Why when someone looses are they always called overrated?????????

I think the reason some are overrated more so than others after a loss depends upon the level of opposition.

When Hearns lost to Hagler, I defy anyone here to say that Hearns was overrated. Mab lost to JMM, was MAB overrated?

Now when highly touted (by ESB for example) fighters lose to suspect opposition that the majority think will lose, of course there will be a backlash.

Now if the fighter who did the upsetting continues to have a stellar career then maybe he was just a better fighter all along.

I think nowadays everyone throws the word greatness so easily..I think if anyone is overrated, Id say its the people who does the hyping of such fighters.

Now back to Juan which is really what were trying to get at, honestly he lost to an ok fighter who fought great. Had he lost to a prime Casamayor in the same manner, he wouldnt be labeled as overrated..only by idiots I guess

 

I still respect Diaz, he deserved to lose that fight, but he is not a bum.

 

and chavez and roy jones jr.

 

Glad to know that there are at least a few intelligent people out there:happy :hi: :good

 

I really want to see your top 10. You don't have Mayweather, Cotto, Calzaghe in there? To name a few.....

 

and for the record I was saying Diaz was "slightly overrated" long before his fight with Campbell. Great fighter, but people were talking like he was completely unbeatable

 

No I can't say that I'd put anyone of them in my top ten. Calzaghe is close. IF he beats Bhop than mabye top ten. Mayweather no way Great Great fighter but my top ten is for guys who dominated the best out there Mayweather has dominated everyone he fought not always taken the toughest fights. Greatness isn't about undefeated or the fastest or even best defensivly it's about fighting the best to be the best.

 

Because most of the posters here know **** all about boxing and are immature. They see one good KO and think the guy is the next coming and they think to ever lose makes you crap.
Their pathetic and childish mentality is why so many fighters now have padded records and being 25-0 is seen as more important than actually learning your trade and developing.

Much of the best learning a fighter can have is in a tough fight and often from a loss, provided it is not a horrible, prolonged beating.

 

Joe Louis was knocked out. -

This content is protected

Lennox Lewis was knocked out. -

This content is protected

Tyson was knocked out. -

This content is protected

Holmes was knocked out. -

This content is protected

Spinks was knocked out. -

This content is protected

Holyfied was knocked out. -

This content is protected

Tommy Hearns was knocked out.

This content is protected

Ray Leonard was knocked out. -

This content is protected

Duran was knocked out. -

This content is protected

etc.............they are not bums. -

This content is protected

 

There is a difference between a fighter who already has accomplished a lot in his career then loses and a fighter who is still an up and coming fighter (but some blind fans think he is unbeatable) then loses. That makes him overrated.

 

Actually, this is a term with a definition. If a 3 rank beats a 1 or 2 rank, then 1 or 2 was over rated. OK. Obviously this SHOULDN'T apply to some one that has fought and won a belt. But rankings down the line are speculation. And of course, number one has to fight the 1's and 2's to retain claim to the rank of number 1 or risk people thinking they are over rated.

But I do get your point. EXPOSED is another favorite word here that equal's LOSS to some people. But, that would be another thread and won't make a damned bit of difference to people.

 

Because forums are mostly attented by teenagers and **** stirrer.

 

If most people are under the assumption that fighter A will easliy beat fighter B, then fighter B goes out and easily beats fighter A, is it not safe too assume that the abilities of fighter A were overrated?

 

Because some people think that if you lose once, you were never good in the first place. Others don't know that anyone can lose on a bad day or that certain styles are bad against certain fighters. That only shows that fighter's limitations; it doesn't mean he was overrated. However, when a fighter steps up and loses, that could prove we expected too much from him on the basis of his performance against good journeymen/fringe contenders. So, we accept we might have overrated him, against the best. Fair enough.

 

losses should be treated as a learning experience. i really dont care how many losses a fighter has, as it has no bearing on his present skills.