The British Boxing Curse

With Haye to make a decision on whether to return to ring and continue to fight or retire as planned.

If he retires, it will certainly add to the theory that British boxers just fall short at the top end of their weight division. Bruno lost to Tyson, Eubank lost to Thompson, Hatton lost to Pacquiao and now Haye has lost to Klitschko. I am wondering whether British fighters take on the 'big' fights too soon or too late in their careers. What do you guys think?

Well, we just don't seem to have got a guy to the very very very pinnacle of the sport for an extremely long time. But we have produced plenty of great fighters that have been able to challenge it, better than most countries to be fair

By "top end of the weight division", I think I know what you are getting at, but does Bruno/Tyson apply,Legendkillar?Eubank losing to Carl Thompson, not a matchup that ever made sense, do not know for the life of me why he tried it and he was able to make super-middle again for Joe.
Hatton taking the superfight with Manny was undoubtledy a daft idea..I'm of the opinion that ,with all the talk of legacies these days, boxers seem to be more deluded and have mentalities more akin to pop-stars or politicians like Blair,laughable really when you think of old-timer greats who had the odd loss from a long record but fought for a livelihood rather than glory or an eye on the record books. I know it's a bit boring but I have said before that boxers these days should not be ashamed of sticking at Euro (say) level,if that's how they rate..am thinking of Rhodes,M.Hatton.
Well of course Britain punches above its weight in sport,but that said, we don't produce many greats ,as recent polls on this site indicate.

Come on lets be serious here, boxers should always try and prove themselves at the highest level possible rather than settle for mediocrity.

Haye proved he could hold on to his heavyweight belt and in all honesty still beats everyone at the weight baring the K bros but what exactly does that prove

Hatton proved himself the best at 140lbs over many years but decided to step up and try to beat the two best fighters of his generation but fell short, of which there is no shame.

I'm all for boxers stepping up rather than stagnating

Nah we've produced some quality fighters that have been extremely entertaining, just none that have dominated P4P top guys, no shame though, they've usually given it everything. You never know Khan and Froch might just go out on top?

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Come on lets be serious here, boxers should always try and prove themselves at the highest level possible rather than settle for mediocrity.

Haye proved he could hold on to his heavyweight belt and in all honesty still beats everyone at the weight baring the K bros but what exactly does that prove

Hatton proved himself the best at 140lbs over many years but decided to step up and try to beat the two best fighters of his generation but fell short, of which there is no shame.

I'm all for boxers stepping up rather than stagnating

May as well aim for the stars rather than settling... And a big pay day usually helps :P

andygf wrote:By "top end of the weight division", I think I know what you are getting at, but does Bruno/Tyson apply,Legendkillar?Eubank losing to Carl Thompson, not a matchup that ever made sense, do not know for the life of me why he tried it and he was able to make super-middle again for Joe.
Hatton taking the superfight with Manny was undoubtledy a daft idea..I'm of the opinion that ,with all the talk of legacies these days, boxers seem to be more deluded and have mentalities more akin to pop-stars or politicians like Blair,laughable really when you think of old-timer greats who had the odd loss from a long record but fought for a livelihood rather than glory or an eye on the record books. I know it's a bit boring but I have said before that boxers these days should not be ashamed of sticking at Euro (say) level,if that's how they rate..am thinking of Rhodes,M.Hatton.
Well of course Britain punches above its weight in sport,but that said, we don't produce many greats ,as recent polls on this site indicate.

The fight with Thompson was actually after the Calzaghe fight & in the first fight he kept a good account of himself, possibly could have stopped Thompson had he gone for it rather than standing off of him posturing, although many felt he was a bit gun shy after the Watson fight.

With regards to Hatton fighting Manny how many people actually predicted a Manny win & that result? Very few I'd say. A lttle after the fact that comment to be honest.

In beating Thompson, Eubank would have become a 3 weight world champion over 4 weights which would have propelled him right up the british all time p4p rankings.

Exaggerrated negativity there. Eubank was undefeated until the last few years of his career, Hatton shocked Tszyu long before losing to Pac and Floyd and Haye of course had established himself as undisputed cruiserweight and two-weight world champ before yesterday, not all doom and gloom.

Then of course you get fighters like Lewis and Calzaghe in recent years who set themselves apart as among the best in their divisions and Froch who has achieved noticeable success and will continue to do so if he can get past Ward.

Froch becomes the best SMW in the world beating Ward, he might want to take on Kessler again and maybe gun for Stieglitz or something at home then retire on the very top.

legendkillar wrote:With Haye to make a decision on whether to return to ring and continue to fight or retire as planned.

If he retires, it will certainly add to the theory that British boxers just fall short at the top end of their weight division. Bruno lost to Tyson, Eubank lost to Thompson, Hatton lost to Pacquiao and now Haye has lost to Klitschko. I am wondering whether British fighters take on the 'big' fights too soon or too late in their careers. What do you guys think?

Retire unbeaten or be deemed a failure??

It was just a theory purely because when British fighters go for the top dog in their division and lose, it tends to spell the end of their careers. I would like to see them go on fighting if they can. It just seems like it is an all or nothing approach. Look at when Lewis lost in his fights. He fought his way back and I can't see why Haye couldn't.

im disgusted in the views that boxers should know their level. no, they should always, ALWAYS believe they can beat anyone on their day. if not, leave the sport.

The difference between Haye and Lewis is the whole retirement issue, Haye doesn't really have anywhere to go from here if he does intend to retire before his 31st birthday.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The difference between Haye and Lewis is the whole retirement issue, Haye doesn't really have anywhere to go from here if he does intend to retire before his 31st birthday.

agreed. its much the same as hatton - where could be go after failing against the very best? nothing else would motivate him - or us.

Hatton could have continued against the likes of Bradley, Alexander, Khan, Maidana and the other contenders at the weight and i've watched them if he showed near his previous ability but from his point of view there's nothing to gain but everything to lose.

Do you guys not think that Haye could get himself back in ring again and consider a re-match? I know he made reference to a broken toe, so is it not worth him to consider a re-match?

A rematch is the only real option or possibly a fight with Vitali but nothing else would be worth it if it is to be his last fight

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Hatton could have continued against the likes of Bradley, Alexander, Khan, Maidana and the other contenders at the weight and i've watched them if he showed near his previous ability but from his point of view there's nothing to gain but everything to lose.

after going for the p4p number one, fights with nobodies would be a huge step down. i rate bradley etc but as hatton said about witter 'he dunt bring nowt t'table'.

a fight with marquez would have been the best bet. khan would have stopped him - especially with roach in his corner.

Not sure Khan would have been able to stop Hatton unless he is shot to absolute bits although it's hard to judge basing it on his last fight against Pacquiao

I am wondering whether British fighters take on the 'big' fights too soon or too late in their careers. What do you guys think?

----------

True apart from Calzaghe and Lewis who were both top tier fighters. Lewis finished on top as did Calzaghe. Lewis beat every heavyweight he ever faced and Calzaghe, despite being a Super Middle had his major win against BHop at Light Heavy who many believed to be washed up but became a champion over three years after his defeat to JC disproving this theory.

In fact, note to author. The oft considered "brave" Carl Froch has stated that if he wins the Super 6 then he wants Hopkins as a catchweight fight. At least Calzaghe had the necessary middle parts to move straight up to Light Heavy to face BHop with no weight stipulations - a fact so few seem to appreciate. The "Cobra" clearly lacking the same amount of bravery as "The pride of Wales".

At the moment, only Lewis and Calzaghe are proven elite fighters from Britain over the last 30 years or so.

Calzaghe never fell short.

He unified at super middle then went top america and got a points decision against the guy who is still number 1 at light heavy weight.

[quote="sohotnot"]

andygf wrote:By "top end of the weight division", I think I know what you are getting at, but does Bruno/Tyson apply,Legendkillar?Eubank losing to Carl Thompson, not a matchup that ever made sense, do not know for the life of me why he tried it and he was able to make super-middle again for Joe.
Hatton taking the superfight with Manny was undoubtledy a daft idea..I'm of the opinion that ,with all the talk of legacies these days, boxers seem to be more deluded and have mentalities more akin to pop-stars or politicians like Blair,laughable really when you think of old-timer greats who had the odd loss from a long record but fought for a livelihood rather than glory or an eye on the record books. I know it's a bit boring but I have said before that boxers these days should not be ashamed of sticking at Euro (say) level,if that's how they rate..am thinking of Rhodes,M.Hatton.
Well of course Britain punches above its weight in sport,but that said, we don't produce many greats ,as recent polls on this site indicate.

The fight with Thompson was actually after the Calzaghe fight & in the first fight he kept a good account of himself, possibly could have stopped Thompson had he gone for it rather than standing off of him posturing, although many felt he was a bit gun shy after the Watson fight.

Thanks for the amendment, learn something new every day

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Come on lets be serious here, boxers should always try and prove themselves at the highest level possible rather than settle for mediocrity.

Haye proved he could hold on to his heavyweight belt and in all honesty still beats everyone at the weight baring the K bros but what exactly does that prove

Hatton proved himself the best at 140lbs over many years but decided to step up and try to beat the two best fighters of his generation but fell short, of which there is no shame.

I'm all for boxers stepping up rather than stagnating

Agree with every word you say here, have not criticised Hatton at all, or Haye, was making a slightly different point about the mentality of boxers in this century compared to the last.I know very few people here would agree with me on it. Well done to Hatton for trying to take on the best.Funny, because when I ask boxing -neutral friends about big fights, as I did with Hatton/Manny, and Haye/Wlad, they have called it straight away.
I myself was way off -even though I was never a fan of Hatton really, found him a limited talent, yet I was still swept along with the hype at the time.
As a guy who supported Haye from as soon as the bbc showed his cruiser fights, I was not sure about his move to Heavyweight, but in time, came to believe he was on a level approaching Wladimir...ah, well, win some ,lose some..

Credit to Joe Calzaghe is cool to see,I mean the stick he gets is unbelieveable and he was a winner.Lennox Lewis always said words to the effect of ,Yep .I'm not a big draw but when I leave the scene,you guys will appreciate my achievements more.
Anyway, I may criticise the hype machine, but it's bloomin' fun to get swept along by it.

However Imperial Ghosty, I do not agree that fighting at any level underneath world champion status is settling for mediocity. Only a very small amount can be the very best, in boxing or any sport. Yet there are many of them who perservere for average or poor money, they make up the bulk of the competition,away from the showbiz side of things.
Yes, Henry Cooper fought and lost to the very best, but you know, I have respect for him because he loved the Lonsdale belts, the other belts he held for years, British European and Commonwealth.

legendkillar wrote:It was just a theory purely because when British fighters go for the top dog in their division and lose, it tends to spell the end of their careers. I would like to see them go on fighting if they can. It just seems like it is an all or nothing approach. Look at when Lewis lost in his fights. He fought his way back and I can't see why Haye couldn't.

Well said that man. Oasis-does a tennis player retire if he's been world number 4 for a decade and got to four Wimbeldon semi's? Henman lost to the best, he plugged away and learnt how to play on clay, got to the semis in Roland Garros, but cos he didn't win a major ,everyone said he was lame and should just go.Pretty unfair.He made the point to journalistys that ,did everyone else who was fourth best in the world at something retire??

andygf wrote:

legendkillar wrote:It was just a theory purely because when British fighters go for the top dog in their division and lose, it tends to spell the end of their careers. I would like to see them go on fighting if they can. It just seems like it is an all or nothing approach. Look at when Lewis lost in his fights. He fought his way back and I can't see why Haye couldn't.

Well said that man. Oasis-does a tennis player retire if he's been world number 4 for a decade and got to four Wimbeldon semi's? Henman lost to the best, he plugged away and learnt how to play on clay, got to the semis in Roland Garros, but cos he didn't win a major ,everyone said he was lame and should just go.Pretty unfair.He made the point to journalistys that ,did everyone else who was fourth best in the world at something retire??

tennis is different - henman knew he wasnt the best and never said he was - unlike hatton or khan and previously naz.
and losing a tennis tournament isnt the same as a boxing match. tennis players get 4 chances, year after year to win the ultimate prize - a major. so if he had a 10 year career - henman gets 40 chances to do the business. most boxers get one or 2 in their whole career.

thinking your the best and being soundly beat like haye, hatton and naz did - well...theres no where to go after that unless you're young and can re-build. the 3 i mentioned werent/arent young enough. haye can fight on, but as long as the k-bros are around, he wont be a world champion again - what would he want to continue for unless its a for against vitali?

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Hatton could have continued against the likes of Bradley, Alexander, Khan, Maidana and the other contenders at the weight and i've watched them if he showed near his previous ability but from his point of view there's nothing to gain but everything to lose.

Problem with this is that he could've ended up like a JCC or JL Castillo, being beaten by bums and nobodies years after their primes.

Grover Wiley???

OasisBFC wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Hatton could have continued against the likes of Bradley, Alexander, Khan, Maidana and the other contenders at the weight and i've watched them if he showed near his previous ability but from his point of view there's nothing to gain but everything to lose.

after going for the p4p number one, fights with nobodies would be a huge step down.

So you think Cotto and Marquez should have retired after Manny beat them too?