Undefeated fighters; Invincible or overly cautious?

Depends on who it is and there competition.....

 

I think it's impossible for a boxer to go undefeated against many great opponents. Just on the styles disadvantages they will face, it shouldn't happen.

Calzaghe would have lost against a great brawler/slugger.
Mayweather will lose against a great pressure fighter.
Ottke would have lost against a semi-decent boxer/brawler/puncher.

Styles make fights and no boxer in history will make it through their career undefeated, unless there is no competition to beat (Calzaghe) or they won't fight the best (Mayweather).

Even the best come across guys just wrong for them. Barrera and Jones, Griffith and Carter, Frazier and Foreman, Liston and Ali etc..

 

nobody is invincible, so if you think undefeated fighters are invincible then yes, they will get overrated. beaten fighters cherrypick as well as unbeaten so I don't see the relation there, just envy.

 

Bigel Benn was a great slugger and he admitted that Calzaghe would have beaten him. The only fighter I see beating Calzaghe at 168 would be RJJ, because of his other - worldly physical attributes.

Being undefeated means great consistency and winning fights that could be lost with less than a 110% effort and ability to adapt. Calzaghe could have lost to Eubank and Kessler, Marciano could have lost to Walcott. They kept their 0 in those fights because of that extra determination and mental strength. Many great fighters sometimes had off - nights or let winnable fights slip away. Hopkins fought better competition than Calzaghe but he also gave away two fights to Taylor, something Calzaghe would never let happen. So there are different roads to greatness, some get there through star opponents, others through incredible consistency.

 

That question is too vauge. Depends on the figther (His personality), who is in his division and who he has not fought that he "should"

 

or option 3.

3. Politics (aka as money)

 

Often nowadays (although it has always happened) I think a undefeated fighter will probably be fighting stiffs. There obviously are exceptions (look at Cotto's resume before Margarito or look at Larry Holmes before Michael Spinks).

 

But sometimes advesaries seem tougher than they are because of star power. Hopkins' performance against Trinidad was great, but much of that had to do with Trinidad's reputation from 147 - 154. The Eubank that was beaten by Calzaghe would have beaten Trinidad, but he never had the star power of Trinidad.

 

When you've lost to as many journeymen as Glen Johnson has you're pretty much going to say that...

 

Ottke would've lost anyway without the help from judges and referees.

 

What do they say- the survival rate for everyone drops to 0 on a long enough time line.

There is always someone out there who can beat them, boxers are not invincible.

Even the greatest encountered fighters capable of breaking his game apart.

 

most undefeated fighters these days beat hand picked bums. but all top 10 fighters of today cherry pick. the difference is that hand picked bums are bums and journey men, the cherrypicked oppents would be low risk high reward say pacs david diaz or moselys mayorga