Why are boxers so concerned with a loss?

[Mrboogie23]

It's almost like they believe one loss will completely destroy their careers. Fight the best and stop worrying about losses.

The greatest of all time had 19 losses on his record. Who gives a shit? Robinson was the man we all know it. People need to take more risks. This diva mentality, these catch weights, all this bullshit just stressed me out.

Fight the best, take a risk, reap the rewards. If you lose, you took risk, good on you. Earn some fans.

 

[dyna]

The greatest of all time is 49-0 though.

And which man was too pretty for Burley?

Which man let himself be featured in cigarette advertisements?

 

[Mrboogie23]

The greatest of all time is 49-0 though.

And which man was too pretty for Burley?

Which man let himself be featured in cigarette advertisements?

 

[wow_junky]

Really?

It directly affects their earning power for the following 12-18 months, unless they are already a house hold name. Losing can also have a big affect on their confidence and career progression, which is very dangerous in a sport like boxing where you need to have a titanium mentality

Now as fans we don't care about money but this is their livelihood remember, so they most certainly do care

 

[A.C.S]

I believe its because of Mayweather, people would pay to see him lose and he would use the 0 for bragging rights, when I see a fighter whos undefeated it brings a kind of boogeyman effect to him, lets say if GGG had a loss his whole KO beast aura goes out the window

 

[turbotime]

Really?

It directly affects their earning power for the following 12-18 months, unless they are already a house hold name. Losing can also have a big affect on their confidence and career progression, which is very dangerous in a sport like boxing where you need to have a titanium mentality

Now as fans we don't care about money but this is their livelihood remember, so they most certainly do care

Especially rhey aren't having 200 fights. The game has changed.

 

[turbotime]

mayweather was going to be undefeated regardless, he was caught in the inbetween of old school fighters, then came the pussy footers. Mayweather was right down the middle at a perfect time. There is a reason people try and be him so much

 

[gumbo2176]

You mention Ray Robinson as the best there ever was and I won't argue that point. However, look at all the fights he had before he retired. He had 198 career bouts, so 19 losses works out to 1 in just a hint over every 10 bouts. Most of today's fighters won't come near to 50 bouts before they retire from the game.

I think it is probably way more important to try to remain undefeated until you get in the ring against a proven opponent to not lose the public's interest if you suffer a loss. Much like this kid Liam Smith did against Canelo last night. His stock hasn't fallen from his loss in my opinion. Hell, he went 9 rounds with the guy before being stopped.

Then take into consideration the money these fighters stand to make, or lose because of their record. The paying public----and the networks would rather have 2 undefeated fighters or a couple of warriors like Gatti and Ward headlining their card if they want to make money off the gate. The more money the promoters make, usually the more money the fighters stand to make. It all boils down to the almighty dollar in the long run.

 

[Mrboogie23]

You mention Ray Robinson as the best there ever way and I won't argue that point. However, look at all the fights he had before he retired. He had 198 career bouts, so 19 losses works out to 1 in just a hint over every 10 bouts. Most of today's fighters won't come near to 50 bouts before they retire from the game.

I think it is probably way more important to try to remain undefeated until you get in the ring against a proven opponent to not lose the public's interest if you suffer a loss. Much like this kid Liam Smith did against Canelo last night. His stock hasn't fallen from his loss in my opinion. Hell, he went 9 rounds with the guy before being stopped.

Then take into consideration the money these fighters stand to make, or lose because of their record. The paying public----and the networks would rather have 2 undefeated fighters or a couple of warriors like Gatti and Ward headlining their card if they want to make money off the gate. The more money the promoters make, usually the more money the fighters stand to make. It all boils down to the almighty dollar in the long run.

Very valid points. I agree with you. It's unfortunate though. Look at someone like Gatti, he had multiple losses but people wanted to see him fight. He put it all on the line.

I guess what I'm saying is, would we as boxing fans be willing to pay for watching a fighter that constantly gave it his hall against the very best but took a few L's in the process?

 

[turbotime]

I guess what I'm saying is, would we as boxing fans be willing to pay for watching a fighter that constantly gave it his hall against the very best but took a few L's in the process?

Look no further than Carl Froch.

world classssss stuff. He earned every penny.

 

[Medicine]

It's almost like they believe one loss will completely destroy their careers. Fight the best and stop worrying about losses.

The greatest of all time had 19 losses on his record. Who gives a shit? Robinson was the man we all know it. People need to take more risks. This diva mentality, these catch weights, all this bullshit just stressed me out.

Fight the best, take a risk, reap the rewards. If you lose, you took risk, good on you. Earn some fans.

It's because of the fans. GGG lost 1 clear round to brook and fans are on here calling him a bum and claiming he got exposed...and thats after winning a fight by 5th round TKO.... Now Imagine if he lost.

Boxing fans are the worst. No respect for fighters.

 

[gumbo2176]

It's because of the fans. GGG lost 1 clear round to brook and fans are on here calling him a bum and claiming he got exposed...and thats after winning a fight by 5th round TKO.... Now Imagine if he lost.

Boxing fans are the worst. No respect for fighters.[/QUOTE}

What I've realized for a long time now about this site is there are many UK folks that post here. They are rabid fans when it comes to supporting fellow countrymen, and that is an admirable quality.

However, when some of them were touting how Khan was going to expose Canelo and Brook would take GGG deep and possibly beat him just goes to show the level of fanaticism they possess and don't look at the overall picture of the talent their fighters are facing.

I wonder how many of them put their money where their mouths were and bet on Khan and Brook

 

[Bogotazo]

I don't blame Floyd in terms of him doing it directly, but being undefeated is now more important ever since he marketed his 0. Larry Merchant said that never used to be a thing in boxing and while I'm not old enough to remember, I don't recall hearing a lot of commentary in the old fights I watched where the emphasis was on the fact the guy never lost. I remember watching an Adrien Broner interview where they asked him about fighting Maidana, and he said "he already lost though", as if that makes him an unworthy opponent. Well look what happened. Thurman also just said Brook made a marketing mistake by losing and no longer having the undefeated title to his name, but that the media could spin it as undefeated at welterweight. It's now almost necessary for any up and comer.

It has to do a lot with the fact fighters don't fight as often anymore. Even guys who aren't PPV attractions like Thurman and Garcia fight once or twice a year at most. So if you lose, it's harder to bounce back from that loss. It's in everyone's mind for a long time. You take a tune-up, then a medium level opponent, bam it's a year later and other fights have happened in the division.

Let's look at a list of undefeated big name fighters in the sport:

Chocolatito
Fury
Wilder
GGG
Spence
Thurman
Garcia
Crawford

A lot of those guys have yet to face their biggest tests. But they've done enough to catch people's attention while undefeated, so they want to keep it that way. Spence, Thurman, and Garcia should all mix it up at some point, but different factors look to delay that.

 

[Haggis]

I believe its because of Mayweather, people would pay to see him lose and he would use the 0 for bragging rights, when I see a fighter whos undefeated it brings a kind of boogeyman effect to him, lets say if GGG had a loss his whole KO beast aura goes out the window

Which is ridiculous.

Foreman, Tyson, Hearns, Jackson, they all lost, they are all remembered as KO beasts.

Rumble Johnson has 5 career losses and he is near-universally regarded as the most frightening KO threat in MMA. OK he has won 12 of his last 13, the only loss was to the champ and he dropped him hard 30 seconds into the fight, but 5 losses mean absolutely nothing when it comes to his punching power.

 

[Haggis]

Very valid points. I agree with you. It's unfortunate though. Look at someone like Gatti, he had multiple losses but people wanted to see him fight. He put it all on the line.

I guess what I'm saying is, would we as boxing fans be willing to pay for watching a fighter that constantly gave it his hall against the very best but took a few L's in the process?

I'd rather watch a Gatti type who fights all comers and puts it on the line for the fans every time and loses 4 out of 10 fights, than someone with a higher level of skill and a shinier record who never challenges himself.

 

[Haggis]

Diaz Brothers:

Combined MMA record: 45-20.

Status among MMA fans: Revered. Main-event fighters with legendary resumes and highlight reels in both victory and defeat. Twenty losses? Nobody gives a shit, Diaz fights are awesome and something to be looked forward to.

 

[Stone Rose]

What I've realized for a long time now about this site is there are many UK folks that post here. They are rabid fans when it comes to supporting fellow countrymen, and that is an admirable quality.

However, when some of them were touting how Khan was going to expose Canelo and Brook would take GGG deep and possibly beat him just goes to show the level of fanaticism they possess and don't look at the overall picture of the talent their fighters are facing.

I wonder how many of them put their money where their mouths were and bet on Khan and Brook

I don't recall anyone saying Khan would beat canelo and it was only thr casual fans who thought brook might win. The bookies and the fans in the know we're fully aware it was never gonna happen .

 

[A.C.S]

Which is ridiculous.

Foreman, Tyson, Hearns, Jackson, they all lost, they are all remembered as KO beasts.

Rumble Johnson has 5 career losses and he is near-universally regarded as the most frightening KO threat in MMA. OK he has won 12 of his last 13, the only loss was to the champ and he dropped him hard 30 seconds into the fight, but 5 losses mean absolutely nothing when it comes to his punching power.

Yeah I know but I think times have changed I blame Mayweather, people see Lemieux and think hes a bum because of his losses not knowing hes improved since then, people saw Maidana as a one dimensional brawler because of his record but showed he has improved, but people do get more excited when they are undefeated

 

[paloalto00]

Money. The average viewer doesn't care about who they fought, just if they won. 1 loss, bullshit decision or not can completely derail their income.

If you want to see real competitive fights, watch the amateurs

 

[sugarshane_24]

Yeah I know but I think times have changed I blame Mayweather, people see Lemieux and think hes a bum because of his losses not knowing hes improved since then, people saw Maidana as a one dimensional brawler because of his record but showed he has improved, but people do get more excited when they are undefeated

Oddly, the undefeated mystique didn't bode well for Rigo's marketing ability.