Thread: 49-0

I understand Rocky's record as retiring undefeated and Mayweather most likely tying and big ado about it.
But is it the fact that they retired undefeated that is the big deal as it can't be the winning streak.

Chavez had to be 87-0 before losing
Duran was around 40
Monzon was like 80 or so.
Pep (not sure without ggogling but he was way up there.
Sure there are lots I am not thinking of.

I remember when Shane fought Mayweather he made a comment similar to 'yeah, I went 42-0 before my first loss too' That is not a direct quote, just from memory.

So is a fighter greater that retires with a winning streak of 49-0 or one like Chavez that had 80 straight and then lost? (Chavez just an example as I know he had some bums handed to him but who hasn't)

Just a thought on how important retiring without a loss is vs wins without a loss.

Keep in mind I am a fan of both the Rock and Mayweather (Please don't hate me) But looking back at past fighters how great is 49-0?

Well it has to do with your opposition and if it were your career or you just ended early which is part of the reason I always thought that Marciano's isn't quite so impressive because I felt that he could have fought longer but retired after only 8 years.

Mayweather did it over twice that and has faced top competition for a long time so IMO, its more impressive. But retiring undefeated is cool. It's nice to say you never lost but there are eras where its nearly impossible to retire undefeated because there are too many good people in the division at the time. So its both fortunate and unfortunate to retire undefeated because your era wasn't elite but just good.

First, people tear apart Marcianos title run but why don't people bring up his pre-title career. If you look it up you will be absolutely astounded how horrific his opposition was.

Next, the 0 is irrelevant. It only matters to the bubble gum sports fans.

What is far more important is the longevity at the top. Because to stay at the top you have to adjust your style. It demonstrates so much about your capabilities. You can hide a weak chin for years, not decades. You can get by on speed or power or defense or offense for a while. But to carry on at the top over a great span of time you need multiple talents.

Originally Posted by Ron Swanson

First, people tear apart Marcianos title run but why don't people bring up his pre-title career. If you look it up you will be absolutely astounded how horrific his opposition was.

Next, the 0 is irrelevant. It only matters to the bubble gum sports fans.

What is far more important is the longevity at the top. Because to stay at the top you have to adjust your style. It demonstrates so much about your capabilities. You can hide a weak chin for years, not decades. You can get by on speed or power or defense or offense for a while. But to carry on at the top over a great span of time you need multiple talents.

Not going to say anything bad about Marciano. Just I agree about longevity at the top and I believe others have had that more so than Marciano, Mayweather, Calzaghe etc.

Originally Posted by Ron Swanson

First, people tear apart Marcianos title run but why don't people bring up his pre-title career. If you look it up you will be absolutely astounded how horrific his opposition was.

Next, the 0 is irrelevant. It only matters to the bubble gum sports fans.

What is far more important is the longevity at the top. Because to stay at the top you have to adjust your style. It demonstrates so much about your capabilities. You can hide a weak chin for years, not decades. You can get by on speed or power or defense or offense for a while. But to carry on at the top over a great span of time you need multiple talents.

That's my main problem with Marciano. He had some good wins later in his short career but that consisted for about 3 or 4 years. He had no notable wins before that. That's pretty short.

Its a mark and a standard just like in any other sport and its numeric. Its also quite straight forward. Highest number of fights w/o a loss in retirement. Splitting hairs is up to the history books and it still stands as a big deal in boxing and to historians. Its still to many a somewhat holy grail of the sport. Like a goverment office we can analyze to paralyze but it makes no difference. Its a mark that has been talked about since it was made and is a lot easier said then done. And sure there is some mystique attached because of the name rec of some of his later opponents but its a big deal and nobody has equaled it.The retirement part is as unique as any numbers

Whats the first question they asked Larry Holmes after he lost his first fight to Spinks and what was his response? What was all the talk leading up to that fight? Floyd is about to perhaps tie it but he will also go for 50 to surpass it and to him just as it is for anyone else in the sport that's a big deal but you wont hear about its importance by others until its ended and he retires. I can actually see him pulling a fake retirement after 49 just to further cash in on the 50th. Not just for the fight but the line up of endorsements he gets once he retires on that mark. Something he's never done his entire career. Lets also keep in mind that its taken 18 years to be on threshold to meet 49. Lopez finished with a 50/0/1 record but he had a draw and it happened in about his 45th fight.

One could see this coming actually. Now that Floyd is likely to tie it and most likely surpass it expect the mark to be trivialized or downright dismissed.

Sure Chavez went 87 and 0 or something but he lost his 12th fight to a 4 and 12 guy and then had the result changed.

Not sure what Marciano's amateur record says about anything cause he never had one. Ok about 10 fights which is actually 10 more then Chavez and what of his first 40 fights?

First 6 fights were against debuts.
Next
0/4/0
debut
0/2/0
1/4
0/1
4/12 and needed a fix
4/2
debut
debut
debut
debut
1/0
0/7
19/11
27/10
1 /2
23/18
0/1
0/1
1/5
2/3
15/11
21/13
6/5
11/7
4/4
13/28
6/3
6/4
1/1
23/16
0/2
4/4
21/15
21/4
debut
3/3
23/11



Greb went 49 and 0 in one year
Stribling went 55 and 0 in a year

You asked about Pep. He went on a streak of 135-1-1
Between 1937 and 1938 Armstrong knocked out 27 in a row getting the feather crown and when he lost to Ambers in a 135 title rematch by a split about a year later it snapped a 46/0 winning streak that included 39 ko's


Perhaps its not a big deal when you put all of boxing history beside it and compare it head on to other accomplishments but its a mark never achieved before or since and its held up for 60 years. Had some other fighters retired when they passed that mark then that mark would not be relevant but they didn't.

Roman Gonzalez is the truest undefeated fighter 88-0 as an amatuer and 43-0 as a pro. Be interesting to see if he can actually stay unbeaten.

Seems wrong doing this without BBB's opinion.

Originally Posted by frasd

I understand Rocky's record as retiring undefeated and Mayweather most likely tying and big ado about it.
But is it the fact that they retired undefeated that is the big deal as it can't be the winning streak.

Chavez had to be 87-0 before losing
Duran was around 40
Monzon was like 80 or so.
Pep (not sure without ggogling but he was way up there.
Sure there are lots I am not thinking of.

I remember when Shane fought Mayweather he made a comment similar to 'yeah, I went 42-0 before my first loss too' That is not a direct quote, just from memory.

So is a fighter greater that retires with a winning streak of 49-0 or one like Chavez that had 80 straight and then lost? (Chavez just an example as I know he had some bums handed to him but who hasn't)

Just a thought on how important retiring without a loss is vs wins without a loss.

Keep in mind I am a fan of both the Rock and Mayweather (Please don't hate me) But looking back at past fighters how great is 49-0?

Fighters who go 40-0 50-0 or 60-0 then lose a bunch of times shouldn't even be in the conversation of undefeated fighter. If Floyd goes to 50-0 it's by far the most impressive record ever as others have said rocky beat a lot of bumbs along his way to 49-0

Plus floyd is a little welterweight and he is the face of boxing.

This era is all about him when it should really focus on the heavyweights.

50-0
Richest athlete on earth
Best fighter on earth
It will be perfect...IF he can get there.

This Marciano record stuff is such a load of bollocks. It doesn't get reported as - "Highest number of fights without a loss in retirement." It gets reported as an unbeaten record streak.

It just shows how important the 0 is to casual fans and what a massive selling point it has been for Floyd. Because if you're dealing with stats nobody could possibly consider 49-0 to be greater than Robinson going 130-1 before a 2nd loss.

Cesar Rene Cuenca is currently 48-0. If Floyd gets to 50-0 and retires it becomes the Floyd record. If Cuenca then gets to 51-0 and retires it becomes the Cuenca record. What a load of shit.

The whole Floyd brand is sold around him being unbeaten. He's TBE because 47 have tried and 47 have failed. There's no blueprint to beat Floyd Mayweather, etc. And the fans lap it up (flomos/casuals)

Just imagine how Pretty Boy Floyd's career would have gone if he didn't get the decision in the first Castillo fight? Many believe Castillo was "robbed."

Oscar-Floyd -- Judge Jerry Roth scored the last round for Mayweather, the only judge to do so. Had he scored the 12th for De La Hoya, the fight would have been a draw. One round away, disputed between judges, from currently being 47-0-1.

I was thinking what if rocky had 1 more fight and lost 49-1 would he even be considered a true great ? Sure he has some good wins but not that many.

Originally Posted by Fenster

The whole Floyd brand is sold around him being unbeaten. He's TBE because 47 have tried and 47 have failed. There's no blueprint to beat Floyd Mayweather, etc. And the fans lap it up (flomos/casuals)

Just imagine how Pretty Boy Floyd's career would have gone if he didn't get the decision in the first Castillo fight? Many believe Castillo was "robbed."

Oscar-Floyd -- Judge Jerry Roth scored the last round for Mayweather, the only judge to do so. Had he scored the 12th for De La Hoya, the fight would have been a draw. One round away, disputed between judges, from currently being 47-0-1.

Love the argument "one more bad scorecard and Floyd would have a draw. Always good for a laugh

Sometime in the future, I'm positive undefeated streaks are going to be looked at differently than they are today.
I don't think anyone believes Marciano was the greatest fighter ever (maybe one) because he was smart enough to retire at 49-0. When Floyd is 5?-0, I don't think most fans will believe he is TBE either.
Floyd has done some amazing things in boxing and he's right when he says no other fighter can equal them. I just don't think beating Marciano's undefeated record is the best thing he's done in boxing.
Even if Berto KO'ed Floyd. You would still have to look at Floyd's overall career and say amazing! Right?