Why do people claim fighters are ruined after a loss?

if a guy loses at the wrong time it can ruin his career

I mean some fighters are obviously shot like Hatton, Vargas, and Morales. But it seems fighters in the past took beatings and fought more often, but only became shot after taking a beating in a back and forth war (Ali-Frazier) or just become plain old (Robinson/Louis). Losing to a better fighter wasn't the end of your career like it seems like now. Many fighters came back better and stronger after losing, even after getting knocked the hell out. Fighters seem like they are better conditioned/skilled and have longer careers these days, but seem to get "shot" or "ruined" much more younger and sooner in their careers than the old school fighters. It seems like a total cop out when you compare the new school fighters to the old school, who took way more damage and got paid a lot less. Morales ruined Pac ..... ohh wait...

I don't know why everyone thinks Cotto is ruined. Guy has two losses... And some great wins. That's because Margarito done him dirty when he gave him a beating, mentally it must have demoralised him.

I am looking for serious opinions. Please don't turn this into another goddamn Pac-Floyd war thread. I am sick of that shit.

Depends on how they loss first off. Mentality, and confidence is such a big part of boxing, that it can really hurt you. If you get bruatally ko'd of course, then most say it's a lot easier to be ko'd again. You lose resistance. True, but it seems like fighters these days have less resistance physically and are mentally weaker after losing. All it takes is one fight, but many fighters in the past actually came back better after getting their ass beat. Joe Louis took a major beating and got "exposed" by Schmelling. I think if that fight happened now with two similar fighters in the same situation, the Louis-type fighter would never be the same and everyone would claim he is already shot.

I'm changing my answer to it being 90% public perception

Pacquiao was ruined 10 years ago but Floyd is ducking him...end of story

I think its a couple different things, I'm not entirely sure Cotto is shot, theres been too many "excuses" i can make for him, so the jury is still out on that one. But i think it could be the money difference between fighters now and fighters of the past, in Ye 'olden times, you couldn't afford to be shot after one loss, you had to climb back to the top, whereas nowadays, sitting comfortably in your mansion after you suffered the first loss of your career, it may be a bit harder to get motivated knowing you're already set for life if you budget your money. It could also be the physical damage taking its toll.... I don't know, guys like marvin hagler would lose and come back stronger, i don't know about alot of todays fighters...

Sometimes they are, while sometimes they are "diminished", which I think is often the case when people say a fighter was "ruined". Taylor was still very good after the first Chavez fight, but not 100% of what he once was. Vargas wasn't that same after Trinidad, but I thought the Vargas who faced DLH was still a pretty formidable fighter. While others like Corrales, Barrera, Pacquiao, Castillo, Lewis, etc...have come back strong from defeats.

I don't know why everyone thinks Cotto is ruined. Guy has two losses... And some great wins.

Depends on how they loss first off. Mentality, and confidence is such a big part of boxing, that it can really hurt you. If you get bruatally ko'd of course, then most say it's a lot easier to be ko'd again. You lose resistance.

I mean some fighters are obviously shot like Hatton, Vargas, and Morales. But it seems fighters in the past took beatings and fought more often, but only became shot after taking a beating in a back and forth war (Ali-Frazier) or just become plain old (Robinson/Louis). Losing to a better fighter wasn't the end of your career like it seems like now. Many fighters came back better and stronger after losing, even after getting knocked the hell out. Fighters seem like they are better conditioned/skilled and have longer careers these days, but seem to get "shot" or "ruined" much more younger and sooner in their careers than the old school fighters. It seems like a total cop out when you compare the new school fighters to the old school, who took way more damage and got paid a lot less. Depends on what type of beating they took and how they look physically and mentally after. Chavez ruined Taylor in one fight. Tito ruined Vargas in one fight. Margarito ruined Cotto in one fight.