Comments Thread For: Josh Taylor: I've Got Plenty Left; All The Greats Have Had Losses, But They're Still Great Fighters

[Stuntman Mike]

Again would largely disagree. The Prograis Haney beat was 5 years older and half a dozen fights later. That’s a long time in boxing. Similarly Taylor fought Catterrall best part of 3 years after Prograis. So the conclusions you’re drawing are failing to take that into account.

Some fighters have a very short shelf life at the top and Taylor for one in my opinion has declined rapidly. Also consider that covid and lockdown happened **** in between and that hit older fighters harder due to inactivity.

Haney didn’t destroy Prograis. Haney doesn’t destroy anyone, he’s a pillow fisted defensive boredom. Ridiculous statement. Yes he fought a shutout and it was boring to watch. Prograis looked old just like Taylor did against Lopez.

Taylor, Prograis and Ramirez are the old guard of 140. Haney, Lopez and Garcia the up comers. Happens all the time in boxing a changing of the guard. It doesn’t diminish the achievements of the generation before them.

Covid and lockdown has got to be the worst excuse I've ever heard regarding a fighters decline

Yeah because everyone just put their feet up and had a cuppa

[M111]

All fighters were less active during covid. Some coped better with that than others.

[crimsonfalcon07]

What makes IT special is that he beat all of them. I’d agree that singularly none are hugely special or HOF or as good as fighters from say 147. However when taken as a whole beating all of them and becoming an undisputed champion is an achievement as history will show. A bit like Canelo’s title grab at 168.

So their crowning achievement that makes them special is that they lost to Taylor?

People crap on Canelo all the time for the same reason, but he's got a better resume outside of his run at 168, and he's the cash cow so he gets good fighters moving up and down to fight him. But he still arguably cherry picked a weak division, and most of those wins aren't aging well either.

And people crap on Inoue as well, and claim that all the divisions under 130 are garbage. That's factually untrue, but the argument still is very common. Point here is that Taylor has 4 signature wins against weak opponents. As soon as talent moved up to 140, he either ducked or lost. He's only 2 years older than Matías, for instance. That's not a new generation. There's plenty of fighters at other divisions who have beaten 4 guys in a row that are at the level of Postol, Baranchyk, Prograis, et al.

Unless there's a compelling reason anyone should think that Postol, Baranchyk, Prograis, and Ramirez are exceptional fighters, then there's by definition nothing exceptional about beating them.

I get that you feel differently, but there's plenty of evidence for thinking that Taylor isn't that exceptional. Haney, for all his boring style, just beat one of Taylor's best wins and did it better than Taylor. And he's a weak undisputed champion too, IMO. His best win was considered by at least 70% of the population to be a loss.

And Loma is 2 years older than Taylor, had a huge layoff while his country was at war and he was wearing the uniform, and came back still able to put his skills to work. This whole "but the pandemic" crap is nonsense. Taylor had the opportunity to rematch Catterall several times during that period and didn't. He's STILL running scared. You are welcome to hero worship him if you want, but there's plenty of evidence to say that he's overrated.

[M111]

So their crowning achievement that makes them special is that they lost to Taylor?

People crap on Canelo all the time for the same reason, but he's got a better resume outside of his run at 168, and he's the cash cow so he gets good fighters moving up and down to fight him. But he still arguably cherry picked a weak division, and most of those wins aren't aging well either.

And people crap on Inoue as well, and claim that all the divisions under 130 are garbage. That's factually untrue, but the argument still is very common. Point here is that Taylor has 4 signature wins against weak opponents. As soon as talent moved up to 140, he either ducked or lost. He's only 2 years older than Matías, for instance. That's not a new generation. There's plenty of fighters at other divisions who have beaten 4 guys in a row that are at the level of Postol, Baranchyk, Prograis, et al.

Unless there's a compelling reason anyone should think that Postol, Baranchyk, Prograis, and Ramirez are exceptional fighters, then there's by definition nothing exceptional about beating them.

I get that you feel differently, but there's plenty of evidence for thinking that Taylor isn't that exceptional. Haney, for all his boring style, just beat one of Taylor's best wins and did it better than Taylor. And he's a weak undisputed champion too, IMO. His best win was considered by at least 70% of the population to be a loss.

And Loma is 2 years older than Taylor, had a huge layoff while his country was at war and he was wearing the uniform, and came back still able to put his skills to work. This whole "but the pandemic" crap is nonsense. Taylor had the opportunity to rematch Catterall several times during that period and didn't. He's STILL running scared. You are welcome to hero worship him if you want, but there's plenty of evidence to say that he's overrated.

Prograis who I agree isn’t elite was a good few years down the road when Haney fought him. Haney didn’t ‘destroy’ him. Prograis who wasn’t particularly mobile in the first place was tailor made for Haney who likes to fight safe from the outside. I wouldn’t say his victory over prograis was necessarily any better than Taylor’s as they were very different types of fight. Styles make fights. Haney’s victory was easier, wider. Taylor’s was more violent, they traded more. I know which fight I preferred to watch. Just because two guys fight the same opponent different ways and one’s method works better against that opponent, it’s doesn’t translate to him necessarily being a better fighter. He was just perhaps better against that partcular opponent. When you factor the time gap too I’m inclined to think the version of Taylor that beat Prograis would probably beat Haney too. Taylor declined rapidly, perhaps a combination of lock down inactivity, enjoying the fruits of his labours and outgrowing the division. Taylor hit his prime when he was big for the weight, slightly younger and less shopworn and could probably make weight easier and be less drained. The most noticeable aspect of Taylor’s game that seemed to have gone to me were his legs. He wasn’t as light on his feet, shipped a little more than he should as a consequence and his reactions seemed slower.

I do still dispute the claim his run to undisputed at 140 wasn’t anything impressive however as at the time Prograis, Ramirez, Postol etc we’re all that little bit fresher and largely undefeated which is also something to bear in mind. Up till the Catterall loss he was a very good fighter. Not on say Crawford’s level but also not a long way off. Difference is the Crawford’s of this world live the life and fight that consistently for a long time. Taylor’s time in the sun was far shorter and he likes to party. I seem to remember something to do with ******* and him in the press. No huge surprise to me he faded quickly but he was a very good fighter at one point. Suggesting otherwise is simply untrue.

[crimsonfalcon07]

Prograis who I agree isn’t elite was a good few years down the road when Haney fought him. Haney didn’t ‘destroy’ him. Prograis who wasn’t particularly mobile in the first place was tailor made for Haney who likes to fight safe from the outside. I wouldn’t say his victory over prograis was necessarily any better than Taylor’s as they were very different types of fight. Styles make fights. Haney’s victory was easier, wider. Taylor’s was more violent, they traded more. I know which fight I preferred to watch. Just because two guys fight the same opponent different ways and one’s method works better against that opponent, it’s doesn’t translate to him necessarily being a better fighter. He was just perhaps better against that partcular opponent. When you factor the time gap too I’m inclined to think the version of Taylor that beat Prograis would probably beat Haney too. Taylor declined rapidly, perhaps a combination of lock down inactivity, enjoying the fruits of his labours and outgrowing the division. Taylor hit his prime when he was big for the weight, slightly younger and less shopworn and could probably make weight easier and be less drained. The most noticeable aspect of Taylor’s game that seemed to have gone to me were his legs. He wasn’t as light on his feet, shipped a little more than he should as a consequence and his reactions seemed slower.

I do still dispute the claim his run to undisputed at 140 wasn’t anything impressive however as at the time Prograis, Ramirez, Postol etc we’re all that little bit fresher and largely undefeated which is also something to bear in mind. Up till the Catterall loss he was a very good fighter. Not on say Crawford’s level but also not a long way off. Difference is the Crawford’s of this world live the life and fight that consistently for a long time. Taylor’s time in the sun was far shorter and he likes to party. I seem to remember something to do with ******* and him in the press. No huge surprise to me he faded quickly but he was a very good fighter at one point. Suggesting otherwise is simply untrue.

This seems almost entirely unsubstantiated supposition and personal preference.

Haney absolutely destroyed Prograis. That's likely a difference in definition, but it feels really arbitrary to say he didn't destroy him when Prograis was never in the fight at all. He got knocked down and beat up by a pillowfisted fighter and basically didn't win a minute. If that's not getting destroyed, I don't know what is. Your personal preference to watch Taylor doesn't change the outcomes of the fights.

Being "fresh and undefeated" doesn't mean that much. There's thousands of fighters who are "fresh and undefeated" simply due to matchmaking against bums. Edgar Berlanga is a great example. He's undefeated. Does beating him make for an elite fighter? Is Munguía the second coming? And you even had to caveat "largely" undefeated. That whole line really borders on the ridiculous. What matters is what happens when they step up to higher level competition, and the facts are that when competition stepped up, Taylor's best wins lost.

Your suppositions about Taylor declining don't have any tangible evidence supporting them. It's possible, but it's ALSO possible that he beat those guys because they were weak opponents, and he was just a little better. And, to my mind, given their subsequent performances, that's a far more likely possibility. You have clearly created a narrative in your mind that you're in love with, but Occam's Razor suggests that we don't need to blame things on the possibility that he didn't behave like a champion and elite fighter blah blah. The simpler explanation is that he triumphed against relatively weak competition because he lucked into the right time for the division. Got a weak division and a World Super Series.

I don't think ANY version of Taylor gets undisputed against the higher level of competition that's now at 140. Maybe he wins a belt, but he's going to end up defeated.

Skill for skill, he seems very basic to me. Even watching his best fights, I don't see elite skills in play. He's good, but not great.

And frankly, this notion that he partied and such is crap. Getting that gift against Catterall should have put him in the gym working hard to erase that public perception. He should have come to the Teo fight in top condition ready to make a statement. Instead he got taken to school. That's not how a great fighter behaves, period.

[M111]

This seems almost entirely unsubstantiated supposition and personal preference.

Haney absolutely destroyed Prograis. That's likely a difference in definition, but it feels really arbitrary to say he didn't destroy him when Prograis was never in the fight at all. He got knocked down and beat up by a pillowfisted fighter and basically didn't win a minute. If that's not getting destroyed, I don't know what is. Your personal preference to watch Taylor doesn't change the outcomes of the fights.

Being "fresh and undefeated" doesn't mean that much. There's thousands of fighters who are "fresh and undefeated" simply due to matchmaking against bums. Edgar Berlanga is a great example. He's undefeated. Does beating him make for an elite fighter? Is Munguía the second coming? And you even had to caveat "largely" undefeated. That whole line really borders on the ridiculous. What matters is what happens when they step up to higher level competition, and the facts are that when competition stepped up, Taylor's best wins lost.

Your suppositions about Taylor declining don't have any tangible evidence supporting them. It's possible, but it's ALSO possible that he beat those guys because they were weak opponents, and he was just a little better. And, to my mind, given their subsequent performances, that's a far more likely possibility. You have clearly created a narrative in your mind that you're in love with, but Occam's Razor suggests that we don't need to blame things on the possibility that he didn't behave like a champion and elite fighter blah blah. The simpler explanation is that he triumphed against relatively weak competition because he lucked into the right time for the division. Got a weak division and a World Super Series.

I don't think ANY version of Taylor gets undisputed against the higher level of competition that's now at 140. Maybe he wins a belt, but he's going to end up defeated.

Skill for skill, he seems very basic to me. Even watching his best fights, I don't see elite skills in play. He's good, but not great.

And frankly, this notion that he partied and such is crap. Getting that gift against Catterall should have put him in the gym working hard to erase that public perception. He should have come to the Teo fight in top condition ready to make a statement. Instead he got taken to school. That's not how a great fighter behaves, period.

I think we’re just going to have to agree to disagree here. Clearly we both have completely different irreconcilable viewpoints. Interesting debate.

[JakeTheBoxer]

He clearly lost his last two fights. I still like him, but he is not championship material anymore.

Thanks for wins over Prograis and Ramirez , Josh, wonderful memories.

It was just hilarious reading all these angry Americans back than lol.

[The D3vil]

Covid and lockdown has got to be the worst excuse I've ever heard regarding a fighters decline

Yeah because everyone just put their feet up and had a cuppa

COVID affected a lot of people adversely

We're even seeing a mass of excess deaths since 2020 all over the world.

A lot of people declined mentally & physically due to COVID.

Did it effect everybody the same?

No.

But some people's lives & routines were upended by lockdowns or sickness & they still haven't gotten back on track.

[The D3vil]

Taylor was one of the best fighters on the planet for a few years there, but age, attrition, and inactivity have taken their toll.

He has one more fight to prove that he's not completely done before folks close the book on him.

[deathofaclown]

None of his wins are aging well. If anything, it speaks to how shabby the 140 division was at the time.

That's true, but you can look at it another way. The guys at 140 then were not avoiding each other. They would put themselves in tough fights which takes a lot out of fighters, which is maybe why the likes of Prograis, Taylor, Ramirez etc are not looking great these days in their 30s. The likes of Taylor probably took a lot out of himself being matched tough since the start. He fought Postol in his 14th fight, that was Bud's best win at the time.

Maybe in other divisions where they all avoid each other until they're cashing out in their 30s, they're not having too many tough fights and picking up wins against fading fighters.

Taylor certainly had a much tougher route to undisputed at 140 than Crawford did, there's no debating that. But its going to take its toll.