Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Is too much weight given to victories in the assessment of how good a fighter is?

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Book Reader
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    12,262

    Default Is too much weight given to victories in the assessment of how good a fighter is?

    Is winning all that counts? It certainly cannot be discounted as a major criteria in assessing how good a fighter is.

    However, I think to a much greater extent than any other sport, the manner in which a fighter wins counts for a lot, or at least it should, in the evaluation of a fighter.

    For example, Maskaev knocked Rahman out of the ring with one punch in his victory over him. Should that count the same as Holyfield's head-butt fueled TKO over Rahman?

    Isn't it far too simplistic to simply talk in terms of who beat whom? And in doing so, doesn't it encourage fighters not to fight the best for fear of losing? And even in the case when they do fight the best, doesn't it perpetuate the safety first approach that so many fighters have adopted that create tedious and utterly boring fights, that quite possibly, could in large part account for the decline of boxing as a main-stream sport?
    "A fisherman is always hopeful -- nearly always more hopeful than he has any right to be."
    - Roderick Haig-Brown

  2. #2
    MATCHMAKER REEDsART's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    CURTIS COKES' Birthplace...
    Posts
    36,806

    Default

    HOW a Guy Wins is VERY Important, but WINNING is the OBJECTIVE, Doug....U CANNOT Minimize a Clear-Cut VICTORY...

    U Know the Axiom, "Win TODAY, Look Good TOMORROW"...

    But When Rating 2 Fighters who NEVER Faced Each Other, MANNER of Victory is VERY Important...



    REED


    DALLAS' FINEST

    Charles "The Future" Hatley (20-1-1, 14 KO's)

    "The Latin Legend" Luis Yanez (7-0-1)

    The "JON 'BONES' JONES - MMA SOUL BROTHER # 1" / "VIVA BLACK MAN" Bandwagon - REED, Steve-Dave, Joe King, Bob N' Weave, Trplsec, Jarhead

  3. #3
    Undisputed Champion D MAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    2,827

    Default

    It all comes down to the fact that boxing has been taken off mainstream tv, so when a fight happens all that 90% of sports fans know is who got the W.. and hence way too much emphasis is placed on the end result, rather than what actually happened.

    I agree 100% that to much weight is given to victories. In particular too muich weight is given to KO victories.. ie most people consider a 3rd round KO to AUTOMATICALLY be far more dominant than a comprehensive 12 round beating.. but they couldn't be more wrong about it.
    ;crafty;

  4. #4

    Default

    I think the defining criteria should be how hotpair of thighs the fighter has
    Quote Originally Posted by "Pascals Wager"

    I was thinking in my head & in my head I think that Styles makes fights is good.
    Its true because when someone beats someone who beat them its confusing like when Frazer beat Ali and Ali beat Foreman who beat Frazer Its because of styles make fights Foreman hits harder than Ali and that made him able to knock out Frazer But Foreman could not knock out Ali because Ali was different to Frazier with his style.
    and also, the jab is a good punch to do.




  5. #5
    Czarcasm whiskey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    29,134

    Default

    I just decide who i like better before the fight. Then even if my fighter loses, i complain "how" they lost and try to diminish the other guy's accomplishment.

    Winning shouldn't mean anything unless it's the fighter i like who wins.
    Reigning European and World Cup predictions champion and all around wonderful person.

  6. #6
    Sleeps in a Cage Trplsec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    13,913

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whiskey View Post
    I just decide who i like better before the fight. Then even if my fighter loses, i complain "how" they lost and try to diminish the other guy's accomplishment.

    Winning shouldn't mean anything unless it's the fighter i like who wins.


    Hmmmm. This is like reading between the lines.

  7. #7
    Book Reader
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    12,262

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whiskey View Post
    I just decide who i like better before the fight. Then even if my fighter loses, i complain "how" they lost and try to diminish the other guy's accomplishment.

    Winning shouldn't mean anything unless it's the fighter i like who wins.

    that's an interesting point. i'll have to mull that one over. seems like you might be trying to guess at my motive for this thread - that it is my indirect way of minimizing the fact that sloppy manages to win one stink job after another and that the only time he manages a stoppage is in wales.

    have you watched more than two or three of sloppy's fights? they're absolutely horrendous to watch. try watching his fight with David Starie. I think it was on the under-card of a Tyson card. It's gotta be the most tedious fight anyone has ever seen.

    Even his fight with Hopkins and RJJ were for the most part boring as hell.

    The Kessler fight was okay because Kessler maintained his distance and to the best of his abililty avoided a hug-fest.

    But by and large, the guy wins ugly. I don't think that should be overlooked in the case of any fighter.

    Fighters who win ugly win ugly because they're not good enough to win pretty.
    "A fisherman is always hopeful -- nearly always more hopeful than he has any right to be."
    - Roderick Haig-Brown

  8. #8
    P4P No.1 KaukipRrr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    CORNWALLESE, AND FUCKING PROUD OF IT!
    Posts
    7,566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Double L View Post
    that's an interesting point. i'll have to mull that one over. seems like you might be trying to guess at my motive for this thread - that it is my indirect way of minimizing the fact that sloppy manages to win one stink job after another and that the only time he manages a stoppage is in wales.

    have you watched more than two or three of sloppy's fights? they're absolutely horrendous to watch. try watching his fight with David Starie. I think it was on the under-card of a Tyson card. It's gotta be the most tedious fight anyone has ever seen.

    Even his fight with Hopkins and RJJ were for the most part boring as hell.

    The Kessler fight was okay because Kessler maintained his distance and to the best of his abililty avoided a hug-fest.

    But by and large, the guy wins ugly. I don't think that should be overlooked in the case of any fighter.

    Fighters who win ugly win ugly because they're not good enough to win pretty.
    You shouldn't blame the Hopkins fight on Calzaghe, infact,.. all Hopkins eye-busters are of his doing... sports writers attempt to sugar-coat 'Mr unknockoutable', with this ironic phrase,..

    "Hopkins makes you fight HIS fight!"....

    yep...he certainly does..


    Future world champion Tommy ''The white hope'' Karpency.

    Down, but not out!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  



Our Affiliates: