What satisfies you more?

what a strange question.

 

Actually it is a fair question imo.
I've seen lots of posts in here where people seem to love it when a prospect gets KTFO or "exposed".

 

**** yeah, their was a shitload of Khan threads when he got ko'd. lol

 

Depends on who. If he's a dick, number 1, seems an OK fellow, number 2.

 

It depends what the hypejob was like in his professional dealings with other fighters.

A hypejob who doesn't duck challengers, travels to fight abroad, tries to fight the best, etc., I want to do as well as possible! Hype is necessary for boxing, especially with it being low profile as a sport these days! Perhaps he'll bring casual fans into the sport!

Arrogant duckers who pad their record, are bad for boxing because they short-change the fans and don't give challengers a go to prove themselves, so I want them to be brought down to earth, but not to fail.

What would be the point of wanting them to fail? It would just mean one fewer good fighter. If a KTFO is what it takes to bring them on the straight and narrow, then let them get KTFO! Problem is, if the hype really gets to them, they think it was a one off and they set of on another unbeaten run against non-hopers, whilst learning little from their defeat and continuing to be arrogant and to duck, etc. Remember, with every hypejob comes a promoter who does the overhyping, who doesn't want his hypejob cash-cow to be exposed (further/again)...I like to see the hypejob exposed also to watch the look of their promoters when it happens, because they are even worse for boxing than their charge! My £ 0.02. Very good question, IMO,

 

doesnt take a psycholoigist to figure out that the people which answered the first option are the jelous kind who get thrills watching other people fail and not true boxing fans, as true fans hearts should be set on the emergence of new prospects to keep boxing alive and not feed of there failure.

 

Im not really bothered as 'hype jobs' are created by the media and nuthugger fans and i tend not to judge a fighter on those two types of people.

If the guy is a good man and works hard then i want to see him succeed. If he's an arrogant arsehole and thinks he's the man without actually ever backing it up (Audley Harrison springs to mind) then i don't mind seeing them flat on their back.

 

Fair enough.
But some don't see it that way apparently, for example people have bashed Jermaine Taylor although he faced Pavlik, got KTFO and then faced him again with no belts at stake.

 

Taylor haters are bad people. Ignore them. Jermain fights the best and gives his all. You cannot ask for more! He will even fight Froch/Pascal or Bute/Andrade or Kessler after Lacy, just wait and see.

 

The more good fighters out there the better the chances of seeing big fights

 

Taylor was only a HBO hypejob - but there have been millions of those, getting blown off by Lampley is hardly a novelty for a fighter.

My definition of a genuine hypejob are guys like Amir Khan, Andy Lee etc.

 

bit of a daft question,all fighters start out being hyped by someone,if all got there ass kicked then there would be no boxing coming through to replace the old ones,i hope all hype jobs do well unless it`s someone really cocky and deserves a beating.
​