Regarding Resumes - Do Losses Count?

Every Wilders loss counts. Above all the next ones.

 

If losing doesn't matter than winning wouldn't either.

 

Most elite level fighters pick up losses along the way. In boxing a loss can be embarrassing, humiliating, even career ending.

I judge a fighter on how he comes back from a loss. Wlad is a good example, so is Shane Mosley...

One thing that always bugged me is guys with incredible careers who pick up a loss and then essentially retire, may be after one more easy fight....guys like Tito and Naseem Hamed come to mind. The only guy I really give a pass to in that regard is Michael Spinks, where else was he supposed to go after that fight?

 

No one very serious does care about judges cards in fights vs superior in meaning to be a cash cow fighter.
Never and this is reason why some bunch with boxers had been avoided if they did not had boxed for cards and could not generate amount of money bigger cash cows could had generated were avoided and " fought nobody ".

One from best tools for big cash cows is to fight in hometown, short training camps for opponents, cherry picking and clauses + hometown officiating and comments & loaded with fans arenas.

It is normal process in the business of pro boxing: avoided boxers might become into class " he had fought nobody " and cherry pickers cash cows might get pride for even blown up lower weight classes fighters beatup with a glance.

You also do not need to be highly ranked in modern days to earn a lot with pro boxing. Not at all.
How well known you are and will be possible with you to sell bunch with ppvs and achieve good tickets sales.

Simply even non boxer might get more for fight than 2X Olympic gold medalist in boxing and like this.

 

Yeah but this might be because a lot of reasons.
For example, pro boxing is career job like all jobs.
If you had get 7 and 6 digits purses for your fights and already have decent savings and property etc, if after loss you maybe should to have fights for 5 digits until you get climbed up again, this might be not so interesting.

Next thing is injuries, we actually do not know in depth about them.

Wlad had added elite level western training and this had helped him with a glance.

For me very impressive looked Huck with his ability to deal with losses.
First was when he was a bit too inexperienced and he still managed to get title, to hold this for long time, then he had lost vs prime Pov at HW and instead to get blamed and forget, he climbed up in popularity after this fight.
Then he lost vs prime shape Glowacki version and still regained his status, even get fight vs prime Briedis version for belt and despite he had lost fight, he later had fought vs Usyk for title and yeah.
Despite he is just approx 3 months older than the same Briedis, he is " old " now but his ability to deal with lost fights under belt was amazing thing.

 

For p4p lists, yes. P4P is a valuation of the current boxing climate.

Legacy wise? no. Not in my opinion.

 

Like this.
If guy does have fights vs real top elite lads without shegenians and smart clauses, short notice camps for opponent and cherry picking, he might accumulate more L in his record.
Bad matchmaking too might induce lost fights in record even if lad is not bad boxer.

Overall, to finish a bum not rarely is easier than to walk all distance with good boxer and this should be taken in account.

 

Absolutely
I mean, you dont typically list a job you got fired from on your resume.

However that would look better then
The shoe store or fast food Restuarant you have worked at back in the day on your current professional resume.

Just about anyone can be undefeated with nothing but crushed beer cans on their resume.

 

Well, the same shoe store might have positions from part time cleaner till director / principal and there is difference, if someone had for example worked from shop assistant till shift manager and above, I don't see this as bad thing in resume.
I had as first job simple stuff and never had been uncomfortable cos this exp. If someone does not feel comfortable, might go to the hell.
During last 14 years I did not had looked for a job, I choose from some offers and had other stuff to do too.
Yeah, if someone needed to fill full resume then if this does not likes, not my problem there.

Like this, because pro boxing unlike am boxing even might have lads with 0-10-0 record and half from this via stoppages etc specimens.
Notice period too is important and difference there is very big advantage for one guy and might be huge disadvantage for another guy.
Clauses, **** with weight classes etc adds this and in all levels.

 

Why are you arguing with me? I was talking to a guy who said only wins matter.

I agree with you that Mike McCallum should be in the Hall of Fame ... and he is. But it has to do with the totality of his career, wins and losses. Not just his wins.

Even when you brought him up, you brought up the James Toney fights, even though he DIDN'T WIN any of them. Because wins over Herol Graham and Steve Collins and even Donald Curry aren't impressive enough for some who have them.

Hell, Sumbu Kalambay beat Mike McCallum, Herol Graham (twice), Steve Collins and Iran Barkley. He isn't in.

Fighting Toney three times (and seemingly winning a few) helped McCallum get in. Fighting Roy Jones helped. Even though he didn't notch any official wins.

It all matters.

 

Nice.

 

Depends on the level of comp. Getting knocked out by Marquez is better than losing to Lamon Brewster. Also how you lose. Golovkins loses to Canelo were razor thin, many believe he won those fights. Now if G had the same issues with Brook, who moved up 2 divisions to fight him, even if the fights were extremely close, I think fans would have been more criticle.

 

Losses do count when evaluating a fighter, but not how many times you lost but rather how you lost and whom you lost to. Being KO'd by Julian Jackson is different to being KO'd by Breidis Prescott. Being KO'd in your prime is different to being KO'd at the end of your career.

 

The obsession with being undefeated is all from Gayweather.. Before no one thought Marciano was that great just cause he was 49-0. People in the 70’s rightly thought that Louis, Ali, or even Dempsey was better. I saw it old boxing mags that was the opinion. Only ******** *****s are hung up on this 0 defeats crap. calzaghe, Andre ward, Gayweather, Ricardo Lopez.. no one should think these guys are the best just cause of their records. The best out of that group is calzaghe and Lopez and no one will be talking about them as anything that special in 20 years

 

Of course losses count. A record has to be weighed up by considering both wins and losses. The manner of the losses also should be taken into account.