Why does a fighter always have to be "exposed" or some other ****?

Quintana is not a top guy, he came into this fight as an 8/1 underdog. Not only did Williams lose, he looked very sloppy in the process. That's why people are saying he was exposed

 

Those days apparently are gone.

In the old days, when fighters fought more, it was expected I guess for them to lose.

I see a loss as a good learning experience, personally.

How well does a fighter learn and come back from it?

 

Cus they are internet warriors.

 

I agree man. There is nothing wrong with losing with class. I still believe Paul can be a great champion. My only problem is on the other side of the spectrum. People believe just b/c a fighter is undefeated, they are great fighters. You have to look at the quality of opposition and see what they have been through in the ring that qualifies them as great.

Examples are...

1) ricky hatton-he never fought anyone great unless you include an old inactive Kosta and way passed his prime Castillo

2) paul williams-great great great potential, but never fought anyone great besides an overrated margarito(but you still have to give him some credit)

Now, Miguel Cotto on the other hand is legit. Many people thought he would be outclassed by Quintana, Paulie, Judah, and Mosley, but he fought brilliantly and always amazes people. he has shown he can recover from being hurt and adapt to different styles.

Hatton doesnt possess the adapting quality and neither does williams.

 

He's 'exposed' because many idiots were predicting him to be a future P4P star, not just a 'good contender', a ****ing STAR and a future ELITE.

None of these idiots know how to analyse a fighter and it's a smack in their face instead of Williams himself.

Nothing to do with losing either, if the fighter in a loss shows good qualities still. Williams is so hittable it's sickening, and Quintana literally is just a B LEVEL decent fighter who Cotto absolutely demolished, but these imbecile's had Williams as more a threat to Floyd than Cotto.

 

Paul Williams wasn't exposed. He just has no technique or boxing ability, add that he has no power and relies on volumes of punches to overwhelm his opponents. Add that he has no defense. He didn't throw enough punches tonight. That is why he lost.

 

:good Couldn't agree more. Supposed elite fighters don't lose and look that sloppy against B level fighters.

 

Technically, he wasn't exposed, many of us had him figured out from the start.:yep

 

sloppy isnt exposed

besides williams just seems to throw non stop punches from all angles they are kinda assumed to be sloppy.

i loved when people were saying hatton was exposed becuase he showed no defence :think

 

Williams wasn't exposed if you knew what he was.

Good fighter with arguably the worst defense in all of the WW division. He beat Margarito after Margarito decided to take half the fight off.

It's all in what you think of him. If you thought he was a future HOF then yeah, he was exposed. If you thought he was a GOOD fighter with severe flaws then you shouldn't be surprised at what happened tonight.

 

Well I hate to be a smart arse, but I've said he's overrated many a time with his pitter patter bull****

That said, I predicted this one wrong, didn't think Quintana would be the man to end the hype

 

cotto has defencive flaws and yet no one bats and eye.but 2 wieght world champion fits better than wbo title holder.

we all know he was easy to hit we all knew he was sloppy. when he fought sham he just got double slapped any time he got close. what i am surprised about is that it was quintana to beat him. i wouldnt mind a full volume ACCURATE fighter but a slick boxer-boxer was not what most people were betting on.

 

That's backlash . . . payback for the people HYPING the losing fighter especially those portraying their fighter as if he is immortal.

:yep :rofl

 

Beautifully, beautifully put. :good

Can you add in a paragraph about the idiocy of claiming that fighter C will be non-competitive with fighter A because fighter B beats fighter C first? Why should any fighter be "credited" for the actions of another fighter? I don't think it used to work that way.