Is undefeated records in boxing impressive or not?

not now. boxing careers are managed for maximum profit and not for the legacy of men. it has become more of a business rather than being the best of the sport. good thing lower rated fighters still make the fight.

 

I've got a dual answer for this question.
1. it depends, simply put. rocky marciano's undefeated record is impressive. floyd mayweather's is impressive. deontay wilder's? hell no. it depends on the level of competition that an unbeaten fighter has been able to remain undefeated against.

2. there's an old belief in sports, past and present, and frankly, human society, that a person's true mettle is tested when they're charged with the challenge of getting back up, after being knocked down, or in other words, recovering and succeeding again after suffering a significant failure. some would say that coming back from defeat by becoming triumphant once again is more impressive.

 

How can anyone say floyd has an impressive record when he doesn't have one atg in their prime on his résumé

Not even one

 

it would be impressive if there's no ducking or fake retiring or vacationing when a threat arises.

 

Must really sting knowing that mayweather will go down as the greatest fighter of this generation despite all his "ducking, retiring/vacationing". I'm sure that has nothing to do with that fact that he has never lost...atsch

Edit: As a pro

 

it's obviously more impressive to have an unbeaten record, if you say otherwise your an idiot. it's better to fight the best and beat the best rather than loose to the same opposition.

 

Roy Jones did the same thing.

 

it's only impressive if you fought them all, not when you retire at your prime and only fights once a year when coming back.

 

The closest we got to an undefeated prime fighter was ali and roy

And then with ali, he did lose to frasier one year removed from his prime

With roy he missed a few big punchers

However, I wish roy had caught McLennan, he probably would have won and shut up any argument against his atg placement

 

So basically there's never been a fighter who's gone unbeaten and fought the best

 

Generally it's not about being undefeated, at least in my opinion, but I also find most of the undefeated records impressive. Some records are more impressive, some are less impressive, but retiring undefeated is always a good thing Imo.

Ricardo Lopez and Joe Calzaghe have impressive records Imo. Not as good as some other fighters who suffered defeat, but definitely very good. Not to mention Rocky Marciano, the first and only undefeated heavyweight champion.

Floyd Mayweather has also a very good record and if he retires undefeated it will be a great achievement. Timothy Bradley is doing fine job so far as well (at least that's what the paper says).

The only problem with undefeated records today is that some fighters can only market their "0", therefore they sometimes avoid the tough opponents in order to minimize the risk of suffering defeat, because in that case their popularity would seriously drop. That's what prevents some great fights from happening unfortunately.

As for Rigondeaux, his record may not be as impressive on paper as some other records because he hasn't been around for that long, but what he displays is pure brilliance everyone should pay attention to.

On the other side, there are surely some less respectable undefeated records, but after all, every champion is up there for a reason and that's not because he's bad at what he does.

 

Great Champions are those who have lost, dusted themselves down and come back better and stronger IMO.

 

Why won't Mayweather fight anybody in their prime or somebody's who's undefeated.

Being undefeated isn't impressive

double standards

 

The guys who are saying that probably have an agenda.

 

Well we all know mayweather lost to Castillo anyway

So he's not unbeaten