Why do some boxers get praised for winning by decision whilst others get discredited?

[pasawayako]

He was right though. He deserved it. So he had to go and prove without a doubt he was the best of his era. Now almost all writers etc have him as the best of his era and a topp 10 ATG. While fart catcher gradually tumbles down the lists.

The only thing that mayweather proved is that he used illegal IV to masks the PEDS but in the fight pac proved to the world that he beat floyd in his own game with just one healthy arm. Pac counter the so called counter puncher master.

[bluebeam]

Best example.
Pac vs Mosley
Floyd vs Mosley

Pac got discredited for knocking down and winning every rounds.

Floyd got credited for being almost knock down and winning the decision.

you left out that pac fought mosley a year after floyd beat mosley. and 9 months after mosley had a draw with mora.

if mosley was old when floyd beat him. what was he after pac beat him?

floyd gets no credit, neither does pac.

simple

[BrometheusBob.]

>Compares Barrera to Enrico Koelling & Christian Hammer
>Expects Beterbiev to receive the same amount of praise as Ward, despite not accomplishing nearly as much



You are the one applying the double standard, friend

[g27region]

Why does this double, triple or more of those standards exist among boxing fans? When one boxer wins a decision by shutout, winning every round in the process. They get criticized for being exposed or lacking this or that ability. Whilst when other boxers accomplish this exact same feat. They are credited and praised for displaying 'high level boxing skills'.

An example of this would be Artur Beterbiev taking 12 rounds to stop Enrico Koelling. Despite Beterbiev winning every round comfortably until the 12th where he eventually dropped and finished off Koelling. Some of the fans are discrediting Beterbiev for apparently being 'exposed' or 'not being good enough' or 'lacking x, y or z ability'. Another similar example is Alexander Povetkin beating Christian Hammer by shutout 12 rounds decision and ends up being discredited similarly to how Beterbiev was discredited by those fans after his win over Koelling.

Yet, when Andre Ward beats someone like Alexander Brand or Sullivan Barrera by decision. It somehow apparently shows Andre Ward is such a 'skilled boxer' with such 'high level boxing abilities', according to those same fans discrediting decision victories of Beterbiev and Povetkin. Even though Andre Ward pretty much accomplished the same feat as the other two boxers?

Why do these multiple standards exist for different boxers? Why can't every boxer be judged / evaluated by the same standard?

Beterbiev is a knockout artist and aggressive so boxing fans weren't expecting that fight to go distance. They were waiting for vicious knockout because that's how Beterbiev wins his fights and that didn't happen. It's not surprising they were disappointed with this performance

Ward is not a puncher, he's a spoiler and fans got what they were expecting from Ward. The way Ward fought against that Argentinian was expected

Simple as that

[j.razor]

The only thing that mayweather proved is that he used illegal IV to masks the PEDS but in the fight pac proved to the world that he beat floyd in his own game with just one healthy arm. Pac counter the so called counter puncher master.

So can you please explain the tests he took BEFORE the IV?

[mlac]

>Compares Barrera to Enrico Koelling & Christian Hammer
>Expects Beterbiev to receive the same amount of praise as Ward, despite not accomplishing nearly as much



You are the one applying the double standard, friend

Not sure you know what double standard means? As far as i can tell hes talking about levels of criticism applied to beterbiev which from what ive read is true, not levels of praise.

As for Barrera don't pretend like you even knew who he was when Ward was fighting him.

[Sheldon312]

It depends on the pedestal you put a fighter on. Guys like Crawford and Ward can get away with it because they are fighting against racism. Golovkin an Keith can't because they are coons

[pasawayako]

So can you please explain the tests he took BEFORE the IV?

Floyd had USADA in his pocket. And why would floyd use illegal amount of IV? Everyone knew that armstrong use illegal IV to masks the PEDS.

[BrometheusBob.]

Mayweather gets hardly any credit for that fight. Even though Mosley was the lineal champ and Pacquiao ducked him. Pacquiao's trainer even said Mosley was "too good"

And despite the fact that, at the time, people told Mayweather he would not fight Mosley who was rated #1 at the weight for beating Margarito to a pulp.

Memories are short in this sport. People wanted that fight badly at the time, and then when Mayweather gets 10 or 11 rounds in the bag they are ready to dismiss the fight as irrelevant. Not that I'd put it in his top 5 wins or anything.

[Mr Objecitivity]

Beterbiev is a knockout artist and aggressive so boxing fans weren't expecting that fight to go distance. They were waiting for vicious knockout because that's how Beterbiev wins his fights and that didn't happen. It's not surprising they were disappointed with this performance

Ward is not a puncher, he's a spoiler and fans got what they were expecting from Ward. The way Ward fought against that Argentinian was expected

Simple as that

You are giving linear interpretations to complicated questions and expecting linear answers. Fact is every fight, and every situation is different and needs to be judged on its own merit.

Also comes down to expectations vs reality, which fans themselves are as guilty as anyone of over-hyping and building up expectations.

If I take your example - normally fighters who have accomplished a lot and been in with the best, fans have a fix on their level and the pattern their fights tend to follow. Those fighters have also probably earned more leeway for a stale performance because of those overall accomplishments. We are talking about someone like Ward now.

After those Barrera and Brand performances he was getting stick anyway, he got hit more than normal against Barrera and fought below par against Brand. But lots of people still picking him over Kovalev because at his best, people have seen what he is capable of. He shuts down top level fighters, but he's not a knock out artist.

When you look at Beterbiev - his reputation has been built on being a fearsome puncher who puts his opponent under pressure. He will be judged on the effectiveness of his style, and his ability to take that style to elite level. He hasn't fought at elite level yet, so at this stage people are trying to interpret if he's good enough. I guess if he's already being taken deep into fights, looked ok, and he hasn't reached top level yet, people are going to question his credentials because he doesn't have that track record.

Fair or not that's how it goes. Maybe Koeilling was just very durable, time will tell.

No offence though, but comparing two fighters with two completely different styles is not smart, and whilst double standards do exist, I don't think this is a good example at all.

I think a better example would be Golovkin. You know that's what you were getting at, why not just say it? He was billed as an unstoppable monster with a near perfect KO ratio. Danny Jacobs was supposed to be chinny and was expected to get demolished in a few rounds. Golovkin's team and fans held him to a different standard. When it went 12 rounds not only did the critics say he was exposed but the excuse from his fans was that he was old. Everyone knows Ward or Mayweather are not KO artists. No one hold them to the same standards as fighters like Golovkin, Kovalev, or even Beterbiev. When Stevens went 12 rounds with Fonfara he was supposedly exposed. No one made any excuse that he was old.

My question is, irrespective of what a boxer's style is, why give one boxer credit for accomplishing a feat that has a specific level of difficulty (winning a bout by decision by winning every round), but not give another boxer the same credit after they accomplish this very same feat which is of the same level of difficulty?

Not being a knockout artist isn't a style. It's lack of a style. Lacking an ability to perform something isn't a style at all. Thus, Ward's inability to KO / stop opponents isn't a style but a lack of.

The same Ward fans who were criticizing Golovkin's performance against Kell Brook and Artur Beterbiev's performance against Enrico Koelling weren't applying the same criticism towards Andre Ward's performance against Alexander Brand. In what way did Andre Ward perform better against Alexander Brand than Artur Beterbiev's performance against Enrico Koelling? What rules indicate that Artur Beterbiev isn't allowed to win a boxing bout by shutout 12 rounds decision but Andre Ward is? Last time I checked, it was 'EQUAL RULES FOR EVERYBODY' or at least that's how it's supposed to be.

Who decides how a boxer should box anyway? Artur Beterbiev isn't obligated to fulfill any extra rules than Andre Ward is supposed to. They both should follow the same rules evenly. Artur Beterbiev never claimed he was a knockout artist and that he would KO every one of his opponents within 12 rounds or that he shouldn't be awarded a victory if a boxing bout that he is involved in lasts 12 rounds. So why should he be discredited for accomplishing the exact same feat as Andre Ward which Ward doesn't get discredited for?

Should we claim that Andre Ward was 'exposed' if he scores a rare knockout victory since apparently it isn't his 'style' to KO opponents, just like how it's not Beterbiev's 'style' to win by decision and just like how Beterviev would get criticized for being exposed if that were to happen?

This entire argument is a bit like two individuals performing the same exam / test where one individual expects to get 80% in their result and end up getting 80% whilst the other individual expects to get 100% but ends up getting 80% as well instead. In the end, both did equally well but the second participant gets criticized and discredited more, because their expectations were higher, despite their results being equally impressive as the other participant.

The main problem here is that boxers are being judged by expectation, rather than by their results / feats.