Do you turn your nose up at boxer who "quit" during fights?

Of course. I'd never quit sitting on my couch while eating popcorn and drinking beer! I'm not a quitter like those pathetic boxers!!!!

 

It depends why the guy quit.

Gary Lockett against Pavlik is a classic example of someone running away like a little *****.

Miguel Cotto and Kostya Tszyu were simply guys that were broken by their opponents - having given everything they had in the particular fight and had nothing else.

Pointless coming out for three more minutes getting splattered.

 

tszyu was retired by his corner for his own safety. he was busted up very badly. cotto i thought did quit in a similar way judah was trying to do against him but how can i slate him after a sustained beating like marg dished out. would i be able to take it ?
BB is right though, certain fighters seem to be looking for a way out from the first bell. tyson used to have opponents like this all the time after he was released from prison

 

yes, in short, i think its unacceptable.






Thats why even though i used to hate a guy like fernando vargas, i will always respect him. He was a warrior, and he never quit in the ring. The are innumerable examples of great fighters who never quit. If you get your ass kicked badly, so be it. Fighters are acutely aware of the potential risks of boxing by the time they reach the pro ranks. The elite fighters are extremely well compensated financially for this risk and they have less of an excuse for quitting then a club fighter who gets his ass kicked monthly for peanuts.




The other worrying thing is, quitting in the ring is becoming more and more common. Even more worrying, fans are now trying to justify it like its ok. Its a matter of opinion, but i am not buying that. I mean, if you were watching an NFL superbowl and the other team that was down by 30 points at halftime decided not to return to the field there would be a national uproar, yet not coming out from your corner after catching a beating in a world title fight is perfectly fine? :huh






I know there are potential dangers, but thats why there are professional referees and a ringside doctor, to stop fights if need. If a fighter punks out with his own free will, i think that is unacceptable






But, its just my opinion





Sage

 

You do make a valid point.

People pay good money to watch these big fights, the last thing they want is someone to take a dive or quit needlessly.

Obviously safety plays an important part, however.

Plenty of fighters have been losing a fight handsdown only to stage an incredible late rally to stop an opponent - it would be a shame for that to end.

 

could anyone say gerald mclellan was wrong to " quit " ?

 

Depends on the circumstances.

We can all talk about how boxers are paid to entertain us and should never quit, but this can be balanced by the need for a boxer to protect himself when his corner, the ref and the doctor wont. He is sometimes the only one who knows how he feels inside, and if he senses something is wrong then I don't blame him if he bails out (especially in those fights were the man taking the beating has no chance of pulling out the win).

I think, looking back, there are instances were we all wished some fighters had quit before they were KO'd or badly injured in the ring. C'mon we've all shouted at the TV at one or more points, screaming for a fight to be stopped.

Anyone who watched the Daniel Reyes - Edgar Cardenas will know were I'm coming from (just one instance, and Cardenas has so far suffered no ill effects that I've heard; but he may have to deal with stuff later on in life as a direct result of the mauling he took in that fight).

 

The decision to quit is never made lightly. Only if the boxer feels as though there is a real danger to himself does he quit, and I fully support that. Granted we fans may lose a few rounds of action but I'd rather that than see people seriously hurt. Forcing someone to continue when they feel they cannot is nothing short of barbaric, and one of the reasons boxing is still seen as such by a lot of people.

 

Watch Lockett vs Pavlik and you will beg to differ.

Gary's attitude in the lead up to the fight sucked, saying how he hated boxing and couldn't wait to retire - that money came before glory and he preferred to defend a WBU belt than fight in a ten rounder on a big card somewhere.

I wish they wouldn't have let him quit and he got beaten into next week.

 

Watch Povetkin v Sykes; makes the Lockett of the Pavlik fight look like a never-say-die blood and guts warrior.

 

I think I will pass.

I saw Povetkin against Chambers, who surrendered - Povetkin is a pudding as well.

 

What are you talking about?

McClellan's case has nothing to do with the OP's question.

 

I echo the sentiment that it depends on the circumstances.

I hold it against Peter for quitting because he is a young, strong guy defending a title. He was taking punishment yes, but hardly the kind Willard took against Dempsey. He could have been more of a warrior, but he surrendered without much resistance.
Obviously I don't hold it against Willard, as he endured incredible punishment and left it all in the ring.

Roberto Duran's quitting against Leonard is another that definitely left a bad taste in the mouth.

By the way, Frazier didn't quit. He wanted to go on, but his corner retired him.