Was Naz harshly judged for one defeat?

First topic message reminder :

Having recently watched footage of, Ian Darke, Barry McGuigan and the deplorable Glen McSnorey discussing Naz's ability to come back from the Barerra defeat(around about 2 months after the fight),if he could change styles etc.

It got me thinking about whether Naz is harshly judged for not boxing on? (Manuel Calvo aside)

In the cold light of day, i believe you can only judge someones career by what they have achieved, not the ifs and buts, and peoples own personal disappointment at the entertainment Naz brought drying up.

Did Ricky Hatton really achieve anything after the mayweather loss, laboured to a defeat over Lazcano, a reasonable performance against the Magic Man, who in reality was made for him, and probably in hindsight not the greatest harbinger of whether he still had decent punch resistance before Pacquiao, the Pacman fight was a disaster, and Senchenko well enough said.

Eubank seems to get hailed by some, for his fighting heart against Thompson/Calzaghe, did he show anything we didn't already know, extremely brave tough, cussed. (broke?) Do these losses add to his legacy?

Fighters legacy should ultimately be judged on the performance they showed between the ropes, not on existential matters.

In my opinion too many pundits/ Journalists and armchair critics judge Naz based on one defeat..

milkyboy wrote:How are you supposed to tell them about your own wealth, intelligence, good looks, wit, charm and sexual prowess... When you can't get a word in edgeways.

You don't......That prolongs the conversation..........You nod and shake your head according to the tone of his voice and hope for the best.

Overrated
Quitter
Never beat an ATG

The Naz huggers can all blame his mental approach wavering and losing motivation. It is a pitiful excuse. The ones you label as an ATG have it all... Physical ability AND the mental side of sport that in my opinion is just (and in some sports more important, notably golf and other intrinsic sports) as important.

He lost motivation, blah blah blah. He got dicked all over by a guy that was too good, too skilled and was far too smart for him.

Naz never beat an ATG and failed miserably in his one attempt before quitting like a sulky little kid.

Would've loved to have seen him with a Castillo or Mayweather who would've knocked seven shades of brown turd out of him. Unfortunately due to him quitting we didn't get to see that he didn't belong at elite world level I.e. At least Hatton gave it a go and we all know he came up short of the two best fighters of the last 10 years so there's no arguement, the huggers cling to something that the Hatton huggers would've done if he'd quit after the FMJ mauling.

Not a top 10 Brit. Doesn't feature in the same for ATG rankings at the weight either.

Izzi wrote:Overrated
Quitter
Never beat an ATG

The Naz huggers can all blame his mental approach wavering and losing motivation. It is a pitiful excuse. The ones you label as an ATG have it all... Physical ability AND the mental side of sport that in my opinion is just (and in some sports more important, notably golf and other intrinsic sports) as important.

He lost motivation, blah blah blah. He got dicked all over by a guy that was too good, too skilled and was far too smart for him.

Naz never beat an ATG and failed miserably in his one attempt before quitting like a sulky little kid.

Would've loved to have seen him with a Castillo or Mayweather who would've knocked seven shades of brown turd out of him. Unfortunately due to him quitting we didn't get to see that he didn't belong at elite world level I.e. At least Hatton gave it a go and we all know he came up short of the two best fighters of the last 10 years so there's no arguement, the huggers cling to something that the Hatton huggers would've done if he'd quit after the FMJ mauling.

Not a top 10 Brit. Doesn't feature in the same for ATG rankings at the weight either.

Johnny? Is that you?

Izzi wrote:Overrated
Quitter
Never beat an ATG

The Naz huggers can all blame his mental approach wavering and losing motivation. It is a pitiful excuse. The ones you label as an ATG have it all... Physical ability AND the mental side of sport that in my opinion is just (and in some sports more important, notably golf and other intrinsic sports) as important.

He lost motivation, blah blah blah. He got dicked all over by a guy that was too good, too skilled and was far too smart for him.

Naz never beat an ATG and failed miserably in his one attempt before quitting like a sulky little kid.

Would've loved to have seen him with a Castillo or Mayweather who would've knocked seven shades of brown turd out of him. Unfortunately due to him quitting we didn't get to see that he didn't belong at elite world level I.e. At least Hatton gave it a go and we all know he came up short of the two best fighters of the last 10 years so there's no arguement, the huggers cling to something that the Hatton huggers would've done if he'd quit after the FMJ mauling.

Not a top 10 Brit. Doesn't feature in the same for ATG rankings at the weight either.

Christ, man! Get off the fence!

Naz is a borderline top ten Brit. Probably belongs just outside but he's one of the few bonafide champs we've had in this country (we haven't had many).

In recent years they've included: Haye, Hatton, Calzaghe and Lewis.

Don't like all this bonafide stuff..........

If Jones had beaten Mcrory he would have been a bonafide champ for me.......Regardless of what Curry was doing.....

Mcguigan was bonafide for me despite Nelson.......

Pedroza/Sanchez.........which one was bonafide ??.......Was Tyson really bonafide only when he beat Spinks..........Nah..

Only one dude can be the world champion -- you can't have two.

Curry was the champ -- Jones would have been a titlist.
McGuigan, like Spinks, was the champion, however, Nelson and Tyson were viewed as better fighters (Tyson was given his chance to prove that he was just that). Similar sitauation to Martinez and GGG.

I know how you feel about it...and It's honorable......

But Ring magazine had Spinks as World heavy and he chose to bottle the HBO series....

Ring magazines stance on 8 divisions and one champion nearly bankrupted it in the Phil Marler/Nigel Collins era and rightly so.....

We are where we are.......Froch is a World champion in my book..

Sometimes the better fighter isn't the linear one........and through politics he doesn't always get the chance to prove it........

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I know how you feel about it...and It's honorable......

But Ring magazine had Spinks as World heavy and he chose to bottle the HBO series....

Ring magazines stance on 8 divisions and one champion nearly bankrupted it in the Phil Marler/Nigel Collins era and rightly so.....

We are where we are.......Froch is a World champion in my book..

Sometimes the better fighter isn't the linear one........and through politics he doesn't always get the chance to prove it........

Froch can collect as many belts as he pleases but there'll always be another guy in his division that has (and would again) whupped him. There's nothing wrong in being second best to someone like Ward but labelling black pudding as steak just confuses casual fans more than they already are.

The term champion has become cheapened (just about every world class fighter had held a belt of some denomination, I think it's right we celebrate the men who truly championed a division: Ward, Calzaghe, Mayweather, Hopkins, Martinez etc.).

We've got to differentiate between these guys and the likes of Bika, Abraham, Bundrage, Barker and Ishe Smith.

Otherwise, it'd be like calling all medal winners in the Olympics "champions" without highlighting the gold medallist.