A lot of people believe that a fighter cannot achieve greatness unless he comes back from a loss. Even the man considered to be the best boxer that ever lived, "Sugar" Ray Robinson, had his share of losses. Do you agree that a fighter cannot be considered great until he shows the ability to come back from defeat?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Do You Have to Lose a Fight to be Considered Great?
Collapse
-
-
Hell no. You don't even have to LOOK like you're about to lose, if you're THAT good, you're that good. Just fight everybody.(Yeah, that goes for you, Mayweather!)
Comment
-
-
If you fight the best fighters available and still don't lose (ala Marciano) then in my opinion you don't need to lose to be considered great.
But for most boxers, if they fight all the top challengers available they will eventually lose by the law of averages.
Comment
-
Originally posted by !! SiN View PostA lot of people believe that a fighter cannot achieve greatness unless he comes back from a loss. Even the man considered to be the best boxer that ever lived, "Sugar" Ray Robinson, had his share of losses. Do you agree that a fighter cannot be considered great until he shows the ability to come back from defeat?
Comment
-
if you are fighting the best out there then you will lose no matter how good you are. if you duck fighters and are a coward thats how you stay undefeated.
Comment
-
in a way i agree with that satement. thats because i believe that if a fighter is able to comeback from a loss and win the rematch, is because he has become stronger and that also proves that he is mentally strong enough to overcome from a defeat, something that not everyone can do.
but of course, if a guy fought the best out there and always won, then there is no doubt that his greatness is obvious :P
But i think that like RagingBull said, by the law of averages, if you fight all the best out there you eventually should lose.
Its like tennis, even federer loses :P...hahaha
Comment
Comment