Nobody ever laces up the gloves trying to lose. Every fighter in history would be better if they had never lost and their defeats were wiped from their resume and replaced with a convincing victory over the same opponent. Obviously losing matters. To say it doesn't is to also indicate that winning doesn't matter either. In today's era, having the least possible defeats is much greater than every previous era because boxers are not nearly as active as they used to be and boxers nowadays don't fight nearly as many top guys frequently as they used to in the past.
I disagree. So much of it depends on stages of careers, styles, tiny details and factors. And losses can be huge learning curves. People can not be the complete fighter right away and do need realistic challenges to evolve and progress. Considered better, perhaps, but unrealistic.
And it's a marketing tool more than in previous eras as well. Most guys get 20-0 on their records just to start with, such is the importance of it. But I do agree with the related idea that losing the 0 hurts now, because fickle fans latch onto it and give it importance beyond its worth. Sadly, riding the 0 like Seabiscuit has become a viable business model. It all leads to more fights not being made due to the blanket protection provided by a fighter's management. Who knows how many fights we have missed out on over the years that otherwise could have been made had there not been an 0 to protect. I think it no small coincidence that every fighter who has gone deep into their careers with 0's intact has been dogged with criticism(some warranted, and some not) of ducking, dodging and cherrypicking, etc. These guys are often defined by who they didn't fight as much as by who they did fight.
A lot, it almost guarantees TV air time which means exposure which means money and a fan base. Having these things allows you as a fighter to pick your opponents and dodge some tough obstacles Obviously the fraudulent 0's get exposed and snuffed out but the 0 is extremely important to be the A side and get to choose your career path and dictate the terms of fights and such
Fact is, it matters a lot. At least on forums like this one. Every time a fighter steps up and gets beat, he's ridiculed. Keyboard warriors live to see undefeated boxers lose.
if you are fighting like an amateur by just pot shotting and scoring to win while avoiding to engage at all costs by running and hugging then it really depreciates in value. wins earned in battles are far greater and often reviewed for it's greatness and entertainment. the "0" makes the holder become a cherrypicker and a very very cautious player. it is more of a curse being held on to for greatness. all undefeated boxers lack the experience of the phoenix which rises from the ashes after after being killed. they are not complete and therefor unproven fighters.
I dont get this video at all, wy do people say he looks scared here? All hes doing is saying he made a business decision (fighting baldomir for more money and baldo was the champ.....)
It matters alot nowadays, namely because of how floyd sold himself as being undefeated and made millions, everyone wants to copy. In the grand scheme of things, a loss doesn't mean much IMO. If you lose to bums them clearly it does but if its a clear top level 50/50 fight its not the end of the world. Brook v thurman for instance, the loser can still go on with there career and a few wins could possibly rematch...
So you believe having a bogus 0 like Mayweathers is better that a fighter who takes on all comers & maybe gets a loss or two huh?? Mayweather didn't earn that 0 Vegas/NSAC kept that for him. Really he has 3 losses Maidana, Castillo & a DQ loss to Ortiz plus Oscar deserved at least a draw. I wont even mention the despicable events of May 2 ATG & TBE??? Don't make me laugh ROFLMAO
Floyd was TERRIFIED he literally messed his pants when Margarito confronted him. He fought Baldomir for Wayyyyyyy less $$$ plus at the time Floyd was saying he wasn't interested in titles he fought for $$$$$$$$$$ He LIED!!!!!! AGAIN!!!!!!!!!! After Margarito destroyed Cotto it was the fight everyone wanted to see it would have generated double what Baldy did Plus they stunk the arena out ringsiders were walking out by round 8. Floyd knew Margarito would kick his cowardly a$$atsch he was:scaredas::scaredas:
let me remind you some of them beltholders you're talking about. ortiz guerrero blown up hatton fattened up jmm baldomir maidana 2x j. harris fake retired to avoid prime cotto and shane
Lot of hate on this thread. Lot of agendas popping up. People can't just give a straight answer? You lace up the gloves trying to win. You never try to lose. Simple as that. Lot of other factors to mention and bring up but then ultimately the discussion becomes one of "RESUME TALK." Every fighter ever would be better if their losses, draws, and controversial victories were convincing victories over that opponent instead. Period. You cannot argue that point. It's not realistic but that is the truth. Once again. No pro boxer enters the ring trying to lose (not counting fixed matches).
Give me a break! Fighters with belts.... Anyone can get a belt nowadays, the belts system is a corrupt system to sell the most marketable fighters to the public. For example, Mayweather and him having fought so many guys with belts, yet these guys with belts will be lucky to make it to even the BHOF, what quality is that? Here's another example. The MW champ is technically not the champ because Cotto is more marketable. So who gives a sh!t about that Stat in todays boxing world, and who gives a sh!t about undefeated records if you avoided some of the toughest fights.