Why Is 49-0/50-0 A Big Deal?

50-0 in and of itself isn't really a big deal (Canelo was like 43-0). But given the context of Floyd doing it with like a 23-0 title fight record with multiple lineal titles, it is impressive.

 

It's not as big as some people make it out to be.

Chavez sr is a very interesting example. I saw the majority of his career as it unfolded, and I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that FLoyd has acheived much more than CHavez did in his first 50 pro fights. In fact, I'll say he acheived more than CHavez did in his first 75 fights.

It's just the truth. For their first 50 wins, FLoyd's level of competition was exponentially greater than what Chavez Sr had faced, a guy who was known to take on good challengers like Laporte and follow it up with 3 defenses back home in mexico against tomato cans, all in the prime of his career as a titleholder.

If FLoyd tried to pull some **** like that, he'd get ostracized from every corner of the boxing community.

but to go back to your original point, no 50-0 is not that big of a deal when you compare it to some other guys like Packey Mcfarland or Ray Robinson, 2 guys that had over 100 victories with just a single loss on their record at the time. That's much more impressive IMO.

 

I agree with this. For his first 48 fights, he has probably more quality wins than 90% of the ATG's when they got up to 48 wins themselves.

The eras are completely different, guys back than fought up to 15 times annually. But it's not like everyone of their fights were against top 10 contenders, because they absolutely weren't. A good chunk of them were against part time fighters who held full time jobs during the week/AAU/Club fighters.

 

Well it's a forum, you're entitled to your opinion man. I don't think you were taking a dump on FLoyd's accolades.

There's been several fighters in the history of the sport that built up some terrific resumes by their 50th pro fights. I'm pretty sure Finito Lopez finished with over 50 wins and no losses (he had 1 draw I believe though.)

Even Jones Jr. Aside from the ridiculous loss to Griffin (Roy got DQ'd in their first fight,) he went into the first Tarver fight I'm pretty sure at 47-1 with that 1 controversial loss to Griffin (which he avenged with a 1 round KO.)

I'm more impressed with FLoyd beating all these top rated guys at 147 and 154 at his advanced age than I am with his unblemished record. I also think him being the simultaneous lineal champion of 2 weight classes is also more impressive than an undefeated record.

 

Yeah, definitely. He's done a lot for his legacy post-2011. Despite being 35+ he's won 6 world titles, and 2 lineal titles just since the Ortiz fight.

 

Floyd has also avoided fighters.

 

^^The whole avoiding/ducking statements are subjective at best.

I can easily mention a million ATG fighters that were accused at the time of their peak powers of ducking someone in and around their weight classes.

Jack JOhnson was accused of avoiding the great Sam Langford in a rematch, although back than it was next to impossible to make a title fight between 2 African Americans (although Langford was actually Canadian.)

Ray Robinson, the greatest fighter who ever lived, is accused of ducking 2 men during his WW reign that were thought to be dangerous opponents that could usurp him in Burley and Cocoa Kid.

SRL made sure he stacked the cards in his favor when he picked his opposition. he rushed DUran in a rematch fully knowing the sedentary lifestyle Duran had in between fights and was able to have him weight drained in their match. He never had any interest in fighting Halger back in the early 80's, rather he waited him out until Hagler got old and was already in some tough, tough wars (i.e. the Mugabi fight back in 86.)

Anyway, the list is pretty dam lengthy of ATG fighters that you can single out certain instances when they avoided specific fighters around their weightclasses. the only guy I can really think of that took on all comers was Harry Greb. But that guy is kind of in his own stratosphere of greatness.

 

Because the media and the television tell you its a big deal.

Truth is it doesn't mean anything.

Plenty of fighters have gone undefeated beyond 50 straight wins. Most of them go on too long and eventually lose, but so what? Going undefeated in 70, 80 or 90 odd fights is more than going undefeated in 50. Big deal.

It doesn't mean anything; the greatest boxers in history all picked up losses at some point and it didn't hurt their reputatations one bit.

 

TPTB need something to sell.

 

undefeated means you ducked, cherrypicked, just score points to win, handicapped your opponent, lots of demands to protect the "0", fight scared. it's actually a bad record. no atg goes undefeated for being an atg and constantly challenging himself. undefeated is just marketing strategy for money. floyd cannot sell his fights with out the mexican holiday date and mexican fighters. people have walked away from his fights for a reason. his style is not promoting the sport.

 

Well said

 

:rofl he's just the largest draw in boxing ever! And you dummies should embrace it not bash it. Either way you slice it he's bigger than your idols.

 

There are countries where there is very little difference between amateur and pro. If you want to put on gloves and make money then you're pro. Canelo was 40-0 when he fought Mayweather.

Wouldn't Loma or Rigo be like 300-0 if they could include their record like Chavez and Excusequiao?