BoxRec

elite fighters used to have lots of losses, but would still be regarded as top fighters and not treated like they were totally finished after 1 L

whereas today, let's take aj losing 1 f@cking fight, you had a huge amount of people saying he was finished. this was even from hardcore fans, many of whom claim losses are no big deal but then act otherwise

fighters who are hyped but then lose are treated like castaways much of the time, and even when they take that loss stepping up they will be regarded as lower than unbeaten fighters who are just beating cans.



when did taking an L become so damaging? when did we all become sissy snowflakes who treat a loss like it's the end of the world?

and related to that


what should be done to make it less stigmatized.


one thing i suggested on another thread is related to activity--when fighters lose they often become inactive, and basically sit on the loss. if fighters were busier and came back quick with a good result after losing, it would help to remind us that a loss isnt the end of the world

in the ufc, fighters who lose are still matched in good fights after the loss, and often immediately win their way back. whereas in boxing, you more often have a guy sitting out for a long while, then being put in against nobodies which dont really boost him back up

I would say early to mid 90s when sky got into the game. They built up their fighters and seemed to be obsessed with fighters protecting their “0”

That started with Eubank - the punters flocked in the hopes of seeing him finally knocked off his perch.

Floyd retiring before his loss didn’t help.

coghaugen11 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2021, 18:31 That started with Eubank - the punters flocked in the hopes of seeing him finally knocked off his perch.

Floyd retiring before his loss didn’t help.

He never sold tickets anyway!

Probably a few things at play today, money the main one, social media and maybe fighters being more aware of the dangers than ever before. As someone else said though, when the TV networks became involved.

mickey1975 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2021, 18:45

coghaugen11 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2021, 18:31 That started with Eubank - the punters flocked in the hopes of seeing him finally knocked off his perch.

Floyd retiring before his loss didn’t help.

He never sold tickets anyway!

His promoter did via posters on walls in streets (if they stayed on) with a slightly visible landline telephone number. 5x a year for 5 years at G-Mex, Earls Court, NEC, Olympia, Old Trafford or wherever.

He didn’t have much of a local Brighton following or whatever but obviously the wider public wanted to see him leap the ropes in the flesh (and the yobs wanted to see him beat and go there to boo and SPIT.)

I remember struggling to actually know how to get a ticket for OT. No internet etc. Nearly gave in and settled for TV.


I’ve noticed you trolling in quite a few threads now. Sort yourself out. It’s midnight.

Always been there off course to a certain standard, but fighters fought much more often it could fade quicker.

Take Joe Louis losing his 0 vs Schmeling - yes it could be looked at that he got his shot very quickly despite the defeat, but that defeat was still a major major story. Ali vs Frazier 1 was another where there was a mention on the unblemished record.

Obviously the manner of the loss is another factor - take Leonard vs Duran and Hagler's early career losses - in Leonard's it was a narrow defeat against an ATG in which he fought tactically terribly and with Hagler they were controversial - so both bounced back pretty quickly. Whereas Don Curry and Mike Tyson losing their 0 was a much much bigger thing, not just to them personally but how it was percieved in the media / public.

It always has been a big thing, but I really think it was before Sky and linked a lot to firstly Ali ("i can't be beat etc) and Tyson (with the MC's going "undisputed, undefeated Heavyeight champion of the world" and Cus proclaiming that he will go on a long unbeaten run).

coghaugen11 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2021, 18:55

mickey1975 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2021, 18:45

coghaugen11 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2021, 18:31 That started with Eubank - the punters flocked in the hopes of seeing him finally knocked off his perch.

Floyd retiring before his loss didn’t help.

He never sold tickets anyway!

His promoter did via posters on walls in streets (if they stayed on) with a slightly visible landline telephone number. 5x a year for 5 years at G-Mex, Earls Court, NEC, Olympia, Old Trafford or wherever.

He didn’t have much of a local Brighton following or whatever but obviously the wider public wanted to see him leap the ropes in the flesh (and the yobs wanted to see him beat and go there to boo and SPIT.)

I remember struggling to actually know how to get a ticket for OT. No internet etc. Nearly gave in and settled for TV.


I’ve noticed you trolling in quite a few threads now. Sort yourself out. It’s midnight.

Did you know Wharton sold 5,000 tickets for their bout? Or that his 3-0 prospect is on bus stops all over York?

Wow that’s amazing I never knew that.

Wow maaaan.

mickey1975 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2021, 20:58

coghaugen11 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2021, 18:55

mickey1975 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2021, 18:45
He never sold tickets anyway!

His promoter did via posters on walls in streets (if they stayed on) with a slightly visible landline telephone number. 5x a year for 5 years at G-Mex, Earls Court, NEC, Olympia, Old Trafford or wherever.

He didn’t have much of a local Brighton following or whatever but obviously the wider public wanted to see him leap the ropes in the flesh (and the yobs wanted to see him beat and go there to boo and SPIT.)

I remember struggling to actually know how to get a ticket for OT. No internet etc. Nearly gave in and settled for TV.


I’ve noticed you trolling in quite a few threads now. Sort yourself out. It’s midnight.

Did you know Wharton sold 5,000 tickets for their bout? Or that his 3-0 prospect is on bus stops all over York?

who is his 3-0 prospect and how'd he get on the buses

More risks and therefor losses early would and will help as it seems more common now. people getting called out on trash 20-0 records, ect.

Fair judging would help it, the reality is, most undefeated fighters have lost and we all know it... just the judges said otherwise. Fury is a perfect example, top 5 name in the sport, "undefeated" but he lost to mcdermont... There are tons of examples of these, think of how many prospect robberys happen, basicaly one or 2 a week...

Tying both of these together, fans need to understand results better. what 3 people judge is what goes on the record, but as a fan, if it was a robbery you shouldent start considering the "winner" to be the better fighter, and if it was dead even, regardless of who got given the win, you have to see it as even. Easy to do at the time, but hard to remember.

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑19 Apr 2021, 00:42

mickey1975 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2021, 20:58

coghaugen11 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2021, 18:55
His promoter did via posters on walls in streets (if they stayed on) with a slightly visible landline telephone number. 5x a year for 5 years at G-Mex, Earls Court, NEC, Olympia, Old Trafford or wherever.

He didn’t have much of a local Brighton following or whatever but obviously the wider public wanted to see him leap the ropes in the flesh (and the yobs wanted to see him beat and go there to boo and SPIT.)

I remember struggling to actually know how to get a ticket for OT. No internet etc. Nearly gave in and settled for TV.


I’ve noticed you trolling in quite a few threads now. Sort yourself out. It’s midnight.

Did you know Wharton sold 5,000 tickets for their bout? Or that his 3-0 prospect is on bus stops all over York?

who is his 3-0 prospect and how'd he get on the buses

George Davey is sponsored by a haulage company amongst others, and they have done it as well as having him on the back of their lorry’s.

unfortunately, if a fighter is only fighting once or twice a year, a loss IS a big deal. The fact that social media is driven predominantly by narcissistic behaviour hasn't helped matters either. I think ultimately its a by product of promoters safety first approach to match making. Tho i have to say, many retired fighters seem in a better state physically and mentally that previous era's.

These spoilt fakers wouldn’t last two minutes back in the days of horse hair gloves, $40 purses and a 15 rounder a fortnight.

I think the boxer whose legacy got hurt the most by a loss...well there are two...Wilfredo Gomez who went from being in everyone's top 50 of all time (at least, if not top 25 or 30)to not being included in the top 100 many times because of his loss to Salvador Sanchez (and consequent semi-failures over the Super-Bantamweight division)

Then there is Vonda Ward. She was something like 23-1. Clearly one of the all time greats in women's boxing. But what everyone remembers is that 1 against Anne Wolfe.

One thing through: You also have to remember that for psychological reasons, to fans in pre 1940, losing may not be such a big deal because they didnt see how it took place. With television, you saw how it did, and specially if it was a brutal knockout, that stayed in fan minds...

interesting point in the last paragraph there, never thought of that before

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑19 Apr 2021, 04:31 interesting point in the last paragraph there, never thought of that before

Seconded

The old saying is very true - you're only as good as your last fight

It makes a lot of sense to get back in the ring asap and for many many reasons.

I reckon losing a been stigmatised a long time in boxing.

Would Muhammad Ali have been the star he was had he not made it up against Henry Cooper in their first fight? Would he have got his shot against Liston at the same time?

Most top fighters do not fight regularly so need to win when they do, Henry Armstrong had 12 title fights in 1939, in two different weight divisions, amazing when you think about it.

Controversial wrote: ↑19 Apr 2021, 07:21 Most top fighters do not fight regularly so need to win when they do, Henry Armstrong had 12 title fights in 1939, in two different weight divisions, amazing when you think about it.

I don’t get why Johnny Fisher isn’t fighting once a month on any platform he can get televised or untelevised. No offence to any opponents but the opponents he is going to face in his first five or six fights at least will not be worthy of televising.

jameswilson wrote: ↑19 Apr 2021, 07:33

Controversial wrote: ↑19 Apr 2021, 07:21 Most top fighters do not fight regularly so need to win when they do, Henry Armstrong had 12 title fights in 1939, in two different weight divisions, amazing when you think about it.

I don’t get why Johnny Fisher isn’t fighting once a month on any platform he can get televised or untelevised. No offence to any opponents but the opponents he is going to face in his first five or six fights at least will not be worthy of televising.

The mindset has changed I think, I can't remember who said it but someone in the game said most fighters today want 6-8 weeks training camp for each fight, even the ones starting out. You don't get better not fighting, the best way to improve fitness and skill is to fight but the flip side is you are increasing your chances of losing and causing damage to yourself. Some of these old timers had numerous losses, it makes me laugh when the younger fans today dismiss them.

There are 4-round fighters going away to Spain for a training camp!

The game is dying fast. The skill level has fallen by the wayside.