Getting "Exposed"

The nature of the game has changed. Boxers once fought- even at the peak of their careers- many times a year. It's why Sugar Ray Robinson has a record of almost 200 professional career wins. A boxer would routinely fight twice, maybe three times a month at one point. What did a loss mean, then? If you were to get beaten and come back with a big victory the next week. Now boxers may fight 50 times in their entire career. Undefeated records are as common as venereal diseases. A fighter may only fight once a year- and if that one fight is a loss- well then, that year just became a waste in the history books. You are "exposed" when you lose because in boxing today that might be the end of your career. I know it sounds insane but look at Floyd Mayweather. Most of his appeal is the air of invincibility his skills, and undefeated record, accord him. If he gets knocked out by De la Hoya do you think he'll be as respected? Or will his stock fall like Enron's in the boxing world? In today's sport boxers fight so much less that one or two losses make us view the fighter in a totally different light. It can change the way they are approached and their entire careers. The term is thrown around simply to justify the way people jump on and off the bandwagon of some boxers as their popularity rises and falls.

You could say Syd Vanderpool exposed Lacy's weaknesses though not everyone noticed. When Calzaghe fought Lacy everyone noticed!

What about 'expwned', is it okay to use that?

To me the word "exposed" means that a fighter gets his weakness or weaknesses shown to everyone for the first time. All fighters have a weakness. Some are harder to figure out than others.

Only a fool would say Louis was exposed the man was up in age, and had faced great fighters and proven himself many times over before Marciano. As far as Lacy goes, he was exposed. People thought he was great, was going to beat Calzaghe, and all sorts of other things (including many experts). And he was "exposed" as not being all those things. Lacy's situation speaks perfectly to the definition of exposed. How could Calzaghe have "exposed" Lacy? I had already "exposed" him by pointing out his flaws and how Calzaghe could exploit them. "People who thought he was great" don't know a "great" boxer when they see one. Most of Lacy's opponents just stood in front of him and got hit. Most of Wladimir Klitschko's opponents just stand in front of him and get hit. Some people say he is a "great" boxer too. They will tell you that the reason Klitschko's opponents don't do what they need to do to win is because Klitschko prevents them in some way. That is just hogwash, but until he faces somebody who isn't afraid of him, we will just have to wait until he gets "exposed."

How many times do we see the knuckleheads in the peanut gallery commenting on who has just been "exposed?" Did Joe Louis get "exposed" by Rocky Marciano? Did Jeff Lacy get "exposed" by Joe Calzaghe? People who know boxing don't ever use that term "exposed" because they know boxing well enough to know in advance that Joe Louis was shot. They also know that Jeff Lacy was a dumbass headhunter who was about to be given a boxing lesson by one of the fastest super-middleweights in the history of boxing. Next time you see the term "exposed" you will know that the guy using it has just exposed himself as a first class knucklehead! i agree. I HATE the word exposed, it pisses me off. Its used waaaay to much on this place

Maybe I didn't type it right, but when Lennox Lewis was hit with a hardshot by vitali in their fight, he clinched so he didn't get knocked down. Thats what I mean by taking hardshots, people tend to clinch real quick so they don't get hit anymore with another one. Yeah that's a little different but I think I know what you mean now .

Not everyone knew that, they only realized that after the fight. If they didn't then the odds wouldn't have been 50/50. I forget the betting odds but I think I heard they were 50/50 giving credit to both fighters. And it's all about heart mostly. Your chin is your heart. If you believe you can take that punch you can physically. The whole point of boxing is to land more then your opponent without leting them land on you. Some people have great chins taking hard shots, but most of the time when you see a guy take a really hard shot he starts to clinch so he doesn't lose the fight. No if you get hit right you go down it doesn't matter what you think about it . When you get hit all that warrior stuff goes away for a sec then you shake it off and if you have the heart for it go back for more .

ponce de leon vs gerry penalosa. how do you explain a supposed to be 21-1 odds favorite, fighting an old, semi-retired boxer two weight class below, only to be given a boxing lesson (and gift decision) exposed.

Here's a recent example: Jason Litzau was looking pretty much unstoppable. He was exposed and his unbeaten run came to an end when he got knocked silly by Hernandez. It doesn't destroy the worth of Litzau, it just means he's going to have to be better next time because his chin and defense is no longer beyond question.

How many times do we see the knuckleheads in the peanut gallery commenting on who has just been "exposed?" Did Joe Louis get "exposed" by Rocky Marciano? Did Jeff Lacy get "exposed" by Joe Calzaghe? People who know boxing don't ever use that term "exposed" because they know boxing well enough to know in advance that Joe Louis was shot. They also know that Jeff Lacy was a dumbass headhunter who was about to be given a boxing lesson by one of the fastest super-middleweights in the history of boxing. Next time you see the term "exposed" you will know that the guy using it has just exposed himself as a first class knucklehead! lol yeah Lacy kind of was as were a lot of other fighters but it doesn't count when they are at the point where they should be losing. If Hopkins were to lose a fight in the next year or two then fine he should start losing at some point it's only normal but if some one in his prime a 20 some thing year old is knocked cold in a few fights , out boxed easy, or shows a lack of fighting heart then yeah he was exposed. EDIT...You also don't have to lose a fight to be exposed . I know we have all seen a good fighter who come to find out can't deal with a southpaw jab but still ends up winning in the end. Or we've seen someone like Byrd fight Vitily and find out that he will have problems with big fighter that have good tech skills.

I disagree. Lacy was "exposed" to a degree because he was considered to be an unstoppable killing machine by many and the degree to which he was taken apart was astonishing, even for those who predicted it. On the other hand Louis wasn't "exposed" because his flaws were already well known. When you have a guy who seems to be unbeatable who is suddenly and unexpectedly shown to have a major weakness then yes, he is exposed. However this exposure happens far less frequently than the peanut gallery seems to think. For example people suggesting Hatton was "exposed" against Collazo was absurd. We knew that Hatton was hittable, especially by southpaws. So Collazo didn't expose anything. Exposure for a fighter is an extraordinary event, more so than a lot of people seem to think.