The magical 0: Victory in defeat

Hey guys

Here is another artricle from our site www.maineventboxing.wordpress.com a musing on the value of an undefeated record.

Visit us, subscribe to us.

Floyd Mayweather, Rocky Marciano, Joe Calzaghe and ahem… Sven Ottke.

All fighters, all champions and all with 0′s at the end of their records. But how much does it matter? Of our current crop of superstars only a few are guaranteed to make it to the boxing hall of fame in years to come. Here are some of them.

Bernard Hopkins (52-5-2) Shane Mosley (46-7-1) Manny Pacquaio (53-3-2) Juan Manuel Marquez (53-3-2)
Erik Morales (51-7-0)

All are future hall of fame inductees and all have more than a couple of losses firmly planted on their record’s.

Now, i am not suggesting fighters should go diving in head first handing their opponent a victory, Ricky Hatton did that twice and it was ugly so let’s not be crazy. But in boxing there does seem to be an unnecessarily high importance placed on boxers remaining unbeaten and often to the point of avoiding the best opposition available, (Chavez jr anyone!) in my opinion this needn’t be the case.

Take Ali as an example (because we all love Ali), had he not lost to Frazier in 71 we might not have had Manila in 75, same with the Morales Barrera trilogy. With trilogies like those it is not the winner that necessarily sticks in the mind but the fights, the look on Ali’s face in Manila between rounds that said ‘quit you Bar Steward before I have to’ and the carnage in each 3 minute stanza that followed until Frazier was finally forced out and Ali’s hand eventually raised. In fights like these a fighter is immortalised even in defeat and if they can handle some more of the same other big fights are just round the corner. It is the classic battle itself that we rejoice in for years after not just who came out the victor and often both men become legends in the process.

Joe Calzaghe finished unbeaten and was a great talent but is discussed more for the opposition he didn’t face than he is hailed for having gone 46-0. Ottke is widely ridiculed by most as a highly protected
fighter and rightly so, i mean you would literally have had to kill him to get a decision in Germany, just ask Robin Reid. Even Floyd Mayweather who for many is the most talented fighter of his generation and unbeaten to boot, but still he is talked about more for the one fighter he has not fought than the forty-one victories he has amassed thus far.

Thankfully some efforts has been made in recent time to push the fights that matter. ShowTime’s super six tournament has seen most of the cream of the super middle’s pitted against one another. In doing so three fighters so far have lost their undefeated records but thanks to the format of a progressive (if i admit turbulent at times) tournament like the super six, all the participants were able to come again and fight high-profile fights.

Surely in an era where we value belts less and less it should be more important who you fight rather than whether you are able to remain undefeated, after all, you’re only as good as you’re last fight in boxing anyway aren’t you? Here is where i think we could learn from UFC, none of their “superstars” are undefeated for long are they, all of them come again unless injury prevents and I don’t hear any MMA fans shouting ‘get out you bum, you got beat before!’ to their favourite fighters on their ring walks.
Another point to consider for us fight fans. When a fighter loses his 0 often he is forced to take fights he might otherwise have avoided. Khan needed to prove he would fight a puncher again after being flattened by Prescott, enter Maidana and FOTY candidate. Ortiz lost his fast track status after being clubbed into submission by Maidana and earned his redemption the hard way with a classic war against Berto in his very first fight at 147. And what of Berto? If anything his stock has risen since the fight with Ortiz, even in defeat. For me having an L on your record does not necessarily make a boxer lost. If a fighter loses a competitive and entertaining fight against another quality fighter there will be room for them to come again, otherwise Glen Johnson would have been finished a decade ago. Zab Judah has lost to every top-level fighter he has ever fought and yet here he stands in his mid-thirties ready to fight Khan in a unification fight for a huge payday.

Defeats test the soul of a fighter whilst easy victories can soften them. It is often when witnessing a great fighter losing a war down the stretch or being denied when within touching distance of a win that we even realize we were watching a great in the first place. To see two fighters’ resolve bent almost to the point of breaking only for them to suck in air between rounds and carry on, well that’s what makes them warriors. If anyone needs evidence of this look no further than Morales v Maidana. Who was the real winner that night I ask you?

They all lose in the end, well not quite as the list at the top proves, but the ones who take the fights that matter are nigh on certain to lose sooner or later. If I were a boxer I would rather be in the same company as Ali than Ottke, wouldn’t you?

Also this week's predictions are on there for Fury Chisora and Khan Judah fights

Great points mate, it is a shame but a lot of people see losses on a boxers record and use it against them without looking at the individual fights.

If a boxer uses losses to work on weaknesses, improve and come back stronger then he deserves credit and these defeats should not be constantly referred to. Ricky Burns is an example of someone who has come on leaps and bounds and a couple of early defeats have not discouraged him from becoming a World Champion.

As you say Khan's loss to Prescott has not hampered his progress and was probably a blessing in disguise. Also, should Froch win the Super Six defeat to Kessler should not tarnish his record.

thorpy17 wrote:Great points mate, it is a shame but a lot of people see losses on a boxers record and use it against them without looking at the individual fights.

If a boxer uses losses to work on weaknesses, improve and come back stronger then he deserves credit and these defeats should not be constantly referred to. Ricky Burns is an example of someone who has come on leaps and bounds and a couple of early defeats have not discouraged him from becoming a World Champion.

As you say Khan's loss to Prescott has not hampered his progress and was probably a blessing in disguise. Also, should Froch win the Super Six defeat to Kessler should not tarnish his record.

If Froch hadn't been involved in the Super six though that defeat to Kessler would probably have set him back more than it did.

He would still have ended up facing someone for the vacant title in that case

i dont think that defeat necessarily would of set Froch back too much because it was very close, extremly exiting and competative, there would of been a chance for Froch to come again

Rocky Marciano never lost...he's a true great of the game....

Think the name of the game is who you fight and when....If you lose to a fellow great when in their pomp you'll be forgiven and rightly so......

Difference in losing to Kessler than losing to prime Jones jr though..as in Hoppo's case.

Seanusarrilius wrote:i dont think that defeat necessarily would of set Froch back too much because it was very close, extremly exiting and competative, there would of been a chance for Froch to come again

It would have set him back though I'm doubtful his next fight would have been for a World title.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Rocky Marciano never lost...he's a true great of the game....

Think the name of the game is who you fight and when....If you lose to a fellow great when in their pomp you'll be forgiven and rightly so......

Difference in losing to Kessler than losing to prime Jones jr though..as in Hoppo's case.

True TRUSS on Rocky but then you get people like Calzaghe who maybe avoided the toughest tests out there in his prime in order to have easy defenses at home (i am not lsating Calzaghe btw guys i do rate his talent just saying) and Ottke who was a joke, i just think too many fighters who are talented dont risk there zero. I understand Chavez jr being protected ebcause he is terrible and once he gets flattened he is done. Froch for me would of come again because he was exiting and comeptative altho yes losing to Kess isn't same as losing to prime RJJ

If a fighter is comeptative then a loss wont wreck their career especially if exiting...Gatti and Ward made three fights and over a mill each in the third on exitement alone. Katsidis, Maidana both lost fights and are right there on exitement factor. Depends ont he circs, but ake the tough tests come again if you lose but offer something in defeat.

I see what you are saying but for some the tests aren't there..

The fact we don't talk about Ottke and when we talk about Calzaghe we talk about the mis-potential.....it kind of sums up your view.......a valid one..

However greatness is also handed out to titlists with longevity.......

Whether you're beaten or not the basic concept of your article remains correct..

Who you fight...rather than victories in general and long may it be so!!!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I see what you are saying but for some the tests aren't there..

The fact we don't talk about Ottke and when we talk about Calzaghe we talk about the mis-potential.....it kind of sums up your view.......a valid one..

However greatness is also handed out to titlists with longevity.......

Whether you're beaten or not the basic concept of your article remains correct..

Who you fight...rather than victories in general and long may it be so!!!

Well put TRUSS, no argument here

Great article. I have long believed hat we place too much emphaisis on records, and not enough on actual perfomances. Great fighters need to have been in great fights, and if they end up on the wrong side a decision then so be it. In most cases undefeated equals protected, or a poor level of oppostion.As a side issue I would love to have seen how history would have judged Marciano had he not been undefeated- an early loss say to a younger Joe Louis would not diminsh him at all for me, but you can bet he would drop down a lot of peoples top tens. Likewise, if Lewis had never lost to McCall and Rahman makes little difference to how I rate him, but I guess he would rise up a couple of places for many people.

horizontalhero wrote:Great article. I have long believed hat we place too much emphaisis on records, and not enough on actual perfomances. Great fighters need to have been in great fights, and if they end up on the wrong side a decision then so be it. In most cases undefeated equals protected, or a poor level of oppostion.As a side issue I would love to have seen how history would have judged Marciano had he not been undefeated- an early loss say to a younger Joe Louis would not diminsh him at all for me, but you can bet he would drop down a lot of peoples top tens. Likewise, if Lewis had never lost to McCall and Rahman makes little difference to how I rate him, but I guess he would rise up a couple of places for many people.

Thanks man, i pulled it from em blog so glad you liked it, i agree totally. Take Sergio Martinezin our very own Q&A . He doesnt care he was robbbed v Cintron or that Wiliams got givent he first fight, he is happy with his performance and over time that tells