Why do posters act like you have to be an underdog to make it a good win?

[LeOoze]

I see a lot of posts saying that Canelo's win over Plant or his domination in 168 isn't impressive because he was the favorite to win. Plant and BJS were good fighters, they were going to be underdogs regardless. If Benavidez was signed to fight Canelo, he would likely be a 10 to 1 underdog or even higher. Canelo would have to step out of 175 to be an underdog, and even that is unlikely.

But I don't see why it makes a win any less great. Leonard was a huge favorite to beat Terry Norris, and he lost like 120-105. Does that make Norris' win incredible? I'd argue it's a good win, but in hindsight it's not so great as we can see that Leonard was on the huge decline. Frazier was a slight favorite to beat Ali in FOTC. Does that make it a less great of a win?

[The Big Dunn]

A lot of posters on this site aren’t mature or adult enough to admit they picked wrong or were wrong when they assessed a boxer.

Instead if just giving credit and admitting being wrong, they criticize the win and the double down.

Check the Teo/Loma threads for example. Some guys just couldn’t give credit. Foreign fans seem to do this a lot. They are not the only ones

check wilder/fury threads for example. Some posters doubled down on the ****** excuses and “cheating” rather than just admit Fury was the better man.

[STREET CLEANER]

You can't go with what others think. Canelo has had a good run at 168 and has fought the available champs beating them all. Two of them were undefeated and they all started boxing at a higher weight than him. Plant showed more character than what I was giving him credit before the fight. Even Canelo said he was a difficult fighter and it showed during the fight. The fighters output goes down and can't keep Canelo off of them.

[ruedboy]

In boxing anything can happen so every win is a good win.
But some wins are whole lot better than others.

[Madison Boxing]

why are people acting like canelo just beat sugar ray leonard or something. plant has beaten absolutely noone, hes never done anything of note, doesnt even look great on eye test. not only that he didnt even turn up to win on saturday, he was beaten before he even got in the ring and just was happy to enjoy the build up and the occasion.

[kushking]

I see a lot of posts saying that Canelo's win over Plant or his domination in 168 isn't impressive because he was the favorite to win. Plant and BJS were good fighters, they were going to be underdogs regardless. If Benavidez was signed to fight Canelo, he would likely be a 10 to 1 underdog or even higher. Canelo would have to step out of 175 to be an underdog, and even that is unlikely.

But I don't see why it makes a win any less great. Leonard was a huge favorite to beat Terry Norris, and he lost like 120-105. Does that make Norris' win incredible? I'd argue it's a good win, but in hindsight it's not so great as we can see that Leonard was on the huge decline. Frazier was a slight favorite to beat Ali in FOTC. Does that make it a less great of a win?

Haters gone hate, & you're right they all would be underdogs to Canelo,Canelo has now reached Floyd status where he's expected to win almost every rd v everyone,& instead of being amazed by a ex jmw koing undefeated "slick brothas" like Plant & schooling him,they say he was a big underdog