Avenging losses...

I think it depends on the bigger picture. It depends on the situation on weather or not a guy rematches someone I guess. Like if an up and coming fighter loses out of the blue, he can move on and take different paths coz his career is still young. Khan losing to Prescott for example. He 'should' have rematched him in some peoples eyes but the fact he didn't won't affect his career really. Another scenario is Lennox Lewis...He beat everyone he fought but he lost a couple too, so revenge was a pretty big part of his record in that respect. Imagine Marciano lost a fight in his first 10 fights or so and didn't rematch the guy and his career continued into what it was, no one would hold it against him, but if he lost one of his last 10 fights and didn't rematch the guy, it would constantly be mentioned about him. I think vengeance is something that should be attempted when necessary, but it's impact on careers can vary I guess.

Definitely something every fighter should do imo, but the annoying thing is that it still leaves the opponent 1-1 on the record.

Immediate rematches seem like a thing of the past. I thought Mares was showing the marks of a throwback fighter when he was pushing for a Gonzalez rematch right away, but that proved to be BS. That's kind of unfair Mares has made a living on beating all different sorts of fighters but came up against a guy Gonzo who is taller,longer can move n box w/1 punch KO power whos weakness punch resistance isn't your strongsuit plus he's sparred with and knows him well. It's a terrible match-up and he seems to have realized this I won't critic him for not taking the fight , sometimes a guy is just all-wrong.

If it's a big fight and it's close like morales vs Barrera or oscar-Shane, them yes a rematch is important, but sometimes a guy has your number like rigo-donaire, or manny hatton,, and a rematch isn't as important

I think not fighting Prescott has impacted his career. While Prescott flamed out quickly, Khan still faces criticism about his chin and that he feels he deserves more than he gets. While avenging that loss wouldnt completely silence his critics, it would have been one less thing contributing to Khan's negative image. He still faces criticism of his chin because he's still getting stopped and dropped. It has little to do with Prescott at this point. Khan may be at a low point now, but when Prescott still mattered he was losing fights that might have put him in some position to entice Khan, who was making his case as the best at 140, into a rematch.

only if it makes sense at the time

Immediate rematches seem like a thing of the past. I thought Mares was showing the marks of a throwback fighter when he was pushing for a Gonzalez rematch right away, but that proved to be BS.

Getting redemption ranks high on my list of things a boxer should do. Leave no questions, unless the fighter that beat you is completely shot.

It's not something a fighter has to do but it's always a good thing if a fighter can beat the guy that beat him. It says that he is better than that fighter now. Also it helps if the fighter he lost to is still in the same weight class. If Khan would rematch Prescott and knock him out and rematch Peterson and clearly beat him it would be the next best thing to those losses never happening. Broner can only regain his high rating by beating Maidana. Of course rematches often go the way the first fight went.

It should always be looked at as a positive when a top-level fighter avenges a loss. Whether it's really that important or not depends. People talk all the time about how Khan should avenge the Prescott loss, but that rematch was never that big a deal. Khan moved on to much better competition and proved a greater class of fighter, while Prescott kept losing whenever the fight became intriguing. On the other hand, it was a big deal for Stevenson to beat Boone, and he went on to accomplish big things after that. I think not fighting Prescott has impacted his career. While Prescott flamed out quickly, Khan still faces criticism about his chin and that he feels he deserves more than he gets. While avenging that loss wouldnt completely silence his critics, it would have been one less thing contributing to Khan's negative image.

Should this be a priority for top level prizefighters or doesn't matter? if they legitimately lost a relevant fight, of course if the fight's not important or it was a robbery, who cares? if you lose an unimportant fight, revenge is unimportant

It should always be looked at as a positive when a top-level fighter avenges a loss. Whether it's really that important or not depends. People talk all the time about how Khan should avenge the Prescott loss, but that rematch was never that big a deal. Khan moved on to much better competition and proved a greater class of fighter, while Prescott kept losing whenever the fight became intriguing. On the other hand, it was a big deal for Stevenson to beat Boone, and he went on to accomplish big things after that.

Should this be a priority for top level prizefighters or doesn't matter? Any real man or fighter would want to avenge someone that whooped on him instantly, just think Floyd and Castillo, a majority say won anyway but the fighter quiet that noise and stomp out that fire immediately, thats a true man and true fighter...... If you ducks someone that beat you if they didnt put that Cotto Margarito esqe beaten, I see that as a smoke and mirrors fighter they duck dodge and forever carry's that negative shade and black could hovering over them like Khan with Prescott.......Other fighters see that dark shadow and see that fighter got took to a place they never wanted to return to, and they try to bring that out of you, giving the that extra mental boost needed......