"Unbeatable" is a Crock of ****

[Horus]

Everyone is beatable, and those who never lost until after their prime, well things more than likely would have been very different if they fought in a different era and had to fight 15-20 times each year, sometimes against bigger guys.

With different judges, Marciano could easily have lost to Lowry and Lastarza, and lost to Charles with a different doctor.

Lopez was undefeated in a crap division that makes the 168 lb. division look like it has a long, illustrious history.

People yap about "so and so is invincible and unbeatable".

That's a crock of ****.

That's all.

Floyd is unbeatable

[Jim Jeffries]

Floyd is unbeatable

So was Roy Jones Jr.

[Derranged]

Nobody is unbeatable. NOBODY. Not even Floyd. But, hasnt been beaten yet, and I dont think Cotto would. I thought if anyone could, it would've be DLH..

[boxing_great]

so does that mean that in order to become ''great'' you have to lose, and make a comeback and win?
or is being undefeated held in a higher regard?

[tito yuca]

so does that mean that in order to become ''great'' you have to lose, and make a comeback and win?
or is being undefeated held in a higher regard?

That's what the haters say. That, or "I need to see him overcome some adversity in the ring first to see how good he is"

Isn't never having to face adversity the mark of true greatness? Because damn near everyone is "beatable" or have L's on their record, when a guy like Floyd comes along, haters say that he only has an 0 because he doesn't take risks. It's a Catch-22 really. If he did have to overcome adversity and managed to do it he'd get even less respect. They'd point out that if he was as good as his fans say he wouldn't have been in that position in the first place.

Same as if he lost and then avenged it, they'd keep talking about his losing in the first place. Look at the Castillo fights. Are there more topics saying that he shouldn't be undefeated because he lost the first fight with him, or more topics giving him props for coming back after a close and disputed decision to convincingly beat him?

[Dynamite76]

Would Larry Holmes have remained undefeated if George Foreman hadn't taken 10 years off of boxing? If the ref had stopped his second fight with Shavers? Had he fought all comers like Michael Dokes or Gerri Coetzee? We'll never know.

The two fighters I've heard the term "unbeatable" with are Mayweather and a prime RJJ. But I agree, no one is unbeatable.

If Holmes had fought Page or Thomas, he would have had that loss sooner.

[BrooklynBomber]

I have to agree, there is a way to beat ANYONE.

[Pugilistic™]

There is no fighter that is unbeatable.

[Thread Stealer]

so does that mean that in order to become ''great'' you have to lose, and make a comeback and win?
or is being undefeated held in a higher regard?

I never really bought that argument.

Yes, it shows something to be able to avenge a loss, but it's better to not lose that fight in the first place, especially if it's to a lesser fighter.

[Mike Tyson77]

Tyson was unbeatable in his prime.