To some extent . When disussing attributes, achievements, athletisim, IQ, etc, sure, if fighter X shows potential, logic states he/she should be able to go far, or win against X opponent, or is prime. All the logic in the world points to promising prospect to win a world title. But when reality hits and an old veteran ends up beating said prospect, then logic goes bye bye. Example: Juanma vs Salido. Juanma, by logic, should have passed the test by out boxing the veteran but we all know the result.
I disagree. I do think logic can be used slightly, but boxing is an art form (not a science) , it does not follow logic. if it did, there would be an exact method to perform at your best, and an exact strategy to implement to create the best fighter, but we do not have this method.
This is because, as my point states, it’s an art form not a science with logic. We are dealing with humans and it’s whoever overcomes that specific night. This is immeasurable, therefore cannot be calculated. if logic/science superseded this, betting would be simple.
Logic means nothing until they actually get in the ring. Even the most knowledgeable boxing experts get things very wrong sometimes.
Logic is all you should use, but it's obvious many don't, and just use emotion and motivated reasoning.
Yes, logic applies but we never have all the pre fight data required to make a concrete call. Even after the fact of getting an outcome wrong, without it being an “excuse”, one could argue that all the available pre fight data still logically pointed to a different and more likely outcome than the one that actually manifested. For instance. “logically”, Lewis shouldn’t have lost to McCall and Rahman the first time around - but there was no accounting for his lack of conditioning and focus going into those fights. In the rematches a focused and conditioned Lewis won. - just as the “logic” would normally dictate.
Logic is all you can use, but it’s not always right. I don’t understand why the obsession with trying to predict the future and who wins a fight…just enjoy the fight. if logic said who won fights, there would never be an upset as the logical person would be the favourite lol
just because logic doesnt work as predicted every time, doesnt mean there is any better way to analyze data. if a fighter overtrains and loses a fight he should have won, and one you said he would win, that has nothing to do with logic. if you knew beforehand he was overtrained, or a pulled muscle, or whatever, logically you would factor that into your calculations, and logically would come up with a different result. i think many dont understand how logic works.
This. Logic is just the agreed rules by which we formulate arguments, how we proceed from premises to a conclusion. Like this sort of thing: "All heavyweights are boxers. Dubois is a heavyweight. Therefore, Dubois is a boxer." follows sound syllogistic logic. It's rarely errors in logic that trip up our predictions. Like Pugguy says, it's about incomplete information. Sometimes this is because emotion makes us wilfully exclude information because it doesn't fit with what we'd like to be true. But mostly, it's because we cannot have all the information necessary before the fight: you can't ever get the complete picture about a boxer's physical condition, mental condition, injuries, game plan , let alone all the dozens of other variables. As observers we only make educated guesses about that stuff. If you start off with flawed premises, even perfect logic may lead to the wrong conclusion. The best we're ever going to get is higher or lower probabilities.