Page 1 of 2
why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 24 Feb 2022, 21:51
by margaret thatcher
joe 46-0
king sven 34-0
ward 32-0
world level fighters retiring unbeaten is super super rare, yet here are 3 within a span of like 10-15 years, all having mostly fought at smw. was this just random or is there a deeper reason
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 01:02
by coghaugen11
In Ottke’s case he had 4-5 losses in reality.
Calzaghe was hugely inactive during his long WBO title reign. Pulling out of fights countless times.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 03:09
by bigjack
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 01:02
In Ottke’s case he had 4-5 losses in reality.
Calzaghe was hugely inactive during his long WBO title reign. Pulling out of fights countless times.
That didn't alter the fact he was unbeaten in 46 though
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 03:14
by DrDuke
Cause the division sucked in comparison to the other ones. It lacked depth, not many cared about Ottke and Calzaghe, except their respective local fanbases. That's why Joe cashed out against Roy and Hopkins before retirement.
However, Ottke indeed should have received some losses.
Ward's case is an exception, he competed in the helluve era, which brought the interest to this weight.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 04:32
by Dioufy
bigjack wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 03:09
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 01:02
In Ottke’s case he had 4-5 losses in reality.
Calzaghe was hugely inactive during his long WBO title reign. Pulling out of fights countless times.
That didn't alter the fact he was unbeaten in 46 though
Who cares? Joe was an immensely talented fighter but his record doesn’t reflect his talent to boxing purists.
He had 2/3 meaningful fights… Eubank for his acid test, Lacy for his his breakout fight and Kessler just to solidify his talent for the world to see.
Then it’s just names tbh. You can throw RJJ or Hopkins at me but even though they were good wins… that’s all they were… good wins.
Beyond that I’m struggling to find anything that makes me wanna wank over.
Guy could’ve done more but was petrified of defeat.
Shame.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 04:52
by bigjack
Dioufy wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 04:32
bigjack wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 03:09
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 01:02
In Ottke’s case he had 4-5 losses in reality.
Calzaghe was hugely inactive during his long WBO title reign. Pulling out of fights countless times.
That didn't alter the fact he was unbeaten in 46 though
Who cares? Joe was an immensely talented fighter but his record doesn’t reflect his talent to boxing purists.
He had 2/3 meaningful fights… Eubank for his acid test, Lacy for his his breakout fight and Kessler just to solidify his talent for the world to see.
Then it’s just names tbh. You can throw RJJ or Hopkins at me but even though they were good wins… that’s all they were… good wins.
Beyond that I’m struggling to find anything that makes me wanna wank over.
Guy could’ve done more but was petrified of defeat.
Shame.
I'm not disputing his record,far too many poor oppononts but cog pointed out the inactivity but that doesn't make a difference to him being unbeaten really.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 04:56
by Dioufy
bigjack wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 04:52
Dioufy wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 04:32
bigjack wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 03:09
That didn't alter the fact he was unbeaten in 46 though
Who cares? Joe was an immensely talented fighter but his record doesn’t reflect his talent to boxing purists.
He had 2/3 meaningful fights… Eubank for his acid test, Lacy for his his breakout fight and Kessler just to solidify his talent for the world to see.
Then it’s just names tbh. You can throw RJJ or Hopkins at me but even though they were good wins… that’s all they were… good wins.
Beyond that I’m struggling to find anything that makes me wanna wank over.
Guy could’ve done more but was petrified of defeat.
Shame.
I'm not disputing his record,far too many poor oppononts but cog pointed out the inactivity but that doesn't make a difference to him being unbeaten really.
Fair enough, mate.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 08:40
by coghaugen11
bigjack wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 03:09
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 01:02
In Ottke’s case he had 4-5 losses in reality.
Calzaghe was hugely inactive during his long WBO title reign. Pulling out of fights countless times.
That didn't alter the fact he was unbeaten in 46 though
He may of lost had he taken all those fights, hungover or a hurt hand etc.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 08:41
by coghaugen11
Fighters often lose when not near 100%
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 10:21
by bigjack
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 08:40
bigjack wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 03:09
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 01:02
In Ottke’s case he had 4-5 losses in reality.
Calzaghe was hugely inactive during his long WBO title reign. Pulling out of fights countless times.
That didn't alter the fact he was unbeaten in 46 though
He may of lost had he taken all those fights, hungover or a hurt hand etc.
He still had 46 wins though,despite the inactivity
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 12:57
by emallini
Dioufy wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 04:32
bigjack wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 03:09
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 01:02
In Ottke’s case he had 4-5 losses in reality.
Calzaghe was hugely inactive during his long WBO title reign. Pulling out of fights countless times.
That didn't alter the fact he was unbeaten in 46 though
Who cares? Joe was an immensely talented fighter but his record doesn’t reflect his talent to boxing purists.
He had 2/3 meaningful fights… Eubank for his acid test, Lacy for his his breakout fight and Kessler just to solidify his talent for the world to see.
Then it’s just names tbh. You can throw RJJ or Hopkins at me but even though they were good wins… that’s all they were… good wins.
Beyond that I’m struggling to find anything that makes me wanna wank over.
Guy could’ve done more but was petrified of defeat.
Shame.
Jones was not a good win. He was shot to pieces.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 15:11
by The Docker
Historically a pretty poor division. Seems to have more European interest than that of the Americas, could be well off the pace here but yeah didnt seem overly supported outside of Europe (with exceptions obviously). Having said that, Joe was fair game for any of the US elite, in their prime or not.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 15:35
by Ruthless-RKO
emallini wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 12:57
Dioufy wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 04:32
bigjack wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 03:09
That didn't alter the fact he was unbeaten in 46 though
Who cares? Joe was an immensely talented fighter but his record doesn’t reflect his talent to boxing purists.
He had 2/3 meaningful fights… Eubank for his acid test, Lacy for his his breakout fight and Kessler just to solidify his talent for the world to see.
Then it’s just names tbh. You can throw RJJ or Hopkins at me but even though they were good wins… that’s all they were… good wins.
Beyond that I’m struggling to find anything that makes me wanna wank over.
Guy could’ve done more but was petrified of defeat.
Shame.
Jones was not a good win. He was shot to pieces.
And the Hopkins win was disputed decision.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 16:14
by coghaugen11
bigjack wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 10:21
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 08:40
bigjack wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 03:09
That didn't alter the fact he was unbeaten in 46 though
He may of lost had he taken all those fights, hungover or a hurt hand etc.
He still had 46 wins though,despite the inactivity
44 at that weight, half of them pre title standard.
He did lose to Robin Reid. Would’ve lost to Ottke unless he knocked him out over there, in which case he’d of got a draw.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 16:47
by bigjack
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 16:14
bigjack wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 10:21
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 08:40
He may of lost had he taken all those fights, hungover or a hurt hand etc.
He still had 46 wins though,despite the inactivity
44 at that weight, half of them pre title standard.
He did lose to Robin Reid. Would’ve lost to Ottke unless he knocked him out over there, in which case he’d of got a draw.
Lost to Reid in your opinion,you can't just say someone has a loss on their record because you think they do,doesn't work that way.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 16:50
by margaret thatcher
ya, thing is, id say most boxers have some decisions at some point that could've gone against them. joe had like 1, maybe 2 tops (for me he beat hopkins clearly but i know some disagree), which is pretty standard, so i dont think shoddy judging is the factor here
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 16:55
by Boxerbeetle
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 16:14
bigjack wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 10:21
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 08:40
He may of lost had he taken all those fights, hungover or a hurt hand etc.
He still had 46 wins though,despite the inactivity
44 at that weight, half of them pre title standard.
He did lose to Robin Reid. Would’ve lost to Ottke unless he knocked him out over there, in which case he’d of got a draw.
He didn’t lose to Reid, a bunch of us on here rewatched that fight a few years ago as part of a mini-forum project, and consensus was Calzaghe won for sure.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 16:56
by bigjack
Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 16:55
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 16:14
bigjack wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 10:21
He still had 46 wins though,despite the inactivity
44 at that weight, half of them pre title standard.
He did lose to Robin Reid. Would’ve lost to Ottke unless he knocked him out over there, in which case he’d of got a draw.
He didn’t lose to Reid, a bunch of us on here rewatched that fight a few years ago as part of a mini-forum project, and consensus was Calzaghe won for sure.
x2
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 20:52
by polecateddy
I agree, Reid landed the eye catching overhand rights sporadically, but was outworked. I’m not quite seeing the inactivity either. Between the start of his reign in 1997 and retirement in 2008, the only year he fought less than twice was 2003. Just one outing that year.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 25 Feb 2022, 22:24
by coghaugen11
2-3 fights a year was pretty ridiculous back then. 1 was unheard of. For a reigning champion.
Now yeah they don’t fight hardly, because they have PPVs to build up and sell over many months when they do fight.
Joe was always on free Sky sports. (And Cardiff ice rink)
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 26 Feb 2022, 04:09
by Ruthless-RKO
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 22:24
2-3 fights a year was pretty ridiculous back then. 1 was unheard of. For a reigning champion.
Now yeah they don’t fight hardly, because they have PPVs to build up and sell over many months when they do fight.
Joe was always on free Sky sports. (And Cardiff ice rink)
Unless you’re Canelo.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 26 Feb 2022, 04:30
by mickey1975
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 22:24
2-3 fights a year was pretty ridiculous back then. 1 was unheard of. For a reigning champion.
Now yeah they don’t fight hardly, because they have PPVs to build up and sell over many months when they do fight.
Joe was always on free Sky sports. (And Cardiff ice rink)
I was at the Reid and Eubank fights. Both were ppv.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 26 Feb 2022, 04:55
by coghaugen11
mickey1975 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2022, 04:30
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 22:24
2-3 fights a year was pretty ridiculous back then. 1 was unheard of. For a reigning champion.
Now yeah they don’t fight hardly, because they have PPVs to build up and sell over many months when they do fight.
Joe was always on free Sky sports. (And Cardiff ice rink)
I was at the Reid and Eubank fights. Both were ppv.
Not due to Calzaghe. Reid was the star.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 26 Feb 2022, 05:18
by mickey1975
Stop it, Cog.
Re: why so many unbeaten, retired smws?
Posted: 26 Feb 2022, 05:19
by bigjack
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2022, 04:55
mickey1975 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2022, 04:30
coghaugen11 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2022, 22:24
2-3 fights a year was pretty ridiculous back then. 1 was unheard of. For a reigning champion.
Now yeah they don’t fight hardly, because they have PPVs to build up and sell over many months when they do fight.
Joe was always on free Sky sports. (And Cardiff ice rink)
I was at the Reid and Eubank fights. Both were ppv.
Not due to Calzaghe. Reid was the star.
It was PPV because of Reid ?
