In your opinion (I'll pretend I care), is the notion hackneyed and does it preclude posters from intelligent debate? :think
If by stating "Ducking is overdone", you mean - too many fighters have been ducked, then yes I agree.
Many times it's overrated, sometimes it's warranted. Political ****s ups in negotiations aren't ducking, but completely avoiding a fighter because of multiple reasons is ducking. Sometimes guys are just pushed under the radar and kept there.
Did you finally get rid of the sideburns or do you plan to look like a drag queen for the rest of your life? p.s. go easy on oestrogens, you're growing tits.
It's hard to clarify exactly what a "duck" is because there's a lot of things behind closed doors that go on. For example, Roberto Duran got stripped of his WBA belt at 154 for not facing his mandatory in Mike McCallum. Instead, he fought the more established, WBC champ in Thomas Hearns for more money. A duck? I think not. Duran was supposed to fight Carlos Ortiz in a non-title bout at MSG, but his management (Carlos Eleta) told him no and pulled out, saying Duran was sick. Eleta also didn't want Duran to have a rematch with Ken Buchanan, or fight Antonio Cervantes at 140. Are these considered "ducks"? Buchanan later said something like "Duran would fight anyone but his management made the decisions". Or what about Floyd Mayweather and Kostya Tszyu? Is Mayweather re-signing with HBO, the more powerful and lucrative network, considered a "duck"? Exclusive HBO and Showtime fighters don't fight each other unless it's something like Lennox Lewis-Mike Tyson which generates $100 million in PPV revenue. People always talk about Ray Leonard "ducking" Aaron Pryor because they watched Legendary Nights. Pryor "called out" Leonard at a press conference, but all the big names are going to get challenged. Fighters want to fight the big names. Does a welterweight champ have an obligation to fight a champ in a lower weight class, when the other champ hasn't done anything at welter?