Losses Should NOT be a Focal Point

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • rizkybizness
    enjoy the silence
    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
    • Jul 2007
    • 26337
    • 673
    • 356
    • 36,512

    #1

    Losses Should NOT be a Focal Point

    People pay too much attention to losses. I'd rather lose to the best than win against the mediocre.

    Look at Glen Johnson's record. On paper you'd think he was garbage but he's incredibly skilled, especially for his age.
  • rizkybizness
    enjoy the silence
    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
    • Jul 2007
    • 26337
    • 673
    • 356
    • 36,512

    #2
    Originally posted by rizo_swat
    People pay too much attention to losses. I'd rather lose to the best than win against the mediocre.

    Look at Glen Johnson's record. On paper you'd think he was garbage but he's incredibly skilled, especially for his age.
    Same concept, in regards to people with padded, undefeated records.

    Comment

    • T-97
      BuyTheTicketTakeTheRide
      Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
      • Nov 2007
      • 14808
      • 566
      • 628
      • 22,958

      #3
      Thats true, especially when you look at losses in context. Ie Robberies, stepping up to early etc.

      i think losses only count when the person was really exposed in that fight, but apart from that just dont.

      Comment

      • deanrw
        Mayor Ford's dealer...
        Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
        • Feb 2008
        • 13096
        • 1,047
        • 1,007
        • 1,860,285

        #4
        Originally posted by T-97
        Thats true, especially when you look at losses in context. Ie Robberies, stepping up to early etc.

        i think losses only count when the person was really exposed in that fight, but apart from that just dont.
        Yeah I actually look upon undefeated records with a lot of su****ion. To me an undefeated record is a protected record. No fighter is unbeatable. A guy with no losses just didn't try hard enough. A fighter who truly takes risks, is a real fighter.

        This is why I want Pavlik to fight Calzaghe. If Pavlik loses, he still shows he was willing to continue to take risks instead of sitting on his belts. If he does happen to win, then Calzaghe will even get more favorably looked upon for being in his late 30's and fighting a young hungry champion. I want Pavlik and Joe to lose a fight.

        Comment

        • Dorian
          The P4P King
          Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
          • Nov 2005
          • 26501
          • 1,652
          • 2,198
          • 42,879

          #5
          Originally posted by deanrw
          Yeah I actually look upon undefeated records with a lot of su****ion. To me an undefeated record is a protected record. No fighter is unbeatable. A guy with no losses just didn't try hard enough. A fighter who truly takes risks, is a real fighter.

          This is why I want Pavlik to fight Calzaghe. If Pavlik loses, he still shows he was willing to continue to take risks instead of sitting on his belts. If he does happen to win, then Calzaghe will even get more favorably looked upon for being in his late 30's and fighting a young hungry champion. I want Pavlik and Joe to lose a fight.
          i agree with you, check this, talk about no future
          http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php...uman_id=306912

          Comment

          • Texanballer
            -Texan For Life-
            Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
            • Apr 2007
            • 13562
            • 488
            • 681
            • 24,660

            #6
            I agree, look at Margarito, 3 losses as a teen. Robbed against Santos, then gets a tough loss against Williams

            Comment

            • rizkybizness
              enjoy the silence
              Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
              • Jul 2007
              • 26337
              • 673
              • 356
              • 36,512

              #7
              Originally posted by texanballer
              I agree, look at Margarito, 3 losses as a teen. Robbed against Santos, then gets a tough loss against Williams
              Exactly. Then look at other people's records like Tye Fields, it's **** and is padded to the max.

              Don't judge a book by it's cover : Don't judge a boxer by his record

              Comment

              • T-97
                BuyTheTicketTakeTheRide
                Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
                • Nov 2007
                • 14808
                • 566
                • 628
                • 22,958

                #8
                Originally posted by rizo_swat
                Exactly. Then look at other people's records like Tye Fields, it's **** and is padded to the max.

                Don't judge a book by it's cover : Don't judge a boxer by his record
                Yea thats true. I think there are so many things to take into account. I actually prefer prospects to lose earlyish as if they go undefeated for a long period and win a small title they may believe they are unbeatable and so when they step up and maybe lose it pretty much ends there carear.

                A loss early can make a career easy, you dont have the pressure of being undefeated etc.

                The only way to judge a fighter is to see them with your own eyes.

                Comment

                Working...
                TOP