why are losses so devastating in this era of boxing?

I notice people saying that if they lose, they should retire. What's with that? A loss isn't that big of a deal. It is when you have a big losing streak or if you are the bigger fighter and you can't win a single round against a fighter who jump two weight classes to fight you(pacquaio vs oscar).

I wonder the same thing... Cotto loses to Margarito and he's shot, mentaly unstable, lost something...Hatton loses twice in all his fights against two guys who, at the time, were considered the #1 p4p boxers...and now he needs to retire... Hatton was sleeping for a good 10 minutes against pacquaio after he got knocked out in the 2nd round. And if you see his recent picture that he is completly fat now. Obviously Pacquaio took his confidence away for good. Cotto obviously lost something after the margarito lost. You know taking a knee during that fight show alot of mental weakness in Cotto.

I notice people saying that if they lose, they should retire. What's with that? A loss isn't that big of a deal.

Its like the old-battlelife saying: Losing a fight but winning the war. Everybody lives his own war, at the end other decide about if you are good or bad. But a warrior can not lie to himself. It is not important to be undefeated, maybe one day Boxers will ask themself honestly if it was wrong not to fight somebody he has to fought. What is said, that there are talents, who live in their own constructed world, with people around them, people like animals, with no mind no honour, telling this special boxer, that he is the best, he beats anybody. Fantasies are stronger than reality.

Well, there's one thing for sure: the best super middleweight fighters in the world are gonna have a few "Ls" on their records come this time next year. I wonder how said fighters will be judged...

I wonder the same thing... Cotto loses to Margarito and he's shot, mentaly unstable, lost something...Hatton loses twice in all his fights against two guys who, at the time, were considered the #1 p4p boxers...and now he needs to retire... Again, it's the way a fighter loses. Cotto looked terrible at the end of the Margarito fight; he looked like a fighter who was physically AND mentally spent. Hatton's loss to Mayweather was forgivable because he didn't belong at welterweight. However, the way he lost to Pacquiao - at 140, his most effective fighting weight - was certainly cause for alarm. Two brutal knockout losses in 18 months will generally have fans expressing concern for a fighter's health. Conversely, a guy like Kessler is still viewed as among the best in his division, even though he no longer carries an unbeaten mark. Why? Because he didn't look like a ruined fighter in defeat.

Boxers fight far less often these days. There is a lot more hype, probably because there is a lot more money involved. Easier to hype fighters that are undefeated.

Cause people are fickle. One loss = exposed these days. Watch IF Mayweather ever loses than he will be "exposed"

Some good points, but I think another part of it noone has mentioned is that top fighters fight a lot less each year than they used to... it's a business where you're only as good as your last fight, and if you have a loss, it can take up to 6 months or maybe more to land a fight and get back to winning ways; sometimes that consists of a softer fighter so you might be looking at a year or more between major fights, and that's no good for anyone. I know it was compounded by injuries and other problems but Pavlik is a good example of this right now I think

Loses in boxing are devistating for a couple reason, one is the whole mental aspect of loosing, boxers are used to be the alpha dog so when they are shown to have flaws and that there is somebody out there their whole mentality can take a hit, some guys are strong enough to take it others not so much. Fans look at fighters like super heros almost so a loss is devastating to that mindset, people talk up up their guy to a point where no one could back up the talk so when their fighter loses they get humiliated so these type of people turn on their hero because they did not achieve their unacheviable expectations. This is a more recent thing atleast to the point it is now, forums like this thrive on that whole cycle.

i think the business side /economics of the game have sumthin to do with it... its not devastating per se &there are some stars that appear immune to this view however , like oscar & tyson but majority of our fighters today lose a lot of marketability if they lose a fight... linares, ortiz, antillon, arreola etc..

I wonder the same thing... Cotto loses to Margarito and he's shot, mentaly unstable, lost something...Hatton loses twice in all his fights against two guys who, at the time, were considered the #1 p4p boxers...and now he needs to retire...

Losses arent devastating its just the fighters that make them that way. When you fight the best sometimes you lose. Back in the day nobody was undefeated cause they all fought each other. after 1 loss you are more willing to fight whoever. IMO the "0" is just a big monkey on a fighters back. Once you lose it you are more relaxed nothing to worry or protect. Avenge your loss move on and keep fighting. Mayweather is the only credible fighter at the moment with an '0' but isnt considered great because he ducks everybody. his skills might be great but him as a fighter shouldnt even be considered as a great. Margo,williams,cotto,jmm,ODH,pac,morales,mosely man i could go forever all great names tha have fought each other and lost to each other.

I'm not so sure a loss hurts a fighter,JC & floyd are the only 2 undefeateds of this era & their both surrounded by controversy!!In the end,when floyd ducks Mosley & Cotto & fights Manny,people will see his true colors!!

Because many "Old Timers" fought often and fought the best...not just once, but twice, three times, etc. They could also move up and down in weight to chase the big money fights. If you lost one week they could be at it again soon after and win. Here is a quick example: Sugar Ray Robinson moved up to MW from WW to fight Jake LaMotta...and he lost. About 3 weeks later, he fought Jake again and won. He would go on to fight him many more times and win. They fought because it was work. It was a paycheck they needed so they fought often and they fought hard. When you fight often, fans are more forgiving for a loss, specifically when you win the rematch.

It's not just the loss itself. It's how a fighter loses, how he reacts, how long he takes to return to the top level, etc. It's also more difficult to bury a loss in an era where you're lucky to see your favorite fighter more than twice a year. Was much different back in the day, where you could lose your first fight of the year, but still be 3-1 by March.

was just wondering everyones opinion on why losing has become such a huge deal in this new era of boxing. In the old days it was common for the greats to have losses on their ledger. And if you did lose, oh well. You got right back on the horse and kept going. It seems to me that once someone loses once or twice today, they are written off as finished(ala Taylor). If Floyd were to lose anytime soon, he would be written off as past his prime. WHY???? My take on the situation is that its the money fueling these fights. I think the real deal is that you are a "shot fighter" if no one wants to put up the money to see you fight. Sad, but all too true i think. What do you guys think? That has a good part to do with it... The other reason i believe is thats the standard we've created in the sport as fans. Everyone is out looking for the next "ATG" and if you lose a fight or two then you get bumped from the list. Having top p4p champs (like floyd mayweather) really do help our sport in terms of attractions and attention from outside sources (ie. casual fans and the media). However guys like floyd ruin it for everyone else in the sport. Since mayweather appears unbeatable to the public and he's considered the best in the sport (or was; watever, etc.) that fighters with a couple losses seem like second rate fighters. there is too much politics and drama around boxing today. everything is about the all mighty dollar and promoters will screw fighters left and right for the big money. boxing has been reduced to the nfl...in other words its all about tom brady (ie. floyd mayweather jr), payton manning (ie. pacman), etc. you get my point. in the NFL all the headlines read is the biggest names in the sport...in boxing the fans have been reduced to nothing but talks of mayweather pacman, and whoever is the flavor of the week to beat them; etc. Its insane. no one cares about the sport as a whole anymore expect he people who have the weakest voice in this situation....the true hardcore fans.

Being undeafed sells, also creates a bullshit aura. If you fight the best in the world consitently you will lose at some stage. All the greats have lost.

Because the sport is run by marketability. If you lose, your marketability takes a hit, unless you just have a huge built in fan base, or the type of personality that draws attention.

Not far from the truth IMO... If you lose, you're either shot, past prime, or exposed.