This is an expression you used to hear often. And it's key implication is that in fact, the better fighter does not always win. But our consciences tell us it's better if he does. Can you recount instances when the better fighter did not win? When, due to intervening circumstances, the worse fighter came away with the victory?
TONS of Instances, Doub... Throughout History, Countless GREAT Fighters Lost to Guys that WEREN'T "Better" than Them, Per Se... Esteban DeJesus Certainly Wasn't "Better" than Roberto Duran, Yet he Took his "0" from him...Ken Norton Clearly Wasn't Better than Muhammad Ali, yet Arguably BEAT Ali Every Time they Fought... Pacquiao-Marquez, Roy-Tarver, Mosley-Forrest...Tons of Examples... REED:kidcool:
Agreed. It happens all the time. Making it a wonder I found it worth discussing at all. :: But it's an important concept I think for fans to keep in mind. I know we beat this drum a lot but the fact remains: any fighter can lose. And he may do so for dozens of possible reasons other than being the inferior fighter. So it doesn't make a lot of sense to write off fighters for losing.
Us fans are certainly to quick to write off a fighter, but i think the networks play a big part of this as they just love to introduce a fighter as undefeated. Once the 'O' goes there is considerable less enthusiasm it seems.
:bears: You already know it bruv. I was there and saw the robbery with my own eyes, should have called the police on that red-headed swine
Unless there was a robbery by the officials, I would say in all cases, the better fighter on that particular night between those particular fighters won. Hate to rain on you guys's debate parade. :nana:
You mention the officials, by which I assume you mean the judges. But what about the dozen or more other factors outside the control of a fighter which can influence the outcome of a fight? For example, the ref. The gloves. A man parachuting into the middle of a ring.
A ref is an official. The gloves is a outlier, an uncommon example, and usually nothing but mind-games from an opponent...though a valid example, I will give you that. Both fighters should be affected equally by a man parachuting into a ring and falls into the "these particular fighters on this particular night category" Tiger Jones beat Sugar Ray Robinson during Robinson's first comeback. Blitzed him, nearly shut him out on the scorecards. On that particular night, for the particular number of rounds they were set to fight, Tiger Jones was better then Sugar Ray Robinson. Doesn't make Tiger Jones "better" then Robinson overall, but for that "particular" night, he was better then Ray. Whether Ray ate bad shellfish, was rusty, had a bum ankle, had some sort of a diarrhea virus, whatever. For one night Tiger Jones was better, for whatever reason. That shouldn't diminish Sugar Ray's career however...if that's what you're getting at.
