creating threads every ten minutes is sparingly? lol anyway here's a similar thread, a bit old but i'm pretty sure one was created just a few months ago with the same topic.
Should losses be given credit when assessing a fighter's resume?
Collapse
-
He said "within ten minute periods", not "every ten minutes".creating threads every ten minutes is sparingly? lol anyway here's a similar thread, a bit old but i'm pretty sure one was created just a few months ago with the same topic.
http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=317991
And the thread you linked to is four years old...Comment
-
Of course, especially if the fighters have fought more than once, or if you're deciphering between similar fighters.Comment
-
Depends if the loss wasn't really a loss, or if the loss was against a top p4p fighter and it was very competitive and close then yes it should count towards the fighter.
But if you just show up get shutout or blown away then no.Comment
-
good points......
also, if we take foty fights as a measure, i think the loser also deserves some credit as you need two to tango...Comment
-
Yes, some losses are what I like to call "Honourable Losses", such as Duran moving up and fighting Hagler and Hearns or Oscar losing to Hopkins or Vitali's loss to Lewis or Ali in Frazier one.
If now, say Canelo was to move up to MW and fight Martinez or GG and get battered, I'd give him major credit for taking the fight, he'd go up in my books.
But some losses, against mediocre or worst opponents are just inexcusable, which is why Lewis getting stopped by guys like McCall and Rahman is detrimental to his ATG ranking. The same goes for Wlad's losses.
Unjust wins is a difficult one, if they were close fights the no, they should not be detrimental to anyone's career but if it was a blatant robbery which was not fixed in a rematch, say Bradley at the moment, then it can influence my opinions of a fighter and should be held against him.Comment
Comment