why is cherry picking wrong for a pro fighter?

You see, John.

Most imbeciles who call themselves fans will dog fighters for trying to make the most money and taking the least amount of punishment, when at the same token, they dread for other favorite fighters being pulled through the sand, getting knocked out time and again. (Roy Jones for example)
People seem to think its ok to distinguish fighters from one another in that aspect, if it were their immediate relatives fighting, they wouldn't be spewing the garbage they are.

But thats life, I suppose. They shall roar till the damage is already done, then they weep.

 

Right on the nose, MM...but, sadly, it's ever thus.

 

They don't want to hear common sense, they want to argue....:nut

 

Really?? Are we really answering this? Well, let me tell you. It's not wrong to cherry pick. It is wrong to cherry pick and make top dollars. An easy, not reason to be made fight should be paid for what it is.

Just like Floyd vs Guerrero fight. I didn't even bother watching it. And it went exactly like I thought it would. There was not a single reason to have that fight.
Ok, Mayweather sells fights. But I don't think fight was worth what he got. But 95% of american fans aren't real boxing fans. Most just knew Floyd was fighting SOME MEXICAN...

 

there's nothing wrong with cherry picking.

the money has to go somewhere though so I just think the boxers that take the biggest risks deserve to get the money and the accolades.

Not the guy who cherry picks.

 

I think cherry picking is ok when you're picking top opposition that's just suite to your style, but when it's something like Nathan Cleverly picking people up from the bottom end of the world rankings, as a champion, it's terrible.

 

thats the frank ****** way
gain a paper belt and sell/milk it for all its worth

make no mistake though, cleverly is no 'champion' just because he walks to the ring wearing it - most the 'champions' arent

 

It isn't bad if a fighter fights the best guys in their era and then want a few tuneup fights. Then it is ok. But if a fighter avoids the top guys and handpicks and never fights his generations best, then it hurts his legacy and the fans get cheated of a great fight.

 

it's not wrong as long as it's acknowledged.

 

the media has always acknowledged it, d, savaging the fighter 'n the event till they were blue in the face. But long as fans are willing ta pony-up, they'll continue ta do it.

 

Who says, M? Fuk legacy. Pro boxing's a cold, heartless business -- not a Frank Merriwell story. For the fighter it's about makin' the most money he can 'n walkin' away so he doesn't wind-up like Ali or SRR.

 

You can stop it, R. Don't support the event.

 

You say it's bad, c. Why should Cleverly care if fans will pay ta see it?

 

i dont know why john wastes his wisdom on this forum, over emotionally invested fans just reject it


i hear ya john, i hear ya

 

Boxing is an entertainment business. As a fighter, you have to strive to keep the fans interested in you. If you can do that, then you'll be ok. Critics are going to persist no matter what.