Why is losing once so horrible in the sport of boxing?

[jqSide]

Precisely the reason why fights don't get made at the proper time. Also, fans want it that way, "He ain't ready yet doe. Still too young to get near the smell of the smoke doe." Meaning, if he takes the fight and loses, his boxing career is over. There's no second, third, fourth chances.

[Roadblock]

it's not bad... it's just that a certain fan base used the undefeated record of their fighter to justify why he is the greatest... this is the only thing their fighter has for them to talk about so they ran with it.

Thats BS, I don't see anybody running with the Greatest theme, and his resume is one of the best in boxing history so you are wrong on so many levels its obvious you don't open your eyes to the majority and focus on a few.

[TheIronMike]

Funny how half the mofos in this thread contribute to the problem. The example? Daniel Dubois. Anyone with eyes can see that the guy has what it takes to make it to the top, but ever since his L to Joyce, he's been written off completely.

ACL tear? Sure...fine.

[BodyBagz]

I can't think of any sport that depicts this strange malady. Fighters in other contact sport like MMA/UFC can fight multiple times regardless of loses. In basketball, one on one tennis, baseball, football, you name it, no such thing as this silliness in boxing.

Who say's it's horrible ?
0's are extremely hard to maintain.
Because of this, ''purists'' want to discredit 0's.
Most 0's are laughable if you take into consideration the opponents.

[SN!PER]

But when you think about it, all boxers have lost before.

Mayweather lost in the amateurs, Tyson Fury too. Crawford and Spence have 12 losses each.

[BodyBagz]

But when you think about it, all boxers have lost before.

Mayweather lost in the amateurs, Tyson Fury too. Crawford and Spence have 12 losses each.

Not the same.
If a guy is going to lose, the amateurs is the place to do it.
No one cares.

[MulaKO]

It’s the Floyd Mayweather way of doing boxing
I’ll give Floyd props when he was Pretty Boy , he worked his way to what he later got
But we are not going to see the best vs the best unfortunately

[Sheikh]

Its one thing that they dont fight other top ranked boxers, whats hilarious is they are even afriad to fight big punchers even if they are gatekeepers or journeymen Thats how much balls these cowards lack they are that scared of taking a chance losing to a puncher that is why they are always fighting light punching guys

[dan-b]

Boxing fans are the most ****** fans in the entire sports industry. That's why.

You included, judging by your regular comments. Be the change you want to see.

[dan-b]

It shouldn't be a big deal, and it isn't that big a deal to me.

But it's slightly justifiable when you consider that a lot of these boxers are being carefully matched. ie they lose to someone who was specifically selected for them with most conditions in their favour. If Manchester United got to choose their opponents a few times a year at their own ground, you'd expect them to win.

As for losing big fights, I always think it just makes the rematch bigger. There should be more, for example, unification fights.

And for mandatories, well that's just sport. You can win and you can lose. Mandatories are the only bit of boxing business that resembles a sport.

And fans and fighters complain about those whilst paradoxically championing the "four belt era". I personally would like the "post-belt era", but if you crave the status and symbolism that comes with holding sanctioning body belts then you have to accept the obligations that come with them. If you've paid fees to the IBF for eliminators then you're going to expect your shot just as the guy holding the belt got his.