Why Is Someone Always Saying "exposed"

i think you can add Calzaghe to the hoping column!!

 

exposed.
cry more

 

I'll never understand why at 26, the undisputed middleweight champion of the world would want to move up 10 pounds to fight a crafty veteran with an iron chin. I get the money part but otherwise I don't get it.

 

@doom bull
cause he lived in a fantasy built by his fans and media.
he sure did get exposed big time compared to the hype he was getting.
this scrub shouldnt have been a champion to begin with.

@walk win me
taylor was not a hype job imo he was a disappointment. and that started when he decided to work with stewart and tried to change the style that got him up there.

 

Exactly it was sickening listening to all the Pavlic nuthugging. He got a big lesson in humility.

 

I agree with the OP, "exposed" gets used way too often around here. "Shot" is another overused word as well.

 

I hate people saying someone is exposed when they lose their undefeated record.

Their are two types of exposure in my opinion.

1) A fighter getting totally exposed - for me a fighter who is totally exposed is someone that really can't fight to well but has been fed bums so it appears he can fight. However when said person fights and get beats by a decent pro then he is totally exposed as the "bum" he truly is. Tye Fields is a good example of this when Monte Barret totally exposed him.

2) A certain aspect of a fighter getting exposed (aka their main weakness being highlighted by a fighter capable of highlighting this particular weakness) - Khan and Pavlik are good examples of this. They are very good fighters so they were not totally expossed as bums. However their weaknesses were exposed by fighters capable of exposing it; Khan's weak chin was exposed by the first power puncher he faced and Pavlik's lack of ability to deal with a slick fighter that throws shots at angles was exposed by Hopkins.

The bottom line is fighters of exposure 1 generally can not come back and be successful after defeat but fighters of exposure 2, if they learn from their mistakes, can come back and be successful after defeat.

 

This is exactly the kind of crap that Nate Campbell was talking about. People said he beat an "overrated" Juan Diaz... or that Miguel Cotto losing to Margarito was proof that he was "overrated". Give the fighters the dignity of being beat by the better fighter was what he was saying.

 

Its pretty much all of the british Calzaghe fan club that have seen all of there other fighters truly get exposed so they are just grasping at straws and are getting a little ***gy revenge. Though, there is no way Pavlik was exposed as something we did not know already. He is one dimensional but it is a great dimension and he will still beat most guys who dont come with the gameplan and skill set of Bhop.

 

Dib got exposed as a bad fighter.

Pavlik got exposed in the fact he had no answer for a slick fast physical boxer.

 

That, indeed was the point BHop was so gracious to make to Kelly post fight. Kelly should seriously consider sparring with BHop for Hopkins future fights. He could learn so much as he is still very young. He should also return to middleweight where he seems faster.