Can some one please explain what "exposed" mean?

[Chuckguy]

Does it mean losing? Because every fighter has lost. Whether it was a legit lose or a questionable win. All of them. All the greats many times the L came from lesser opposition.

This is boxing bumps and bruises. Wins and loses.

Many times a good fighter loses there are other factors that come in to play. Personal problems, injuries, off nights, bad match up or even there opponent was on some PED. Being a bum, hype job or exposed is hardly the reason. Can you imagine writing pacquiao off as a hype job after his first loss. Or Ali, or maweather after Castillo 1. You would have missed out on great careers. Let's stop downing a fighter for Losing and maybe start giving credit to the guy that won. Every fighter has lost and the your flavor of the month is going to too.

I'm not sure the people using the term "exposed" know what it means. Wilder for example. Wider is the kimbo slice of boxing. He can't get exposed. If anything wilder is exposing the heavy weight division. A back alley fighter koing actual boxers. Because let's be real. EVERYBODY that Wilder has beat is better than wilder.

Sure this will fall on deaf ears, but by you claiming every boxer that loses is "exposed" then you're sayin they lost to a "bum". If that's the case then every fighter sucks and boxing is a horrible sport.

Can you imagine you not getting a job after a interview and some one comes in the parking lot calling you "exposed" and picking apart your resume.

You win some you lose some. The Saying used to be, "it's not how you fall it's how you get back up". Well now it seems you can't lose a fcking round. Let's get it together.

It means that a hated fighter loses

[Ray*]

Someone getting “ expose”doesn’t mean they lose or lost. It could be people seeing that someone isn’t so especially like original thought.

[Lopez_Boxing]

Someone getting “ expose”doesn’t mean they lose or lost. It could be people seeing that someone isn’t so especially like original thought.

Being not as good as someone original thought, isn't exposing the boxing. It would be exposing the observer's eye for talent or lack there of.

[j.razor]

Props I don't know you twos relationship, but you seemed to end what appeared to be a heated debate with class.

Actually I have watched fights for years & even fought in that boxing ring & when I see comments that don't add up with what actually happens in fights I chime in to deflect that negativity even if they get negative with me (I defend myself) just like when they say Floyd Mayweather runs he doesn't fight & I see him making people miss while landing his punches so it makes no sense for these people to say the opposite. For some reason I can't let the nonsense go & I have fun with it & debate or try to "expose" them....lol...Now I'm waiting for some close matched fights or something he would not agree with me so we can keep count of our predictions.

[Lion81]

COOL. We just need to get some good scraps & so far not much. Lets keep count as we go on debating fights.

I would suggest fights with no black or Mexican fighters. To test our knowledge beyond fights of guys we know well and are fans of. Would make it harder to win.

[Lion81]

Props I don't know you twos relationship, but you seemed to end what appeared to be a heated debate with class.

Not heated, was mostly shooting jabs at Razor for shiiits and giggles. This place is fun when you troll a bit and poke fun at each other.

I was laughing at the EXPOSED words in a sentence. Didn't think it came off as jacked up.

[Ray*]

Being not as good as someone original thought, isn't exposing the boxing. It would be exposing the observer's eye for talent or lack there of.

Being not as good is different to being thought of as being special.

[paulf]

It's kinda like that.

[Richard G]

A blatant example of the abuse of the word 'expose' was when Horn was beaten by Crawford. We had those who were upset that their idol Packy had been officially beaten by Horn and who saw the Crawford result as some sort of justification or acknowledgement for their claim so that Horn had been 'exposed' as some sort of fraud who could only beaten Packy through corruption. Then we had the American status quo thing, who was this unknown foreigner coming over here thinking that he could beat our best, geez let's hope he can't, is it possible? Followed by relief that he couldn't, ha what a bum, he's been exposed, how did he get to be a challenger anyway.

Of course both the above attitudes carried with them the accusation that boxing officialdom was somehow in the wrong, to put it mildly. No thought that their criticism could damage the sport that they claim to follow, apparently their fandom was far more important and it's all that mattered. No thought that Horn may have had a bad day, no acknowledgement of how good Crawford is, no acknowledgement that his camp were a bunch of amateurs and his preparation rubbish. Nope, he was exposed as a hopeless bum and on this one performance should be written off forever. Geez.

[KillaMane26]

Exposed is moreso when we see a fighter weakness get took advantage of first time.

Victor Ortiz got exposed by Marcos
Pacquaio got exposed by Marquez
Imo Paulie exposed Broner
Marg exposed Cotto
Martinez exposed Willams
Ward exposed Sergey

All these fighters became easily beatable afterwards...The blueprint was set

Fury aint expose Wilder numbnuts!
When his last fight we saw his weakness already being exploited.