[dyna]

Surprised you didn't go with Oscar first. He took some losses, but he took some huge challenges, too.

Cotto, Mosley, Pac, JMM. If a fighter actually tests himself on a consistent basis, he'll eventually lose. And fans should support the guy for actually testing himself and taking the tough fights.

Oscar only didn't do rematches (most of the time)

 

[JeffJoiner]

Oscar only didn't do rematches (most of the time)

I wish he would have rematched Trinidad. I lost money on that fight and the fans wanted to see a rematch.

 

[Bjj_Boxer]

Because Floyd. That's his biggest legacy, single handedly bringing about the pussification of boxing.

 

[Bogotazo]

I think that Mexican fighters are generally brought up differently than American fighters. Those guys aren't concerned with the marketability of being undefeated, they are concerned with being the best at their weight and putting on entertaining fights. It's worth nothing, though, that JMM never had an '0' to protect; he was DQ'd in his first professional fight. Freddie Cruz's 50-9-7 looks impressive, but what was his level of opposition? He was basically a regional fighter who lost all of the major championship fights he'd ever been in, was 34 years old at the time, and was at the beginning stage of a stretch where he lost damn near every fight for the next ten years.

But you couldn't say that fighting Cruz was the same experience as fighting the other younger fighters he had in the fights before that. It was a different type of opponent with more experience for a different purpose.

I think it has less to do with the fact JMM was Mexican and more with the fact that you're gradually increasing your competition the first 20 fights. SRL's first 20 fights see opponents' records gradually grow in number of bouts. Then shortly after a continental title, then soon after that a world title.

Canelo was brought up like an American fighter. Managers know not only who to put their guys in with, but when to put them in there with them. Team Alvarez had a penchant for putting him in with welterweights; he wasn't even fighting people in his own division. He was going to beat Gomez, Cintron, and Mosley with no real difficulty; look at the stage of their careers when he fought them. Still, he was already up around 40 professional fights by that time and his team didn't even want him to fight Trout when he did. The Mayweather fight was built primarily off the strength of each fighter's undefeated record.

But those fights were necessary learning experiences. Canelo was actually behind against Gomez when the fight was stopped, and you could see Canelo was trying some shoulder roll techniques for the first time. Fast forward a few years to the Trout fight and he's much slicker. The Canelo from the Gomez fight wasn't ready for a Trout level guy.

With young Mexicans you also have to remember they don't have extensive amateur careers. Canelo turned pro as a young teenager. He can have 20 easy fights because he's learning how to fight in the first place. So the NEXT 20 are his normal progression.

Errol Spence is a unique case. He has Olympic pedigree, but no real marketability outside of the ring. Floyd Mayweather jump-started his worldwide notoriety, but he's had to earn and prove everything in the ring, on his own. I love his career progression so far.

I guess my only point is that a fighter with 20 fights isn't just padding their record. They're a necessary part of building a fighter.

 

[Duo]

I researched this fairly assiduously, but apparently, the very first challenger of the HW Title during the Queensberry Era who was undefeated and untied was Marciano. He became the great exception to the axiom expressed by Billy Conn that "When a fighter's undefeated, there's something wrong." Then Patterson defended against a quartet of undefeated challengers (Harris, McNeely, Ingo and the blank slate amateur Olympian Rademacher), then as went the heavyweights, so went boxing.

Pat O'Grady deliberately overmatched his son Sean against Danny Lopez to get that undefeated albatross off the Bubblegum Bomber's back.

The way times have changed is a key reason I couldn't name a single current "champion" today.

 

[NoMas]

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

I believe this is true, to a degree... I can understand protecting yourself or your fighters until they have enough money to live off and to get their career in place...

But once they have already made 'set for life' money and are a household name etc which means they can bounce back from a loss as they still have TV networks interested (khan for instance), sponsors and fans and etc surely you would think fighters would want the glory of fighting the best and really testing themselves???

 

[NoMas]

Fighters who end up with a few losses or even know they are limited but have an aggressive style, and as I think Budd Schulberg once said skilled in 'the manly arnt of no defence', I think they often tend to almost resign themselves the fact they may not become of the best ever, but can be involved in some of the best FIGHTS ever and they can also atleast become fan favourites, i.e the great Gatti and earn great money at the same time... Gatti might not be the most skilled fighter in history, but he is one of my favourite fighters in history...

 

[Haggis]

As an example of what little it means when top contenders rack up rosters, here is the schedule in the MW division for the next 2 months. As per official UFC rankings:

Oct. 8 - #5 vs #9
Nov. 12 - #2 vs #4
Nov. 27 - #1 vs #3
Nov. 27 - #7 vs #8

That's the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 ranked fighters - almost half of the top 10 will have taken a loss in a non-title fight two months from now. And MMA fans are hyped for this, as they should be. It's two months of great fights. The winners of #2 vs #4 and #1 vs #3 will come out looking very strong. The losers will fight someone else in the top 10 and have a chance to recover their standing. Until boxing figures this out again, it's going to lose more and more ground.

:hat

 

[Cableaddict]

As an example of what little it means when top contenders rack up rosters, here is the schedule in the MW division for the next 2 months. As per official UFC rankings:

Oct. 8 - #5 vs #9
Nov. 12 - #2 vs #4
Nov. 27 - #1 vs #3
Nov. 27 - #7 vs #8

That's the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 ranked fighters - almost half of the top 10 will have taken a loss in a non-title fight two months from now. And MMA fans are hyped for this, as they should be. It's two months of great fights. The winners of #2 vs #4 and #1 vs #3 will come out looking very strong. The losers will fight someone else in the top 10 and have a chance to recover their standing. Until boxing figures this out again, it's going to lose more and more ground.

:hat

Bloody fantastic!

if only it wasn't so GAY. A bunch of sweaty men, in tights, rolling around on the floor & grunting....

:lol:

 

[Haggis]

Bloody fantastic!

if only it wasn't so GAY. A bunch of sweaty men, in tights, rolling around on the floor & grunting....

:lol:

Sometimes. And sometimes you get incredible blood and guts wars that are contested almost exclusively on the feet.

First minute of round 1:

Last minute of round 1:

You like watching fights? The best fights aren't in boxing any more sorry mate. :good

Hey, a couple of weeks ago this is how the 240 pound former HW champion opened up his first fight since getting knocked out and losing the title:

How's that whole Fury-Wlad thing playing out? What about Joshua and Wilder - are they seeking out tough challenges and putting on exciting, competitive fights? You getting value for money out of the heavyweight division these last 15 years or so? Or is there more action and excitement in that 3 second gif than Wlad and Fury combined have given you in the last 18 months. :yep

:hat

 

[Haggis]

But once they have already made 'set for life' money and are a household name etc which means they can bounce back from a loss

There's no such thing as "set for life money" for most boxers or athletes in general mate. :lol:

:hat

 

[dyna]

are they seeking out tough challenges and putting on exciting, competitive fights? You getting value for money out of the heavyweight division these last 15 years or so?

Last 15 years or so?

 

[Haggis]

Last 15 years or so?

I will watch that later tonight. I haven't seen it before. :good

:hat

 

[NoMas]

There's no such thing as "set for life money" for most boxers or athletes in general mate. :lol:

:hat

Haha you know what I mean, once they have the money before they piss it away then :lol:

 

[Bogotazo]

Bloody fantastic!

if only it wasn't so GAY. A bunch of sweaty men, in tights, rolling around on the floor & grunting....

:lol:

Referring to MMA, it's not comparable. The depth of world class competition just doesn't exist. It's too new of a sport, involving too many disciplines to have the depth that boxing does.

I mean the biggest recent star in the sport, Conor McGregor, lost to someone who supposedly hadn't even sparred for their fight, having just 8 days to prepare of it. Unheard of in boxing despite any size difference. The UFC has had a few dominant fighters, but at some point, taking numerous losses stops being about the quality of competition and starts to reveal a lack of an elite class with enough mastery to rule over a division.

Not to mention the horrid treatment of fighters as employees. I don't like when boxers get overpaid, but I'd rather that than people who take physical abuse for a living to get underpaid and lack a democratic voice in their professional lives.

 

[dyna]

involving too many disciplines to have the depth that boxing does.

I think it's mainly this.

The more different disciplines, the harder it is to master and the more "random" it becomes.
You can't be a master at BJJ, kickboxer and boxer at the same time. (master as in being Mayweather like in that discipline)

With all those variables almost all top fighters have very realistic chances for an upset so true dominance is hard to achieve. It just feels a little random.

Imagine if UFC had even less rules and soccer kicks to a grounded opponent where still allowed.
You could be the best wrestler in the world but one little mistake or slip and you're on the receiving end of a guy who thinks he's Ronaldo and your head the ball.

Too many disciplines are required, and you simply can't master it all at once.
Even in boxing, you have people in the game for 2 decades and they still haven't mastered pugilism. And boxing is the simples combat sport of them all because it is just your fists.

Imagine if they were in MMA and instead of trying to master 1 discipline (which they already couldn't) they have to do it with 4/5 disciplines.
You just get a bunch of jack of all trades who can all upset each other rather easily.

 

[Haggis]

Referring to MMA, it's not comparable. The depth of world class competition just doesn't exist. It's too new of a sport, involving too many disciplines to have the depth that boxing does.

"Depth of world class competition" doesn't mean anything if nobody ever fights each other.

I mean the biggest recent star in the sport, Conor McGregor, lost to someone who supposedly hadn't even sparred for their fight, having just 8 days to prepare of it. Unheard of in boxing despite any size difference.

Unheard of in boxing for a superstar to accept a fight 25 pounds up from their last fight, and 15 pounds up from the weight they were contracted to fight at 11 days earlier.

Also, the size difference. Yeah, that's a bigger deal in MMA than it is in boxing, and:

But still.... trash that fight all you want. It was very dramatic, sold a million PPVs and led to a rematch which sold even more and was an even more exciting fight. The rematch got signed without two years of fucking around, and the fans paid their money and went home happy.

The UFC has had a few dominant fighters, but at some point, taking numerous losses stops being about the quality of competition and starts to reveal a lack of an elite class with enough mastery to rule over a division.

Top fighters:

Jon Jones, 22-1. Lone loss was a bullshit DQ due to a rule that has now been changed.
Anderson Silva. Won 16 straight fights in the UFC before getting KOed by the top contender at age 38.
Georges St-Pierre: Career record, 25-2. Both losses in title fights, both avenged. One of them avenged twice.
Demetrious Johnson: 24-2-1. Both losses came at bantamweight, one of them to the current champ.
Daniel Cormier: 19-1 across two divisions. Only loss was to Jones the GOAT.

You don't know shit about MMA Bogo, you just hate it 'cause you're threatened by it. It's hilarious when you watch a big PPV full of evenly-matched, action packed fights and then you cry about it.

Not to mention the horrid treatment of fighters as employees. I don't like when boxers get overpaid, but I'd rather that than people who take physical abuse for a living to get underpaid and lack a democratic voice in their professional lives.

They have a voice. They can go to Bellator. Some have. Or they can do something else for a living. I don't like it that tree cutters have to work with equipment that is dangerous for lefthanders. So I'm not a tree cutter. Meanwhile, look at the boxing forums. 80% of the threads seem to be about contract negotiations breaking down or one fighter ducking another.

:hat

 

[Haggis]

I think it's mainly this.

The more different disciplines, the harder it is to master and the more "random" it becomes.
You can't be a master at BJJ, kickboxer and boxer at the same time. (master as in being Mayweather like in that discipline)

With all those variables almost all top fighters have very realistic chances for an upset so true dominance is hard to achieve. It just feels a little random.

Imagine if UFC had even less rules and soccer kicks to a grounded opponent where still allowed.
You could be the best wrestler in the world but one little mistake or slip and you're on the receiving end of a guy who thinks he's Ronaldo and your head the ball.

Too many disciplines are required, and you simply can't master it all at once.
Even in boxing, you have people in the game for 2 decades and they still haven't mastered pugilism. And boxing is the simples combat sport of them all because it is just your fists.

Imagine if they were in MMA and instead of trying to master 1 discipline (which they already couldn't) they have to do it with 4/5 disciplines.
You just get a bunch of jack of all trades who can all upset each other rather easily.

That's true to an extent, but it's not like most/all of the divisions haven't seen dominant champions. GSP was 12-2 in title fights and every one of them was vs a top contender who presented a completely different stylistic puzzle. Anderson was 11-0 in title fights up until his 38th birthday. Jon Jones is 10-0 in title fights. DJ is 9-0 in BW title fights. All these guys face top guys for every defence. There's no comparison at all as to which sport makes better, more competitive matchups. Which is why MMA is on fire right now and boxing has no buzz at all.

:hat

 

[Bogotazo]

You just get a bunch of jack of all trades who can all upset each other rather easily.

Exactly. Well said.

 

[Haggis]

Exactly. Well said.

How easy is it to upset Jon Jones, or Demetrious Johnson?

:hat