You Can Lose To Someone And Still Be A 'Better' Fighter Than Them

[PK3434]

These dudes are fighting 2-3 times a year maximum. There is no room for having an off-night. Its not baseball.

[nubianpiye]

I disagree if you beat someone you are better than them. You could say someone has had a better career but they aren't a better fighter

[IronDanHamza]

It's a great question.

Logically, beating a fighter you'd think would make you better.

But then again styles do make fights.

Would anyone say Fernandez is better than Arguello? I wouldn't.

Raheem better than Morales?

Jimmy Young better than Foreman?

The list goes on and on.

Cocoa Kid beat Holman Williams 8 times. But most would say Williams is better.

[big_james10]

Just because you lose to someone doesn't mean they're a better overall fighter than you. It means they were better man that night, but if your overall resume and accomplishments are better (especially if you fought likewise opponents), then you are still the overall better fighter in my eyes. Ali lost to Frazier and Norton, and even if he had never gotten revenge on them by winning rematches, he would have still been 'better' - Just look at how he dominated George Foreman for eight rounds and knocked him out after Foreman had destroyed them both in two rounds apiece. His overall career resume would have still been more impressive. Etc., etc.

You sound like a "Pacquaio is better than Marquez even though Marquez KTFO Pacquaio apologist or an even though Mayweather beat Pacquaio, Pacquaio still have a better overall record fan.

The response to those two statements is No and Hell No!

[lopetego]

It's a great question.

Logically, beating a fighter you'd think would make you better.

But then again styles do make fights.

Would anyone say Fernandez is better than Arguello? I wouldn't.

Raheem better than Morales?

Jimmy Young better than Foreman?

The list goes on and on.

Cocoa Kid beat Holman Williams 8 times. But most would say Williams is better.

Agree

Would you say that bumbeater Chris John is a better fighter than JMM? or had a greater career?

No, styles makes fights and some styles and individual characteristics are poison for certain fighters, no matter how good they are. Master counterpunchers will struggle against ******* who force them to lead all the time, a genius inside fighter will struggle against a master clinchers, great sluggers struggle against movers who can outbox them and control the fight with the jab, etc.

The only way to avoid this kind of bad match ups is to avoid certain styles, becoming a serious cherrypicker *points at Mayweather*

[soul_survivor]

I agree but there a certain fan base that claims there a boxer who one of the best ever when he fought no one period of note....and gives him credit for "if" and fantasies fights and claims he the winner when the fight doesnt happen

LOL spot on.

I understand what TS is saying, although it doesn't always apply but in many cases it's true.

Who is better h2h is different in terms of who is better in a general, all round sense and overall greater. The latter depends on opposition beaten, legacy, title wins, how they won etc.

I think Bowe would beat Holyfield 6 or 7 times outta 10 but Id be crazy to rank Bowe higher (atg wise) in a heavyweight list. Just an example.

[Devon37]

You sound like a "Pacquaio is better than Marquez even though Marquez KTFO Pacquaio apologist or an even though Mayweather beat Pacquaio, Pacquaio still have a better overall record fan.

The response to those two statements is No and Hell No!

The problem is that this thinking doesn't hold up. So Marquez is better than Pac because he beat him. And Bradley is better than Marquez because he beat him..... But Pac beat Bradley. See what I mean.

[yngwie]

It's a great question.

Logically, beating a fighter you'd think would make you better.

But then again styles do make fights.

Would anyone say Fernandez is better than Arguello? I wouldn't.

Raheem better than Morales?

Jimmy Young better than Foreman?

The list goes on and on.

Cocoa Kid beat Holman Williams 8 times. But most would say Williams is better.

Well...Raheem is better than his record suggest

[Zaroku]

depends on the situation....like if they were both prime, size disparity, both guys respective resumes.


example....Aaron pryor beat Arguello head to head but el Flacco is definitely more accomplished and IMO the greater fighter....look at who both fought and the titles they won.


Pryor is the better 140 pounder but Arguello will be remembered as the greater fighter


when the resumes are similar...like say Mayweather and Pacquaio, the deciding factors can be WHEN they fought their opponents, and head to head results,

i.e. Mayweather fought Mosley, Cotto, Hatton, and DLH coming off career defining wins

Manny fought Cotto after he looked bad in his last 2 fights and had a tko loss recently.....Hatton was tkoed by Mayweather and wasnt impressive after...Mosley was 1-1-1 and hadnt won a fight in years........DLH looked pretty bad vs Forbes and lost to mayweather before he fought them


Manny won belt at 150 vs Unranked margarito...hell manny was ranked either for a vacant title....long lay off....fought a nobody and prior got beat to ***** by Mosley

Mayweather fought DLH, Canelo and Cotto. For belts they won in the ring and he took them by beating them fair and square



its not always the names but when and where you fight them in their respective careers

Excellent analysis! Good stuff!

[nubianpiye]

So Rahman was better then Lewis, then much worse after?

Yes at the time Rahman beat Lewis he was better than him, Lewis was distracted Unfocussed and sloppy the night that he lost. In the rematch Lewis was much better an won by knockout.

Leicester won the English premiere league this season next season Arsenal or Manchester united may win it, but last season Leicester were the best team and that won't change.