Which fighters in the history of boxing found themselves in situations in which they had everything to lose and nothing to gain?
Jim Jeffries - I'm talking about his comeback fight against Jack Johnson during the "Great White Hope" period.
Jack Dempsey - he had nothing to gain and everything to lose against Georges Carpentier
Joe Louis - everything to lose and nothing to gain against light heavy champ Billy Conn
Larry Holmes- had nothing to gain against Gerry Cooney
Marvelous Marvin Hagler - had everything to lose and nothing to gain against Sugar Ray Leonard
Question: Which fighters in boxing history had pigeon holed themselves into a position where if they fought someone, they would have absolutely nothing to gain and everything to lose (perhaps because his opponent was past his prime like Leonard against Hagler, too small like Bob Fitzimmons, just came from an injury, etc.)?
Frankly, I can't think of one. Can you? Something recent, maybe in the 21st century or something. Any suggestions accepted.
Jim Jeffries - I'm talking about his comeback fight against Jack Johnson during the "Great White Hope" period.
Jack Dempsey - he had nothing to gain and everything to lose against Georges Carpentier
Joe Louis - everything to lose and nothing to gain against light heavy champ Billy Conn
Larry Holmes- had nothing to gain against Gerry Cooney
Marvelous Marvin Hagler - had everything to lose and nothing to gain against Sugar Ray Leonard
Question: Which fighters in boxing history had pigeon holed themselves into a position where if they fought someone, they would have absolutely nothing to gain and everything to lose (perhaps because his opponent was past his prime like Leonard against Hagler, too small like Bob Fitzimmons, just came from an injury, etc.)?
Frankly, I can't think of one. Can you? Something recent, maybe in the 21st century or something. Any suggestions accepted.
Comment