases over the years - McGirt and Malignaggi, Steward and Taylor, Roach and Khan, Hatton and Graham to name a few prolific examples.
The fighter is the one who performs all the real work, putting themselves through rigorous training, often spending weeks away from family in seclusion, and finally putting themselves at risk by entering the ring to face the opponent.
But that's my own opinion. Who do you think deserves more respect, the fighter or the trainer?
Comment