Which losses enhanced a fighter's legacy?

[MisterHardtop]

In boxing history, "honourable losses" or "special losses" are sometimes given more credit than wins. it may even be controversial decisions.

e.g. frazier - ali in thrilla in manilla.

that fight did more for fraziers legacy than his wins over fellow hall of fame fighters jimmy ellis and bob foster

I agree that there are honourable losses but they are never better than a win. Frazier's win over Ali and his run as champion are greater achievements than the Thrilla in Manilla but that fight does enhance his legacy, how ever it is not better than any of his wins against men like Ellis and Mathis and Foster.

Honourable losses can also be used to excuse some of the mistakes of the past, for example, Duran's losses to Hagler and Hearns went a long way to healing the damage done when he quit against Leonard but it was ultimately winning the middleweight championship off Barkley that truly guided him back into our good books.

The only occasion on which an honourable loss is better than a win is when fighters take on insurmountable odds, lose against the best, rather than fighting lesser opponents. Take Frazier rematching Foreman or Holyfield moving up to heavyweight and losing to the likes of Bowe or Hatton's two losses to the greatest fighters of his generation.

[jas]

My question is how the hell is Pacman number 2 on your pfp list??

pacman was 4th but he has moved up 2 places because of ward and rigo's inactivity.

my list is based on this critera:

my criteria from most important to least important:

1) current overall skill level
2) recent wins
3) stature in own Division. Extra points for being top fighters of competitive divisions
4) career accomplishments
5) activity
6) least important is excitement

pacquaio scores very high in 1, 4 and 6..
in terms of 3 - he would be favourite against anyone at welter other than floyd.
in terms of 2, he beat bradley 2 years ago, that just about qualifies as recent.

[jas]

I agree that there are honourable losses but they are never better than a win. Frazier's win over Ali and his run as champion are greater achievements than the Thrilla in Manilla but that fight does enhance his legacy, how ever it is not better than any of his wins against men like Ellis and Mathis and Foster.

Honourable losses can also be used to excuse some of the mistakes of the past, for example, Duran's losses to Hagler and Hearns went a long way to healing the damage done when he quit against Leonard but it was ultimately winning the middleweight championship off Barkley that truly guided him back into our good books.

The only occasion on which an honourable loss is better than a win is when fighters take on insurmountable odds, lose against the best, rather than fighting lesser opponents. Take Frazier rematching Foreman or Holyfield moving up to heavyweight and losing to the likes of Bowe or Hatton's two losses to the greatest fighters of his generation.

you make some excellent points but way more people know of thrilla in manilla than his wins against ellis, mathis and bob foster.

[MisterHardtop]

you make some excellent points but way more people know of thrilla in manilla than his wins against ellis, mathis and bob foster.

Are we talking about popularity of win/loses or what they actually mean to that man's career?

the Thrilla is without a doubt one of the most famous fights ever but anyone looking at Frazier, as a boxing fan will know that his wins over Ali, Mathis, Foster and co are more important to his legacy, Manilla just makes it shine that little bit brighter.

[jas]

Roy jones' loss in 1988 olympic gold medal match

[KingTito]

A win is always better than loss. There are times when a loss can raise a fighter's stock depending on the circumstances though. We just saw it with Maidana against Floyd.