Why do some fans demand fighters to do what past greats do?

[BodyBagz]

So Pac falls way short since he couldn't beat the best guys on his resume in their prime.

Pac tried his best to avoid the best. Especially at WW.
Let's review -
Shot Clottey, Shot DLH*, Cotto*, Shot Rios, Shot Margarito*, Shot Broner, Shot Lucas, Shot Mosley, Shot Algieri*, HORN, Vargas, Bradley 3x........

I don't why the sport let him get away with it for so ling.

[-Kev-]

Pac tried his best to avoid the best. Especially at WW.
Let's review -
Shot Clottey, Shot DLH*, Cotto*, Shot Rios, Shot Margarito*, Shot Broner, Shot Lucas, Shot Mosley, Shot Algieri*, HORN, Vargas, Bradley 3x........

I don't why the sport let him get away with it for so ling.

Pacquiao fought some guys who had no hope but Clottey was definitely seen as a very live opponent. So was Hatton. He played Cotto with the weight for some reason. Idk why. He also did fight Cotto after he seemingly lost to Clottey (I had Clottey winning).

While Roach and Ariza were telling us that DLH was shot, couldn’t pull the trigger anymore, can’t make 147 healthy, and was seen “huffing and puffing” after a short run…us fans did not buy it. Oddmakers did not buy it either. No one bought it. Everyone thought Pacquiao/Roach were crazy. Turns out they were right. But still, the beating Pacquiao put on DLH, no one saw that coming except for them (Roach, Ariza). I don’t even think Pacquiao knew he was gonna put that kind of beating on DLH. He probably also thought Roach and Ariza were crazy like the rest of us.

The rest I agree with. Although he beat the crap out of Horn. I thought Pacquiao won that fight.

You also can’t take his wins over MAB, Morales and Marquez away from him. I mean he lost more to JMM than he won. But those were the 3 greatest fighters he could fight and he did and they were prime. You can’t take that away from him.

You also can’t take his wins over Keith Thurman and Tim Bradley away either. Those were very good wins.

And he absolutely undressed Algieri, who was a decent, gutsy fighter. Not a great fighter but man, what a way to take someone’s 0.

A lot of top 10 fighters 1st loss was to Pacquiao.

[Hustle]

Exactly nothing.

No one said anything about not wanting to see the best not fighting the best. We have had this issue before, where you do not understand the thread topic. Again, it is in easily understandable English.

Fans have extremely high expectations for fighters they don't like.

The point of the thread is that it's very difficult to do what a boxer unanimously known as a top 10 ATG did in his time. This means wining like they did. Accomplishing what they accomplished.

This includes the best fighting the best and losing or winning close.

The thread topic, if you read carefully, does not mention "fighters should avoid the best".

The content of the thread is that even if fighters fight the best, it's not enough for some fans. They want to see a fighter they don't like replicate a top 10-20 ATG fighter.

But that top 10-20 ATG is ranked where he is ranked because what he did can not be easily replicated. Which is a very hard concept for some of you to understand. I am not sure why it's so hard. It's like I am talking to zombies or something.

What Ali or SRL did in their time, winning like they did, beating who they beat, winning in the fashion they did...all of that is extremely difficult. Some boxing fans think boxing is a piece of cake and anyone can do what Ali did, or what SRL did, or what Marciano did.

If Mike Trout from the LA Angels can't reach Babe Ruth's homerun record, or Hank Aaron's home run record, it's okay. Baseball fans know it's a huge feat to break without the use of steroids (Barry Bonds cheated to break Ruth/Aaron's record). Why won't Mike Trout finish with 714 home runs or more? If he is really great, he should replicate Babe Ruth or Hank Aaron's career right? No, what they did was extremely hard and will not be easily done again.

Some of you boxing fans don't really have any clue how hard the sport is. How hard it is to even be top 25 active in a weight class. Let alone top 10. Let alone win every fight vs any top 10 fighter you fight. It's hard. ATG's are who they are because they accomplished things that are very hard to accomplish and can't just be repeated easily.

you wrote all of that for what? I wasnt even talking to you. I didnt post anything pertaining to your thread starter. You're mad because i agreed with another poster about dudes not wanting to see the best vs the best? Lmaooo


you become great by attempting to do what the greats did before you. Everybody isnt gonna make the mark. But you cant become great if you dont try. So miss me with that bull****.

All the greats loss. Aint no shame in losing to the best. Its shame when you avoid the best. These dudes hold titles hostage for years and never even attempt to unify. These dudes have no interest in fighting anybody equal or better.

Sports is about competition. It don't matter if your number 1 or number 10 in a divison.

And stop pretending like you know better than everybody else. Because you dont know me or anybody else on here. I grew up in the amateurs. That doesnt make my opinion better than anybody elses. This is a forum to talk boxing. Its all opinions.

The only facts are the results in the ring. But we dont even get results in the ring because these dudes wont fight each other.

But go ahead and keep telling us why fans are wrong for wanting todays fighters to attempt what past fighters attempted.

[BodyBagz]

Pacquiao fought some guys who had no hope but Clottey was definitely seen as a very live opponent. So was Hatton. He played Cotto with the weight for some reason. Idk why. He also did fight Cotto after he seemingly lost to Clottey (I had Clottey winning).

While Roach and Ariza were telling us that DLH was shot, couldn’t pull the trigger anymore, can’t make 147 healthy, and was seen “huffing and puffing” after a short run…us fans did not buy it. Oddmakers did not buy it either. No one bought it. Everyone thought Pacquiao/Roach were crazy. Turns out they were right. But still, the beating Pacquiao put on DLH, no one saw that coming except for them (Roach, Ariza). I don’t even think Pacquiao knew he was gonna put that kind of beating on DLH. He probably also thought Roach and Ariza were crazy like the rest of us.

The rest I agree with. Although he beat the crap out of Horn. I thought Pacquiao won that fight.

You also can’t take his wins over MAB, Morales and Marquez away from him. I mean he lost more to JMM than he won. But those were the 3 greatest fighters he could fight and he did and they were prime. You can’t take that away from him.

You also can’t take his wins over Keith Thurman and Tim Bradley away either. Those were very good wins.

And he absolutely undressed Algieri, who was a decent, gutsy fighter. Not a great fighter but man, what a way to take someone’s 0.

A lot of top 10 fighters 1st loss was to Pacquiao.

Clottey was maybe a decent gatekeeper.
Hatton was pure hype.
Cotto and DLH were fights were fans wanted to believe were dangerous fights for Pac (on paper they were ?).
Pac's team is very smart and sold fans on the idea he was doing some otherworldly shlt. It was shlt alright.

Erik, Barrera and Bradley were prototypical Pac opponents. Even JMM fit the Pac opponent profile - Easy to hit righthander.
The thing with Bradley is his lack of power yet eager to show he has heart (which he did). 3x fights, though ?
I also felt Pac beat Horn rather easily. That should have been another successful cherry pick.

Prior to WW, Pac's resume was.....ok.
Above it all he has is Thurman and a couple of close W's vs JMM. Thin as hell, if a fight fan is unbiased.
Some 0's are worthless.

[Lomadeaux]

It is not about fighting everyone.

It’s beating everyone like ATG’s did.

That’s what’s hard.

And yeah they fought so often…but what level of fighters? That’s called padded records.

And FYI, I prefer that. I would like that back. Padded records meant you can see fighters more often. You can watch boxing more often. Guys would get developed better.

And I am not entirely sure how you can say a man is not a man in boxing today. Most of those top guys you are questioning would probably kick your ass and my ass on the same day. They will probably make you question your manhood after a good beating.

Also, do you still box? If so, where do you box? Where do you train? (City/state)

I'll give you an example. Ray Robinson lost to LaMotta. He wanted a rematch... So he took a tune up fight... two weeks later. And he didn't fight a slouch. He fought Jackie Wilson who had over 50 fights and only 4 losses and won a decision. This type of stuff doesn't happen today. A WEEK after that fight he rematched and beat LaMotta.

Men were men back then. Do you think ANY fighter back then would utter the words, "I'm not giving him a rematch because he wouldn't of given me one..." No. This is the difference between fighters back then and fighters today. It's the reason there's all time greats like them.

[Lomadeaux]

I mean seriously, I wish boxingscene had an actual physical meeting spot where we can all just box our asses off.

Lmao... There'd be no more trolling, I'd tell you that. Well, actually I'm sure they still would.

You have to understand man, pro fighters who say ****** **** in interviews and on TV get called out by people in the boxing world behind the scenes and they just laugh about it. The culture definitely has gotten very bad. Not as bad as places like the NBA, but it's trash in a lot of areas. It's good to call to them out and joke on them about it.

[Finito2K]

For nearly 15 years posting here, this never gets old.

Critics of certain fighters have such clouded judgement of hatred that they don’t realize they are insulting past greats by pretending that any good top 10 boxer can do what the legends did.

Like…”so and so is not great because he could not do what [insert top 10 ATG] did.”

Okay, has it ever occurred to these sorts of fans, what the legendary ATG did in his career was part of what placed them so highly as one of the best?

“So and so fought the most HOF fighters in history. Top fighter from the present could not do that so he sucks, is a fraud.”

Boxing is a very tough and grueling sport to be successful in. A boxer being the best of his era does not mean he needs to replicate what past greats did. Or that he can do exactly what they did.

You are either subconsciously putting the fighter you are criticizing on a pedestal. Or you don’t think very highly of the past greats/HOFers and expect the current top fighters

It’s nearly impossible to copy an ATG career and be successful at it. Pay your respects to those who had ATG careers and move on. It is extremely hard to have an ATG career. Especially a carbon copy of one.

Level of activity in today's fighters leaves much tio be desired, so fans expect alot more.