One loss is not the end of a prospect's career. But according to the boxing fan it is

because a large portion of boxing fans and I mean a portion of those that that take time to post on boxing forum message boards such as these are ****** little babies that are hard to please and if a boxer losses than they think they have the right to cry and moan about a boxer being a "hype job" "underrated". It's like a boxer losses and so what are you angry because that boxer didn't live up to your expectations? The most classic example of this was when Ricky Hatton lost to Floyd Mayweather. Some people were walking around calling Ricky hatton an overrated bum!!!! are you kidding me!!! god damn its like do some of you little queers even have a clue!????

 

Exactly. People react to the HYPE, not the fighter. If there is a lot of hype around a fighter, there will be a lot of reactions when he loses, that's just the way it is.

 

Haye, Pacman, Marquez... All have defeats and are great fighters still. Problem lays in a)the hype, not the fighters are followed b)the belt system is so flawed that win-lose-draw records are now the only thing your average boxing fan can understand. With all these belts left and right, they dont mean much until they are unified. And the mandatory's are a pain when you own 3 belts.

MMA fighters can have defeats because theres only ONE UFC champ per weight class. Joe Blow(20-5) goes through the contenders and then he has a shot at being the champ, even if he has a 20-5 record.

 

you have missed the point entirelyatsch

 

Keyboard warriors. To the point, the guys on these boards are not that important to boxing. The cream will rise to the top with or without their consent.

 

One loss means nothing. You can learn from it and grow into a better fighter. Henry Armstrong had a rough start, but figured it out, and he is one of the greatest ever. A loss is nothing.

 

There are a lot of factors when determining the effect a loss has on a boxer's career. Who they lost to... How bad was the loss.... At what point the loss happened in the fighters career..... How willing the fighter is to fight for less money....

For Andy Lee, he's a heavily hyped fighter ( mostly by Manny ) who got KO'd in his first attempt to face an opponent with a comparable record. That's a bitter pill to swallow. And now he has to make a choice. Does he go back to fighting low level opponents for a while or does he jump back in and try to immediately regain some of his stature?

It appears that its going to be the latter as both Lee and Steward are asking for a rematch. But the Vera hasn't takenup the offer yet.

 

great post bone. you nailed it right.:good

 

Well, considering what great fighters of the last 15 years have done, I think a loss before your 20th fight definitely creates limitations.

There are exceptions, of course, like Hopkins. Well, he also didn't have much amateur experience.

You can be sure that Andy Lee won't become a great fighter. He will become a contender, and maybe a beltholder and a referent of his era's middleweight division if he's lucky.

 

That's true man.
It's a sport, sometimes **** happens like Tyson-Douglas. A fighter losign should never be ruled out at anytime.

 

That's a great post. The only thing I have to say is, thank god they're boxers and not Greyhounds.

 

Great post BigBone.

One loss does not a career make. It's what a fighter does after that loss that defines whether he is great. The list of fighters who lost and acheived greatness is many times longer than the list of great fighters who never lost.

 

Similar situation with Juan Diaz but it was the cut that beat him more than anything else

 

I usualy don't bother to read posts with words like "exposed" or "fraud" in them. One loss dose not end a career.