Does losing when your shot hurt your legacy?

Lets say your a ATG or HOF and have good wins does losing when your clearly a shadow of your former self hurt your legacy and ATG ranking. And if so, why is RJJ's legacy hurt by the fact that he gets destroyed easily nowadays but it doesnt even matter for guys like duran and ali who despite some really bad losses in their shot period don't get judged based on it and are foregiven?

 

Roy Jones has been losing embarrassingly, which probably doesn’t help.

 

The only people who have a list and are marking Jones down further and further with each loss since Tarver, are probably mildly ******ed. Excuse me, I didn't mean to put it like that. They're probably incredibly ******ed.

 

This.


Anyone who judges a fighter on how he performs when he's shot is a moron.

 

Its easy to say that but alot of peope have jones in their top 50 atg list but before tarver he was top 20. I also think it is unfair but it does happen alot because a fighter will get labled exposed more then shot in some situations.

 

I am an idiot then, Duran and Ali took on all comers and beat them all in their prime, after their prime they still had some good wins.

RJJ ? , did not sort out all the best comp' , but after he lost his prime he is fighting some of the guys that he did not fight in his prime and lost, so people might have thought that he might of been betten if he fought better comp' when he was on top.

Being KO'd by a fighter of Greens standard does not help.

 

So your saying that taking risks win some great fights and lose some are worth more for your legacy then looking great against decents fighters ( although roy has some greats on his scalp) and getting destroyed in the final days of your carreer.

 

It doesnt hurt your legacy in terms of where you will stand when you retire, because that would be equivalent of saying evander and roy didnt acheive what they did because they lost numerous times.

But at the same time it doesnt look as clean or professinal and makes people look at their records in a different light which is quite sad.

 

Depends on how many times it happens, I mean look at RJJ if he had retired right after the 1st Tarver fight where would he be in peoples all time list? compared to now, where he's been KO'd by Tarver, Johnson and Green and easily UD'd by Calzaghe and Hopkins, it's hilarious to see these deluded people think it absoloutly 100% wont hurt someone's legacy especially someone like RJJ.

 

So you saying that despite him having numerous title fights, dominating opponents round after round and winning heavyweight title, he never accomplished those things.

So basically now that he has been shot for years and beaten on like a bag he never did acheive those things mentioned above. despite him beating many borderline hof

 

A few things.

1. Roy losing to Tarver didn't tarnish my opinion of him. Its good to see the champs fighting guys who have a chance to beat them. If they just fought the safe fights, you couldn't respect them as much. Look at Floyd Mayweather for example...cherrypicker who could get a lot more props if he was out there testing himself by fighting the best.

2. RJJ is so past it now, he's more of a sideshow than anything. We are so far beyond embarrassing that its crossed over into shamelessness. That doesn't mean that he wasn't once a great fighter, it just means that he isn't anymore. It's kind of like if Einstein had developed Alzheimers. Doesn't mean he wasn't a great physicist IN HIS TIME, he just isn't physically capable of being one NOW.

 

Not imo, although if a boxer continues to fight on and on despite being shot you will inevitably see his legacy become tainted, people will start remembering the bad side of a guys career before the good side, i worry about this for guys like RJJ.

 

good analogy:good

 

How would Jones legacy stand if he had retired after Ruiz compared to now? Of course it has some impact. Especially at the moment.

 

IMO Holyfield is blending the wine of his legacy with a lot of water...