From John Scully's thread, I decided to Boxrec Holman Williams to see if aI recognize any names on his resume. And I see he fought Cocoa Kid, like more than 10 times[I didn't really count], and he fought Charley Burley a pack of times too. Than you have Robinson vs Lamotta fighting 5 times I think it was..and the list goes on. This was a very regular thing I see, like rematches are today, 5 fights were normal back then. It's like when a fighter lost back then, he genuinely wanted to get his revenge right away, and they would want to get revenge on eachother with neither of them backing out of the next fight, like they do now. For example Miguel Cotto wanted nothing to do with Margarito, until Margarito had been brutally stopped by Mosley, beaten to a pulp by Pacquiao, and had an unhealthy eye. Margarito himself wanted nothing to do with Williams, and instead picked the seemingly easier and older Shane Mosley.
Now, people get tired of the same match up after 3 fights. It ends there, a "trilogy".
Why don't fighters do this now? Are fights nowadays won so decisively that there is no need for 4-5 fights? Or were old school fighters just too brave to just take a loss, and that's what new school fighters are missing?
Now, people get tired of the same match up after 3 fights. It ends there, a "trilogy".
Why don't fighters do this now? Are fights nowadays won so decisively that there is no need for 4-5 fights? Or were old school fighters just too brave to just take a loss, and that's what new school fighters are missing?
Comment