Do you prefer to follow top boxers with losses

Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • SplitSecond
    Undisputed Champion
    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
    • Nov 2009
    • 23151
    • 1,715
    • 1,187
    • 85,044

    #11
    What I want is two beasts go at it, skills, power, speed. That’s it. High level fights.

    Comment

    • El_Mero
      Undisputed Champion
      Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
      • May 2019
      • 7482
      • 3,118
      • 10,972
      • 31,316

      #12
      If people are only fans of fighters with 0 losses, theyre not true fans of the sport. PERIOD.

      Comment

      • ShoulderRoll
        Join The Great Resist
        Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
        • Oct 2009
        • 55878
        • 10,014
        • 5,015
        • 763,445

        #13
        Originally posted by Golden Boi 360
        Weird question. I follow and watch top boxers regardless of their wins or losses. As everyone knows a loss isn't the end of the world, being undefeated also doesn't mean weak resume.
        My thoughts exactly.

        Above all I'm always on the lookout for skillfull fighters and/or good fights.

        Comment

        • BoxingIsGreat
          The Champ
          Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
          • Feb 2009
          • 19470
          • 1,684
          • 2,397
          • 1,062,888

          #14
          I don't. After a few losses, I lose interest. Also, undefeated doesn't mean a weak resume. It's case by case.

          Comment

          • Hot Shyt
            Contender
            Silver Champion - 100-500 posts
            • Jun 2010
            • 304
            • 9
            • 33
            • 8,811

            #15
            I dont have a preference. I just like highly skilled guys that go out and try to fight the best. Lomachenko and Chocolatito have multiple losses and are two of my favorites.. I also love Inoue and Teofimo who have no losses. All the top welterweights are wack to me regardless if they have losses or not.

            Comment

            • _Rexy_
              Undisputed Champion
              Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
              • Jan 2018
              • 27934
              • 6,140
              • 3,585
              • 358,040

              #16
              losses don't matter IMO. It's how you respond from a loss. Hell, most decision losses are up for debate recently anyways.

              Comment

              • Marchegiano
                Banned
                Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
                • Aug 2010
                • 12209
                • 1,790
                • 2,307
                • 165,288

                #17
                I'm extremely neutral about losses on their own. blanket statements don't fit, I need narratives.

                Some of my favorite fighters in history took heavy Ls, but, fixed fights and fighting 3 times a week will do that.

                Other guys got 0's I just don't give a **** about. Hrgovic got's an 0, bit of hype, idgaf. If he beats hunter I will, if he doesn't it'll be a while before I give a **** about him.

                Some guys got 0's and no resume and I still think they're impressive as ****. Kleitomachos, for example, won the Olympic boxing, pankration, and wrestling without giving a point to any opponent in any tournament. Idgaf if it was 1200 cans, that's good ****.

                Ward's got a good 0, and I like to watch Josesito Lopez.

                Comment

                • paulf
                  Undisputed Champion
                  Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                  • Sep 2009
                  • 23699
                  • 3,324
                  • 2,093
                  • 1,052,140

                  #18
                  I don't fuck with anybody that doesn't have at least nine losses.

                  Yori Boy Campas FTW

                  Comment

                  • Eff Pandas
                    Banned
                    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                    • Apr 2012
                    • 52131
                    • 3,624
                    • 2,147
                    • 1,635,919

                    #19
                    I follow boxers with no losses to doubt digit L's. It's all about strength of schedule. That said if you've never heard of a guy with L's & don't see noticable names on his resume or some split decisions the winning bet far more often than not is he's not worth following now & won't be in the future.

                    Comment

                    • chaosisme
                      Undisputed Champion
                      Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
                      • Apr 2013
                      • 1348
                      • 156
                      • 88
                      • 25,686

                      #20
                      I don't follow boxers. I follow boxing.

                      Not as hardcore as I used to though. Like 20 years ago I would never miss Shobox, Telefutura, ESPN WNF/FNF type cards. These days, I don't tune in for those kind of shows. I must admit, my passion lies with beer these days. Honestly, these current guys taking the Mayweather route without putting the work in to earn that status isn't helping to reignite my love for boxing. It feels like we discuss the business of boxing more than the actual fights these days. $port$ in general.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      TOP