A Great Fighter Would NEVER LOSE to a Low Level Opponent

[BoxingIsGreat]

I voted true, but I'd go with both true and false. According to one's agenda, strong arguments can be made for either.

[KingHippo]

Thinly veiled Lomachenko thread but I do agree.

[Real King Kong]

Almost all great fighters lose to lower level opponents near the end of their careers. Throwing the word "never" in there pretty well ruins it.

How about you make a thread on all the "great fighters" who didn't face 10-15 no hopers to begin their careers.

[LacedUp]

James Toney lost to an italian journeyman yet people think he's one of the greatest of all times.

[jas]

a great fighter in his prime wouldnt

a great fighter past his prime can do so and has done

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Almost all great fighters lose to lower level opponents near the end of their careers. Throwing the word "never" in there pretty well ruins it.

How about you make a thread on all the "great fighters" who didn't face 10-15 no hopers to begin their careers.

In this era? There are like a handful of fighters who do that now. In the old days, most guys faced tougher opposition early on which is why many had early losses and the "0" mattered much less than it does now.

[Shinkyokushin92]

It depends on how they lose.

If it's by a 1 punch KO, then not necessarily. Sometimes top fighters get caught cold or by surprise - it can happen.

However, if a top fighter gets outpointed/out hustled by a lower level guy, then that is inexcusable.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Robert Villemain beat a prime Jake Lamotta. Was Lamotta a bum?

[Real King Kong]

Robert Villemain beat a prime Jake Lamotta. Was Lamotta a bum?

Yea he was...and he took robinson's 0, which in turn makes Robinson a bum also.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Yea he was...and he took robinson's 0, which in turn makes Robinson a bum also.