Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

In your opinion: How can a top fighter come back from a loss in today’s Boxing environment?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    depends on manner of loss, if you come in as clear favourite, touted as some all time great and get made to look like a ****ing bum after talking about fighting at cruiser and heavyweight, basically lose every round then you have lost your aura for good, you can still have a good career but wont ever be looked at in the same way.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Madison boxing View Post
      depends on manner of loss, if you come in as clear favourite, touted as some all time great and get made to look like a ****ing bum after talking about fighting at cruiser and heavyweight, basically lose every round then you have lost your aura for good, you can still have a good career but wont ever be looked at in the same way.
      You mean the fight between Canelo and Bivol?

      The same one you said you'd leave the forum for if Bivol won?

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by PRINCEKOOL View Post
        Just ignore people and carry on. Avoid social media, no idea why boxers or top athletes obsess over social media.

        People change up real quick, a loss is only made out to be a big deal because? Fighters give these critics too much credit.

        Just ignore them and carry on. Derek Chisora is a great example of this.

        Honestly, if Alvarez is to win his rematch with Bivol? People will change up their behaviors really quick.

        You only have to look at people on this forum, they change up real quick from fight to fight. 90% of Fury's hardcore fans online, will be gone if he ever lost 'But then they would come back again if he was to win'.

        These people should not have such a strangle hold and influence on fighters.

        The critics will always be watching.

        This is very generic advice, but it is how to deal with the situation.


        How about the promotional and network pressure for a top fighter to interact with fans through social media as well as appearing on radio and other shows to promote themselves and their fights?

        Should a fighter just become a hermit? Just spend time with family, train in the gym, and box. No advertisement, no interacting with fans through modern ways?

        Back then, there was no social media, but boxers were absolutely required to do news interviews, appear in night shows, and interact with fans, physically.

        It is still like that today, but with more modern ways, aka technology. Top fighters are still required to advertise themselves in some minimal way. That minimal way is social media.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by Cypocryphy View Post


          I have one word to explain it: Tribalism. Either racial tribalism or nationalistic tribalism.

          People have agendas now, a lot of the time, and the biggest agenda is to promote tribalism. The problem is that with some of these contemporary fighters you mentioned have extremist fans and extremist haters. But also with Lomachenko, Joshua, Canelo and Wilder, you have people hating on them for different reasons, so each case has to be judged individually.

          Anthony Joshua's stock went down significantly because of his loss to Andy Ruiz, which was like a Tyson loss to Buster Douglas. Joshua lost to a guy he should have never lost to is how many view that fight, and that's where the criticism began of Joshua. Before then he could do no wrong. Then, after taking a loss to Usyk, most people view him accurately, which is that he's very good but not the best. There are some who **** on him for other reasons, such as the Wilder fans who are critical of anyone who had previously attacked Wilder's abilities. It is American fans vs English fans most of the time.

          Wilder has a lot of fans that are fanatical, conspiratorial lunatics, believing that he didn't lose to Fury but was cheated, that Fury had loaded gloves (from egg weights to horseshoes), that he was drugged, that his whole team was in on the conspiracy, etc. etc. You couple that with how much **** Wilder had talked, it makes sense. There was also a racial narrative going on with Wilder fanaticals, and that caused greater division. Wilder because a faux-civil rights figure for many of these fans, and there was push back on that aspect too. So these qualities have made it hard for Wilder to come back on top.

          Similar issues can be said about Lomachenko, with narratives such as "complexion for the protection" are pushed, unjustly so too. You had people upset because Arum said he hadn't seen such good footwork since Ali. You had all of these people pushing a racial narrative again on a guy that's not even American, who he himself never compared himself to Ali. Of course, when Arum compares Keyshawn Davis to Sugar Ray Leonard, you don't get any pushback. So we can see that there are certain groups that think of everything in some tribal manner, and this is why it's difficult for some to make a comeback. And it should matter how a fighter takes a loss because Loma lost by split decision to Salido, who everyone thought should have been disqualified and whom the judges counted many of the below-the-belt blows in order to validate his win over Loma. You then have the Lopez fight, which even though he lost, he outclassed Lopez, winning the fight if not the match.

          Canelo is a mixed bag, but the reasons some hate on him goes back to that tribalistic agenda so popular these days. It goes both ways too because his biggest fans are tribalistic, certain demographics, which are primarily found in America. You don't see so many fanaticals in Mexico, so it points to a cultural issue in America. The other reason people are critical of Canelo is due to the industry doing what it can to give Canelo wins when he doesn't deserve them. Many believe, including myself, that it hurts the sport of boxing when you continually give a guy a W because he brings in more money. Many have been waiting for Canelo to lose because they feel it's a win against corruption.
          What happens when a fan is a fan of many fighters of different races, different promotional companies, different countries and are not into the whole tribalistic way of rooting for fighters?

          What if a fan likes and praises both Tyson Fury and Deontay Wilder? Oleksandr Usyk and Anthony Joshua? Canelo Alvarez and Dmitry Bivol? What if a minority latino fan likes Lomachenko more than Lopez, but also had Lopez beating Lomachenko, but still likes Lomachenko more?

          If the so called single-fighter fanatic, also makes threads praising Fury, Wilder, Lomachenko, Usyk, Kambosos, etc and the “other” side would never in their life, praise a fighter they are highly critical of? Then who really is the toxic fan?

          I was highly critical of Lomachenko after he lost to Salido. But he won me over with his post-Salido resume. I gave him his credit where credit is due. I am now a permanent fan of Lomachenko.

          I was a supporter of Crawford from the start of his career until after his string of crap fights after Postol. I was going at it with the naysayers who were accusing him of ducking Postol. It was great to be a fan of Crawford at that time. Now being a Crawford supporter is equivalent to being a lawyer for a man who is dead guilty of aggravated murder and there is nothing the lawyer can do but go through the motions of a lawyer, knowing his client is guilty as sh/t. In Crawford’s case, of not fighting anyone worth a sh/t.

          I consistently called Canelo vs Yildirim a sh/t fight and an example of how sh/t sanctioning body rankings are. A crap ass mismatch that should be unacceptable and it is 100% indefensible even by his own fans.

          Just some examples of me and other fans like me who can and will give credit where credit is due, and also, criticize a fighter you root for if they are in the wrong. Lastly, admit when a fighter shut you the fck up and made you a fan. Usyk recently did that to me with his AJ win. I am now a fan and recognize him as one of the best fighters of his era.

          But today’s boxing environment has way too many fans that:
          1. Their favorite fighter can never do anything wrong.
          2. Fighters they are highly critical of can never do anything right.
          Cypocryphy likes this.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by -Kev- View Post
            Fighters of the past had losses in their prime, but came back from losses and were still top fighters even with those losses.

            Today it seems like that is something that is a lot more difficult to overcome for a top fighter. Especially top 10 P4P fighters and top 5 best fighters of a weight class.

            If a top fighter goes on a string of wins over other top 10 fighters, fights 10-15 of them, but losses to 1 or 2 of them, he is “exposed” and that loss proves that he actually was never that good to begin with. And those losses are now also evidence that he would lose to other top 10 fighters.

            So, how can a fighter overcome losses today?

            How many “I told you Joe Louis was always an overrated bum” threads would be created after losing to Max Schmeling, a guy with 7 losses?

            How would prime, undefeated Ali’s loss to Joe Frazier be treated today? Would his critics pan him and say he was exposed and overrated?

            What kind of response would a prime, undefeated Duran’s loss to Esteban De Jesus get from today’s boxing fans?

            What about a prime George Foreman getting hurt, dropped and losing to Jimmy Young?

            Would Tyson’s loss to Douglas prompt today’s fans to say that Mike Tyson losses to any good heavyweight in history?

            Lastly, how badly would Pacquiao be ridiculed by today’s 2022 fans, if he were to lose to Torrecampo and Sansurat?

            Some of the top fighters of today, like Lomachenko, Joshua, Canelo, Wilder, have losses and these losses are used by their critics as a way to prove their criticism was warranted.
            - - Henry Armstrong lost his debut by KO and 3 of his first 4 fights. Archie Moore KOed in his debut.

            Modern monkeyboys dunno squat from squirt these days and it's reflected in the crybaby spam they post like deranged pubescent grrrrls.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by -Kev- View Post

              What happens when a fan is a fan of many fighters of different races, different promotional companies, different countries and are not into the whole tribalistic way of rooting for fighters?

              What if a fan likes and praises both Tyson Fury and Deontay Wilder? Oleksandr Usyk and Anthony Joshua? Canelo Alvarez and Dmitry Bivol? What if a minority latino fan likes Lomachenko more than Lopez, but also had Lopez beating Lomachenko, but still likes Lomachenko more?

              If the so called single-fighter fanatic, also makes threads praising Fury, Wilder, Lomachenko, Usyk, Kambosos, etc and the “other” side would never in their life, praise a fighter they are highly critical of? Then who really is the toxic fan?

              I was highly critical of Lomachenko after he lost to Salido. But he won me over with his post-Salido resume. I gave him his credit where credit is due. I am now a permanent fan of Lomachenko.

              I was a supporter of Crawford from the start of his career until after his string of crap fights after Postol. I was going at it with the naysayers who were accusing him of ducking Postol. It was great to be a fan of Crawford at that time. Now being a Crawford supporter is equivalent to being a lawyer for a man who is dead guilty of aggravated murder and there is nothing the lawyer can do but go through the motions of a lawyer, knowing his client is guilty as sh/t. In Crawford’s case, of not fighting anyone worth a sh/t.

              I consistently called Canelo vs Yildirim a sh/t fight and an example of how sh/t sanctioning body rankings are. A crap ass mismatch that should be unacceptable and it is 100% indefensible even by his own fans.

              Just some examples of me and other fans like me who can and will give credit where credit is due, and also, criticize a fighter you root for if they are in the wrong. Lastly, admit when a fighter shut you the fck up and made you a fan. Usyk recently did that to me with his AJ win. I am now a fan and recognize him as one of the best fighters of his era.

              But today’s boxing environment has way too many fans that:
              1. Their favorite fighter can never do anything wrong.
              2. Fighters they are highly critical of can never do anything right.
              That's because you're a fan of boxing and not a fanatical. Of course, we're going to have favorites in the sport. But that doesn't mean we have to hate on everyone else.

              I knew Canelo would lose, and I think anyone who knows this sport well could see that Canelo should have been the underdog. But that's betting, which is more about popularity than ability to win. I've been really critical of Canelo in the past, but he earned my respect by going up against Bivol, who's one of my favorite boxers in the sport. He's one of the guys whom I've molded a portion of my boxing after, imitating a lot of what he does.

              Anyway, the point is I can't see how people can **** on Canelo. He should be getting everyone's respect for doing what so many others are too scared to do. The loss doesn't take anything away from what a great fighter he is. People need to separate the boxing industry from the boxers, IMO.

              What's that saying? Don't hate the player, hate the game. That's how Canelo should be thought of, that he's just playing the game, and if there's an issue, then it's with the sport of boxing, not the boxer.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by -Kev- View Post

                How about the promotional and network pressure for a top fighter to interact with fans through social media as well as appearing on radio and other shows to promote themselves and their fights?

                Should a fighter just become a hermit? Just spend time with family, train in the gym, and box. No advertisement, no interacting with fans through modern ways?

                Back then, there was no social media, but boxers were absolutely required to do news interviews, appear in night shows, and interact with fans, physically.

                It is still like that today, but with more modern ways, aka technology. Top fighters are still required to advertise themselves in some minimal way. That minimal way is social media.
                There is zero need for a fighter to engage is social media.

                Everything else is fine, but social media there is no need.

                They do it to themselves, by engaging with social media.

                Comment


                • #18
                  By not lying and making excuses about things like shoulder injuries, thin socks, or leg cramps when they lose. By not making excuses about weight especially if the fighter was confident before the fight. Be honest when you lose and just say you lost to a better man being real with yourself is the first step of getting over a loss.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Be signed to Eddie "rematch " Hearn. If you lose you are guaranteed to have everything stacked in your favour in the rematch. He's a master at erasing losses from the records of fighters he's in love with.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by REDEEMER View Post
                      A.J won soundly in his rematch in his first attempt at redemption . He was never bombarded easily and destroyed like many past time greats but people still count that as some fight that indefinitely counts against him it then not others if we use that logic .

                      Let’s be real here even if Wilder won a title belt without beating Fury then that’s actually plausible to hold against him looking at his resume there a huge difference between him and A.J. . If Foreman was fighting today they would say he’s worse then Joyce who many called a bum before he kept winning .


                      It’s simply a double standard in todays era as it is with any current era ,when a fighter loses he’s overated ,look at Canelo just the latest fight . It’s absurd . I’m not sure posters know there can be only one winner in a boxing match and seem to think a loss exposes someone ?
                      Bro, people still to this day bring up Valdes because he's the only top ten rater Marciano didn't face. That's not even a loss, that's one guy left out of a record, and Rock didn't even avoid him. He lost to Moore and Moore took his spot.

                      Dudes criticized Joshua before the loss and see his losses as validation for their criticism. It's always going to follow him, like how Wlad will always get **** for being KTFO by b-listers. Does not mean Joshua won't go down as a great, like Wlad and Marciano have.

                      All Joshua has to do to get enough respect to make his critics seem small and unimportant is keep winning at abouts the rate he has done and the level he has done.


                      <--- admitted critic. I wrote this a bit distanced from myself so I just wanted to make clear it wasn't my intention to distance myself from Joshua criticism, I'm just saying our criticism doesn't matter as much as his wins.

                      Old Foreman would beat TF out of Joyce. Younger Foreman maybe not.
                      REDEEMER likes this.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP