How much significance do you place on a fighter "coming off a loss"?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by horst, Jan 6, 2011.


  1. horst

    horst Guest

    From most of the comments I see on here, it appears that very little value is placed at all on wins achieved over fighters who were "coming off a loss".

    I find this problematic in many ways.


    First of all, within the last few years many good wins have been achieved over fighters who lost their previous fights (eg Floyd Mayweather vs Zab Judah, Juan Manuel Marquez vs Juan Diaz II, Manny Pacquiao vs Erik Morales II, Glen Johnson vs Roy Jones Jr, Juan Diaz vs Michael Katsidis, Joe Calzaghe vs Byron Mitchell, etc, I'm sure there are many more good examples but that's all I can come up with off the top of my head).



    Second of all, are you telling me that a lightheavyweight such as Hopkins or Cloud getting a win over Chad Dawson in 2011 would not be impressive?

    Or if Victor Ortiz got his revenge over Marcos Maidana?

    What about if Paul Williams outfought Kelly Pavlik in a 160 grudge match? Or if Floyd Mayweather outboxed Paul Williams at 154?

    What about Miguel Cotto outpunching Kermit Cintron?

    The list goes on.



    Thirdly, if a win over a fighter coming off a loss is not worth much, then surely that invalidates rematches and trilogies? :huh

    Marco Antonio Barrera beat Erik Morales in the second and third fights of their trilogy - was the third win worth less than the other two fights in that series because Morales was coming off a loss? Or was it the most important win, as it was the definitive win, the decider, the highest stakes of them all?

    For those of you who scored the Taylor-Hopkins rematch for Jermain Taylor, was the second win pointless/meaningless? Or was it the more important win of the two, as it consolidated the victor's superiority in your eyes?

    For those of you who scored the first Castillo-Mayweather fight for Mayweather, was the second win pointless/meaningless? Or was it the more important win of the two, as it consolidated the victor's superiority?




    And fourthly (and perhaps most importantly), the very idea that a loss automatically leaves a fighter a declined force is non-sensical.

    If that was true, boxing would not be the sport it is today.

    Many many ATGs have suffered many losses in their careers, but this does not leave them unalterably changed or diminished as fighters at all.

    When Ray Leonard was outfought by Roberto Duran, did he crumble? Or did he come back stronger, and secure some incredible victories? The same could be said about Duran and his loss to Esteban deJesus at lightweight (brutally avenged twice), or any of his losses in the 80s (Leonard II, Hearns, Benitez, Hagler), because he kept coming back to wrack up astonishing wins as well (Cuevas, Moore, Barkley).

    ATGs have suffered losses all throughout their careers, in their primes and outwith their primes, and it has not affected them as fighters.

    Losing a fight may in some cases leave a little mental hangover that a fighter has to overcome, but unless the fighter has been injured in that loss, it is extremely rare for him to actually lose his ability or skills on account of a defeat.

    In recent times, the likes of Kostya Tszyu and Marco Antonio Barrera have suffered crushing stoppage losses near the start of their world title careers... and came back to become long-time p4p staples and HOF calibre fighters.




    I conclude by saying I think this whole "coming off a loss" thing has became a bit hysterical on this forum. Many great wins over many great fighters have been achieved over fighters who dropped their previous fight. It is silly to overstate this. A loss does not correlate to a decrease in a fighter's skills or abilities.

    :bbb
     
  2. nuketurnal

    nuketurnal N-Bomb Full Member

    2,090
    0
    Apr 24, 2010
    only a specific group of haters emphasizes this 'coming off a loss' issue..
     
  3. Hatesrats

    Hatesrats "I'm NOT Suprised..." Full Member

    60,376
    241
    Sep 28, 2007
    :good:deal
     
  4. Jetmax

    Jetmax Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,729
    0
    Jan 4, 2010
    It holds significance depending on to who they lost to and how. But you're right, that particular group do overemphasize it we all know why.
     
  5. cesare-borgia

    cesare-borgia Übermensch in fieri Full Member

    28,924
    20
    Jul 4, 2009
    dont say its just a group almost everyone here writes a guy off who loses brutally, nobody is talking about paul williamsor danny jacobs this day. I think it means very little, in boxingfans logic a loss means your not prime anymore or over the hill. The ts is right on this one.
     
  6. EJDiaZ

    EJDiaZ Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,213
    420
    Aug 21, 2010
    No idea :huh
     
  7. PNoyFightFanUSN

    PNoyFightFanUSN Larry Don't Give a **** Full Member

    6,836
    2
    Apr 9, 2010
    losses have always impacted your ability to get fights since like...1890. Duh. That automatically takes away your value and skill as a fighter because only the very best never have any losses.
     
  8. Boxed Ears

    Boxed Ears this my daddy's account (RIP daddy) Full Member

    56,128
    10,539
    Jul 28, 2009
    It always, always, always depends on the context. No ifs, ands or buts about it.
     
  9. horst

    horst Guest

    Have you ever heard of someone called Sugar Ray Robinson? :huh


    Argument annihilated. :hi:
     
  10. Chappy112

    Chappy112 Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,347
    10
    Nov 14, 2009
    Great point. I do think a lot is placed on 'coming off a loss' but I can see why some people use it, just a lot use it to hate which is wrong.

    For example I don't think Dirrell losing to Froch had any effect on Dirrell so coming off the loss is insignificant. However if it's a brutal KO or a beat down then it can have an effect mentally such as Miguel Cotto. Hatton was never the same after Mayweather knocked him out.
     
  11. Boom_Boom

    Boom_Boom R.I.P Boxing 6/9/12 Full Member

    38,291
    23
    Sep 21, 2006
    Thats how it is with boxing fans these days, "You're only as good as your last fight."

    For me it it really depends on the kind of loss such as if the fighter was competitive at all or how much damage did he take in that last fight.
     
  12. horst

    horst Guest

    I don't see how Hatton was a different or better fighter against Luis Collazo than he was vs Paulie Malignaggi. Don't see it at all. Hatton always had a suspect chin (see Magee fight even before Collazo). Malignaggi was arguably the second best all-round performance of his career.
     
  13. PNoyFightFanUSN

    PNoyFightFanUSN Larry Don't Give a **** Full Member

    6,836
    2
    Apr 9, 2010
    Sarcasm hat isn't on today, is it?:think
     
  14. Chappy112

    Chappy112 Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,347
    10
    Nov 14, 2009
    Tbh I forgot about the Paulie fight mate. I was more thinking about the Lazcano fight where I thought he was gonna get KO'd near the end.
     
  15. horst

    horst Guest

    :lol: A thousand apologies!!!!


    :oops: I'm so accustomed to dealing with morons on this forum I sometimes forget that there are many sane and good posters out there.