Do losses count as part of your resume?

[dans]

I believe it does!!If u fought good fighters,then u accomplished something,no??

Again, if I went out right now and got my ass kicked by the entire P4P list, does that mean I have a good resume?

[DrewWoodside]

I've never heard anyone say "he has four losses on his resume".

When I think of the word resume, I think about what has been accomplished, as in wins.

If we count losses as part of your resume, then wouldn't Jermain Taylor have the best resume of anyone?

If I go out and get my ass kicked by every fighter on the P4P list, does that mean I have a good resume? Even though I got my ass kicked?

I see people putting Floyd Mayweather on Marquez's resume as a positive point. In other words, because he fought Mayweather, his resume is somehow stronger, even though he was embarrassed.

I say your resume is what you've accomplished. Level of competition and record are completely different. What do you think?

A loss can say just as much about a fighter as a win in many situations. A fighter with 2 losses against Elite opposition can be more impressive than a fighter with 4 wins against poor opposition. For example, What is more impressive, Winky Wright's losses and draw to Hopkins, Taylor and Williams or John Duddy's knockout victories over Tomato Cans?

[Princemanspopa]

Only if your Ricky Hatton and Joe frazier

depends on their performance. Duran lost to Hagler, but he was winning on two of the judges scorecards after 12 rounds, was fighting out of his natural weight class and went the full 15 rounds. That's a fair acheivement even though he lost.

It's not really when you actually watch the fight.Duran's effort in that fight is overrated as hell.Giving him four rounds is being generous

[dans]

yeah, maybe it wouldnt be considered to be part of his resume but resumes are used to judge the relative worth of a fighter. If you want to be more indepth in looking at how good they are you have to look at their performances and the context in which they happen not just how many big names they've defeated.

Having said that, comparing resumes is probably the most important and objective way you can judge a fighters merits.

Agree. Resume is one thing, strength of opposition and how you win/lose is different. They're all important, but when we're talking about resumes, we're talking about what a fighter has actually accomplished.

[djsygo]

Okay, but does that count on his resume? When Paulie Malignaggi's carreer is over will you say, "Oh look, he lost to Cotto, that adds to his resume." I don't think so. It adds to his legitimacy and his strength of opposition, but not to his resume.

I once had a dishwashing job that I quit in the middle of a shift. I don't put that on my resume when looking for jobs because I don't consider it an accomplishment. Resume has more to do with accomplishments than strength of opposition or how you won/lost, IMO.

oh well, obviously a win counts more than a loss against the same guy. But i think a close and balls out loss against a champion counts more that for example almost all Mundine wins lately.

[Eaner0919]

I've never heard anyone say "he has four losses on his resume".

When I think of the word resume, I think about what has been accomplished, as in wins.

If we count losses as part of your resume, then wouldn't Jermain Taylor have the best resume of anyone?

If I go out and get my ass kicked by every fighter on the P4P list, does that mean I have a good resume? Even though I got my ass kicked?

I see people putting Floyd Mayweather on Marquez's resume as a positive point. In other words, because he fought Mayweather, his resume is somehow stronger, even though he was embarrassed.

I say your resume is what you've accomplished. Level of competition and record are completely different. What do you think?

but what if you accomplished something even in loss?

for example

shouldn't fans of Pacquiao be allowed to say "he went toe to toe with the Mexican legend Morales only to lose a tough decision" and have it be a positive on his resume? I mean it should be something to hang your hat on considering there were still questions about Manny at the time

and prior to AA Taylor has fought every fighter in there with him (even in loss) to very competitive standards. Short of Saturday there wasn't a single fight where you could say he wasn't competitive at all even the Hopkins and Pavlik fights. Against Hopkins no one thought he would do anything yet he did and did it again in the rematch. I gave both fights to Hopkins but admire the fact that Taylor fought very competitively. Same with Pavlik fights. He almost had Pavlik out in the 2nd in the first fight and in the rematch fought his ass off

so while I dont think losses should be an asset per se I don't think all losses are bad

[djsygo]

btw...at the end of the day, its what the public make of a win or a loss that ultimately counts on the career of a fighter

[Ch@mpBox@PR]

yes Wins and loses counts for resume. Resume is just the presentation of who you fought in what circumstances.

Quality wins is the top contenders/Champions you beat

And Accomplishments is the things you did by beating who, how, when and where!!!!!!

[the_blueprint]

yeah calzaghe has good names on his record but he beat, RJJ and B-hop when they were older, so i dont class that as a good win but he still has the names on his resume.
so yeah theoretically jermain does have an amazing resume, plus he actually beat a lot of them.

personally i agree with eli porter and that if you do well then you should get credit for it but if you get KTFO like hatton against pac-man and mayweather it don't mean shiiit

[larry x]

if loses counted as your resume...journeymen and gate keepers would have the best resumes...