Assessing the quality of victory.

acie2g · 12-01-2012, 05:31 PM

I've seen a lot of thread up recently touching on many interesting subjects from scoring rd's to differentiating elites from contenders which got me thinking how do you as posters chooses what is a big win to me I when looking at types of fighters there are:
the WHO you fought guys which would be fighters that have a lot of big named fighters on there resume but never managed to fight them at there best then you have the WHEN you fight them types these are fighter who have victory over opponents they fall short of hall of fame but are the best in the division at the time some examples would include:
garcia vs moralas compared to broner vs demarco
Moralas is arguably a top 3 win in garcia's resume in a victory against a sure fire hall of famer but it's laughable to say moralas was anywhere near his best compare that to a broner victory over demarco where while its still early no one would mistake demarco for a future hall of famer but was the top rated fighter in the division.
example two I'll compare two higher profile fights
mayweather vs baldomir compared to pacquiao vs cotto
while there is no question that cotto is the better fighter overall, cotto in the time leading up to the fight cotto suffered a career altering beat down at the hands of margarito was then gifted a vacant title against jennings which he arguably should of lost his next fight vs clottey add in to that cotto had no real trainer/gameplan vs pacquiao then you look at a fight like mayweather vs baldomir where baldomir is not a great by any means he was on a 10 yr winning streak and was coming of a victory over the then undisputed WW champ and #1 fighter in the division effectively making him the man to beat.
there are many more instances of this through out history but in your opinion what holds more value to this a win over a faded legend or a win over a fighter that not as great historically but was a legit champ at the time of the fight
Also state some more fights you can think of that fit into this criteria.

OnePunchKO · 12-01-2012, 05:52 PM

http://pkway.net/wp-content/uploads/...odles-2008.jpg

I'm going to get some pho.

Peace!

12-01-2012, 05:31 PM	#1
acie2g Journeyman ESB Jr Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 178 vCash: 500	Assessing the quality of victory. I've seen a lot of thread up recently touching on many interesting subjects from scoring rd's to differentiating elites from contenders which got me thinking how do you as posters chooses what is a big win to me I when looking at types of fighters there are: the WHO you fought guys which would be fighters that have a lot of big named fighters on there resume but never managed to fight them at there best then you have the WHEN you fight them types these are fighter who have victory over opponents they fall short of hall of fame but are the best in the division at the time some examples would include: garcia vs moralas compared to broner vs demarco Moralas is arguably a top 3 win in garcia's resume in a victory against a sure fire hall of famer but it's laughable to say moralas was anywhere near his best compare that to a broner victory over demarco where while its still early no one would mistake demarco for a future hall of famer but was the top rated fighter in the division. example two I'll compare two higher profile fights mayweather vs baldomir compared to pacquiao vs cotto while there is no question that cotto is the better fighter overall, cotto in the time leading up to the fight cotto suffered a career altering beat down at the hands of margarito was then gifted a vacant title against jennings which he arguably should of lost his next fight vs clottey add in to that cotto had no real trainer/gameplan vs pacquiao then you look at a fight like mayweather vs baldomir where baldomir is not a great by any means he was on a 10 yr winning streak and was coming of a victory over the then undisputed WW champ and #1 fighter in the division effectively making him the man to beat. there are many more instances of this through out history but in your opinion what holds more value to this a win over a faded legend or a win over a fighter that not as great historically but was a legit champ at the time of the fight Also state some more fights you can think of that fit into this criteria.
Top

12-01-2012, 05:52 PM	#2
OnePunchKO Hard Work, Medication! East Side Guru Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 8,195 vCash: 75	Re: Assessing the quality of victory. http://pkway.net/wp-content/uploads/...odles-2008.jpg I'm going to get some pho. Peace!
Top