Will Errol Spence’s inactivity (15 months) affect him like it did Josh Taylor?

Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • SweetPbfAli
    Undisputed Champion
    Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
    • Aug 2006
    • 3291
    • 794
    • 798
    • 28,865

    #31
    I think both have the same issue of blowing up and having weight cutting camps too many times. You can only do that so much before the body just gives up.

    Comment

    • Rockin'
      Banned
      Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
      • Jun 2004
      • 23915
      • 4,461
      • 12,395
      • 1,239,562

      #32
      Originally posted by Chollo Vista

      Spence was firing on all cylinders
      So you're saying that the crash never affected Spence in this bout? ................Rockin'

      Comment

      • Hotsauce91
        Contender
        Silver Champion - 100-500 posts
        • Nov 2021
        • 158
        • 47
        • 178
        • 0

        #33
        Originally posted by -Kev-
        1. Spence was shattered by a car crash.
        2. From January 2021-Present, he fought once.
        3. When he enters the ring vs Crawford, his last fight will be 15 months ago.
        Called it...

        Comment

        • brettWall
          Undisputed Champion
          Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
          • Jan 2011
          • 6624
          • 684
          • 220
          • 18,355

          #34
          So now we can mathematically measure chances of winning by either inverse or direct proportion. The longer the inactivity (15 months in this case), the lesser one's chances of doing well in one's next fight. We can also say the longer the inactivity, the more it gets worse. Who's fault exactly is it why people choose to go inactive?

          Comment

          • tomhawq
            Undisputed Champion
            Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
            • Jan 2008
            • 4184
            • 585
            • 183
            • 8,620

            #35
            Originally posted by breWall
            So now we can mathematically measure chances of winning by either inverse or direct proportion. The longer the inactivity (15 months in this case), the lesser one's chances of doing well in one's next fight. We can also say the longer the inactivity, the more it gets worse. Who's fault exactly is it why people choose to go inactive?
            Boxers in this sport are not held accountable for choosing to be inactive. They even get automatic slack for not performing on par. Props are not even given for active fighters, who obviously take more risks. Active, inactive, they're treated the same by fans.

            Comment

            Working...
            TOP