Losses Should NOT be a Focal Point

[rizkybizness]

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]

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.

[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.

[deanrw]

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.

[Dorian]

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

[Texanballer]

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

[rizkybizness]

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

[T-97]

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.