why are todays boxers only remembered for their losses.

Because many "fans" these days seem to enjoy seeing the fighter they dislike lose more than they like to see the fighters they are fans of win.

It's ridiculous. The stick Cotto has been getting since losing to Margarito and Pac has been way over the top. In one, he could have very well lost to a guy with brick fists, the other was the p4p best in the world. He is far from shot. He'll prove it against Foreman and I have no doubt he will have significant wins in the future also.

 

Its about activity too

if you're fighting every month the odd loss wasnt a big deal.

If you fight twice a year and have 4 months of build up to a fight losing it takes on much more significance.

 

I think one big factor is how well the fighter is liked will determine how well their losses are taken. In UK everyone loved Hastton so his 2 losses are forgiven but in USA ive seen many posters claim how he was exposed? yet another thread shows many US fans claim mosley shouldnt be judged on losing to mayweather because he is p4p number 1. If a region or group really like a boxer they will rationalise the loss and forgive it, if they dont like the boxer or have nothing in common with them,they wont. This is for the majority but not for every single fighter ofc.

 

to me an ATG will always be remembered for what they capable off at their prime age

 

To the Thread Starter; I think its due to the fact that somefighters appear to have manafactured records. When they do lose some 'fans' see it as a case of 'well they were never that good to begin with'.

There is some truth to this, but Cottos loss to Pac? No.

Also, its because there is a fascination with the '0' nowadays. Ridiculous. Good thread though :good

 

Because, according to bipolar fans perceptions, a fighter is only as good as his last fight.

Then with time, fans take a step back and are able to better appreciate a fighter for his merits.