The GRIT (Greatest Resume In Total) belongs to a boxer who has fought the best competition, regardless of how many losses may have accumulated throughout his career. Compare this with the GOAT (Greatest of All Time) which tends to take into account wins and losses combined. Conversely, the GRIT just focuses on resume alone, regardless of whether they've won or lost.
So who has fought the best opponents throughout their entire career?
Oscar De La Hoya, as an example, fought Floyd & Jeff Mayweather, Chavez, Whittaker, Pacquiao, Camacho, Trindad, Hopkins, Vargas, Mosley, Molina, Mayorga, Sturm, Gatti.. He lost to many of them but this doesn't matter, he still could be top 3 GRIT.
It's all subjective, but who you got?
Fighting great opposition doesn't = having a great resume, it just means you fought great opposition.
This is why GRIT is the greatest resume in total (the "in total" means the total number of high level/elite opposition faced.)
Now the GOAT is about having a "great" resume. There is a difference between the two, that's why they are separate designations.
Remember, GRIT is solely about who you fought, not about whether you won or lost, it's just about who you stepped in the ring with..
I didn't think this idea of bestowing the title of 'The GRIT' was gonna fly with the sanctioning bodies.
So, I've had a good ol' chin-wag with the boys down at the WBC, and they're of the opinion that this is only gonna work if you declare one fighter as 'The GRIT' as a kind of interim award, and then declare another 'The True GRIT'.
I'm sorry if this confuses matters and/or renders the accolades meaningless, but I've been informed that this is the way that the show's being run now and we're all gonna have to get used to it.
The GRIT (Greatest Resume In Total) belongs to a boxer who has fought the best competition, regardless of how many losses may have accumulated throughout his career. Compare this with the GOAT (Greatest of All Time) which tends to take into account wins and losses combined. Conversely, the GRIT just focuses on resume alone, regardless of whether they've won or lost.
So who has fought the best opponents throughout their entire career?
Oscar De La Hoya, as an example, fought Floyd & Jeff Mayweather, Chavez, Whittaker, Pacquiao, Camacho, Trindad, Hopkins, Vargas, Mosley, Molina, Mayorga, Sturm, Gatti.. He lost to many of them but this doesn't matter, he still could be top 3 GRIT.
It's all subjective, but who you got?
Are you spinning out a new acronym?
Oscar De La Hoya, as an example, fought Floyd & Jeff Mayweather, Chavez, Whittaker, Pacquiao, Camacho, Trindad, Hopkins, Vargas, Mosley, Molina, Mayorga, Sturm, Gatti.. He lost to many of them but this doesn't matter, he still could be top 3 GRIT.
It's all subjective, but who you got?
Ruelas, Hernandez, Gonzalez and Carr wins are often overlooked.
When I read the topic, Oscar and Evander came to my mind.
langford, robinson, or greb.
probably robinson. it's subjective, obviously, to pick just one.
ali's is looking better and better as the years go by as well.
Fernando Vargas, he fought DLH, Tito, Winky, and Mosley, Hoya and Winky didn't fought, Tito and Mosley didn't fought.
Vargas also had Mayorga and Quartey in his resume, That's 6 out of 7 big names, (only missing is Forrest) and to add more, Castillejos, Campas, Raul Marquez, all 154 champs.
Ferocious has stayed at Junior Middleweight for most of his career and retired only at 29, losses were to all-time greats Trinidad, Dela Hoya and Mosley, the Mayorga fight, he was just own mentally.