I'd say that's a pretty much perfect definition. And it's funny how people bring up age in relation to it... As if a fighter could be too young to be shot, or too old to be assumed not to be shot. There's plenty of examples of fighters who were shot much younger than the norm (Hamed was pretty much shot at 27 - hands ruined, weight ballooning and couldn't get it together). Then you have guys who are still in perfectly decent shape and able to fight as well as ever at 40+... Zhang posting his career best wins at around 40 years old, for example.
Mayweather retired undefeated at 38. (I'm not counting the McGregor fight) what did he have left to prove?
I don't understand the question. What does probing yourself to anyone have to do with the topic? Winning a single world title is an amazing feat. You could make the argument that a man has nothing to prove to anyone at that point.
You said anyone who retires undefeated has retired too early, so that must mean you think Floyd retired too early?
That's a possibility I spose. But seems a bit drastic to lose 2 + years of your money earning career over medication issues. I don't know to much about PED testing rules and regulations, but I'm guessing if you're on genuine health medication, and it's likely to show in a test, then there'd maybe allowances made if it's all above board and made known prior to testing (?)
Pirog is the first guy to come to mind. Never reached his potential. Gvozdyk was basically forced to retired after that beating he took from Beterbiev.
Yeah plus Head Butter, Testes basher Ward retired because he knew he'd been exposed. He knew he couldn't beat Bivol & Betterbiev He'd have to fight outside of Oakland too. He was coming off what were both robberies Kovalev 1 & 2. Practically the whole boxing world called Fight 1 a robbery & fight 2 should have ended in a DQ win for Kovalev after the tag team of Ward & Weekes had tried their best to neuter him. That fight warranted a Commission inquiry at least
Which of the many "retirements" of Floyd MayeatherJr do you mean ?? Or one of his dodges to escape having to meet guys he knew he couldn't beat? or the one the called his 50 -0
Hagler was an old 32 and had been in many wars, and the amount of speed and reflexes he lost by the time he fought Leonard was dramatic. So that's what my post meant, I feel that Hagler was beginning to slip as far back as the Duran fight, perhaps even earlier.
It's also one of the reasons why the Mugabe fight was a war, if Hagler had been closer to his best he would have finished him much sooner and in better fashion.
Leonard was commentating for HBO on the Hagler v Mugabi fight and even said “ Marvin might be slowing down “ and Gil Clancy even stated Hagler was showing signs of advanced ring Wear and age with many even saying this was the fight that convinced Leonard that he could beat Hagler. In the Mugabi fight Hagler was no longer the slick/quick boxer/puncher but now a stalking flat footed slugger to compensate for his loss of speed and reflexes. Mugabi was also Haglers 66th fight of a long hard pro career . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvelous_Marvin_Hagler#:~:text=He noted to Tompkins between,fight with the aging Hagler.
Both Dimitry Pirog and Alexander Frenkel retired too early,both unbeaten and both with promising futures ahead of them .
Nah. It just so happened that he fought a guy who was much faster and had better reflexes, even at that age, than anyone he had fought before. Hagler wasn't shot.