BoxRec

Do you think that boxing is more accurate in determining who is the superior boxer based on result than other individual sports?

For example in tennis Andy Murray might compete against someone who is 20 rankings below him and get blown away in straight sets, whereas in boxing if someone gets blown away in a couple of rounds there is almost never a rematch.

I'm not stating this should change, I just find it interesting to ponder whether off nights or someone performing above their usual level can provide us with the incorrect perception of a boxers ability.

Thoughts?

If a fighter loses a contest, it usually spells disaster for their legacy, earning potential and future opportunities.

In other sports, possibly because they compete more often and also because there is only one governing body, facing no political issues (such as TV network or promotional rivalries), then defeat can quickly be forgotten about and has little to no impact.

Boxing is unique, in the fact that the winner of bouts is usually more superior (sporting-wise) than their defeated opponent, barring injury and massive misfortune, such as one-punch KO and poor judges/refereeing.

In other sports, the athletes compete more frequently, which means that peaks and troughs in their fitness/exhaustion levels can unduly influence their success, whereas boxers should be in their physical and mental peak for each fight (assuming they only compete [typically] three times a year).

samdance wrote:Do you think that boxing is more accurate in determining who is the superior boxer based on result than other individual sports?

For example in tennis Andy Murray might compete against someone who is 20 rankings below him and get blown away in straight sets, whereas in boxing if someone gets blown away in a couple of rounds there is almost never a rematch.

I'm not stating this should change, I just find it interesting to ponder whether off nights or someone performing above their usual level can provide us with the incorrect perception of a boxers ability.

Thoughts?

Two entirely different Sports. Tennis players don't use fist's to beat each other up.

Whenever judges decide who wins, there is no accuracy. The more money is involved, the higher chance of bad decisions.

Enlightened-One wrote:If a fighter loses a contest, it usually spells disaster for their legacy, earning potential and future opportunities.

In other sports, possibly because they compete more often and also because there is only one governing body, facing no political issues (such as TV network or promotional rivalries), then defeat can quickly be forgotten about and has little to no impact.

Boxing is unique, in the fact that the winner of bouts is usually more superior (sporting-wise) than their defeated opponent, barring injury and massive misfortune, such as one-punch KO and poor judges/refereeing.

In other sports, the athletes compete more frequently, which means that peaks and troughs in their fitness/exhaustion levels can unduly influence their success, whereas boxers should be in their physical and mental peak for each fight (assuming they only compete [typically] three times a year).

Great logical and thoughtful response

MachoTime wrote:

samdance wrote:Do you think that boxing is more accurate in determining who is the superior boxer based on result than other individual sports?

For example in tennis Andy Murray might compete against someone who is 20 rankings below him and get blown away in straight sets, whereas in boxing if someone gets blown away in a couple of rounds there is almost never a rematch.

I'm not stating this should change, I just find it interesting to ponder whether off nights or someone performing above their usual level can provide us with the incorrect perception of a boxers ability.

Thoughts?

Two entirely different Sports. Tennis players don't use fist's to beat each other up.

Terrible response!

boxing_rocks wrote:Whenever judges decide who wins, there is no accuracy. The more money is involved, the higher chance of bad decisions.

That's not the point of this subject matter, its more to do with your perception