Hey Guys I've been looking at the up and coming match ups, such a Pac vs Timmy, and Froch vs Bute. In these cases we have two fighters with losses on there record (Pac and Froch) and we have two who are undefeated (Bradley & Bute). Often I hear mixed messages about fighter losing....such as he lost so he is done (Linares, Froch, Hatton, Malignaggi, Abraham, Pascal, Khan, Ortiz, Berto, Mosley,Cotto, Dirrell, ). Then I hear being undfeated is not important it's about who you fight (Calzage, Mayweather, JCC Jr, Alvarez,Ward). I also hear say some fighters are still good dispite loses (Glen Johnson 16Ls). I mean how come Zab Judah is a perceived as washed up, but Glen Johnson is a viable opponant? Is this double standards. I mean JMM has losses but if Gamboa loses to Rios I'm sure many will say he's done...or even Mayweather if he loses people are waiting to say he wasn't that good anyway or hype job....this is crazy to me. Thoughts brothers. Dipset4Ever
If you're logged onto http://www.eastsideboxing.com then it shall be 1 loss upon your professional boxing record.
On ESB: 1. In reality: You can be shot without ever having actually lost (at least in theory if you lower the quality of opponents faster than your own decline, not sure of any examples), you can not be shot and have 10 losses.
It's the nature of the losses rather than the number. It's the usual telltale signs, such as diminishing punch resistance, inability to pull the trigger when opportunities arise, timing/accuracy of punches is off, getting caught with punches they shouldn't, no spring or strength in the legs. Taking Glen Johnson as an example, he still fights pretty much the same way he did a few years ago, only a bit slower and with less intensity. He is definitely past his prime, but not a "shot" fighter.
depends on what wars the fighter has been in and how long until he reaches father time. hatton was shot after 2
It depends on which group of fanboys is doing the evaluating. RJJ and B-Hop were prime young men when Slappy Joe fought them according to his nuthuggers. Johnson is a beast according to the Bu-tards. Cotto's status changed with one contract according to both *****s and *******s. In reality, different fighters age in different ways. JMM has some early losses, and some close, questionable/disputable losses. That's not the same as Jones getting knocked out in back-to-back fights, or Mosely not looking competitive in years. Boxing isn't like baseball, there aren't indisputable statistics to mark a point of decline. Using your eyes and some common sense (and not having a fighter's nuts in your mouth) are your best tools.
For Jeff Lacy...one loss. For Hatton...two. For someone like Archie Moore or JMM or Hopkins...well, it just varies doesn't it?
When fighters' in ring abilities have dramatically declined they are considered shot; Really has nothing to do with wins and loses on a resume.