The typical fight fan today believes that a guy with a loss or two is done or cant really fight. What about back when boxing was huge in the 30s 40s and 50s. Guys had loses all over their records and they were still good fighters, many going on to win a title.
If todays boxing audience was more acceptable to a loss on a record we could have many great fights going down. But its not that way.
A loss is a learning tool, and the man that steps up without a loss is a man with a lesson yet to learn.
Dont judge the record, judge the fighter in action and you will be much better off.
The typical fight fan today believes that a guy with a loss or two is done or cant really fight. What about back when boxing was huge in the 30s 40s and 50s. Guys had loses all over their records and they were still good fighters, many going on to win a title.
If todays boxing audience was more acceptable to a loss on a record we could have many great fights going down. But its not that way.
A loss is a learning tool, and the man that steps up without a loss is a man with a lesson yet to learn.
Dont judge the record, judge the fighter in action and you will be much better off.
Rockin'
IMO, if you have 5 losses or more, THATS when u're done. 0 is great, 1 is forgivable, same with 2, 3 is alright, 4 is enough, 5 or more is a problem.
but yeah, i know what ur talking about. but fighters back then had 100-200 professional fights. a high number of losses was expected, its the law of averages. if you have so many fights, ur bound to lose some of them.
low loss counts are expected today cuz today, fighters are such ******* that they finish their careers with less than 50 fights under their belt. do you think lennox lewis would be considered a great HW if he lost 20 of his 44 professional bouts?
losses count, whether we like counting them or not. a fighter whos 40-0 will definatley be held in higher regard than a fighter whos 35-20.
I would not say that fighters are *******, they are just more conscious and knowledgable about the effects of fighting hard fights all of the time.
Do you remember Freddie Pendelton. A 500 fighter that got the right people with and behind him and went on to win a title. The guy could fight. Back when he came to Detroit and KO'd Tyrone Trice who was a bad man in his own way. Freddie could fight.
Floyd Mayweather
Joe Calzaghe
Calvin Brock
Steve Cunningham
Nicolay Valuev
Tomasz Adamek
Chad Dawson
Mikkel Kessler
Carl Froch
Jermain Taylor
Arthur Abraham
Kelly Pavlik
Miguel Cotto
Ricky Hatton
Paul Malignaggi
Demetrius Hopkins
Juan Diaz
Janos Nagy
Edwin Valero
Kevin Mitchell
Chris John
Joan Guzman
The typical fight fan today believes that a guy with a loss or two is done or cant really fight. What about back when boxing was huge in the 30s 40s and 50s. Guys had loses all over their records and they were still good fighters, many going on to win a title.
If todays boxing audience was more acceptable to a loss on a record we could have many great fights going down. But its not that way.
A loss is a learning tool, and the man that steps up without a loss is a man with a lesson yet to learn.
Dont judge the record, judge the fighter in action and you will be much better off.
I would not say that fighters are *******, they are just more conscious and knowledgable about the effects of fighting hard fights all of the time.
Do you remember Freddie Pendelton. A 500 fighter that got the right people with and behind him and went on to win a title. The guy could fight. Back when he came to Detroit and KO'd Tyrone Trice who was a bad man in his own way. Freddie could fight.
Rockin'
carmen basilio
gene fullmer
george foreman
joe frazier
willie pep
jake lamotta
alexis arguello
marvin hagler
these fighters had a LOT of fights, and they're still around, still walking, still talking, doing fine (for their age).
these ******* today dont realize that you can have a lot of hard great fights and still not get brain damage. brain damage is not automatic.
Comment