I'm just curious to know that you guys think. Fortyounce thinks that a good amatuer background and winning medals in the Olympics mean nothing. He is saying that guys like Lewis, Mercer, Frazier, Foreman, the Klitschkos, Whitaker, Taylor, and Tarver getting medals at the Olympics was pointless. I disagree strongly. I think that winning Medals at the Olympics is the most coveted and highest honor any sportsman can receive.
I don't think medals mean anything any more, and that is because Olympic boxing no longer resembles pro-boxing, it is another sport completely.
Of course winning a Gold Medal at the Olympics is a coveted achievment for a fighter. But it doesn't guarentee success as a pro.
It doesn't guarantee success but it probably guarantees that you make a lot of money. I bet Audley Harrison has made ten times what another heavyweight with a similar record will ever make.
Wining an Olympic medal dosen't automaticly mean pro secuess. However wining a medal in the Olympics gives a boxer some name recanigition which can lead to better manaagment. which can lead to a clearer path to a title shot and/or larger paydays. An Olympic medalist must of course have the talent to be a world class pro boxer. An Olympic medal dose not allways mean that that boxer has world class pro talent, but if he he dose that medal could be the diffrence between geting that first tittle shot after 20 fights or as many as 30 fights mabey more.
