What does being undefeated really mean these days?

We all know what this means to some boxers, but I'm talking about the publics perception here. Yeah when I was a kid growing up, I always wanted to watch the undefeated boxers (Tyson, Holyfield etc...) But as I started to mature as a boxing fan, it started carrying much less weight for me. I think we're all starting to see more and more that an undefeated boxer is just a guy who's very picky with his opponents. I'm not a huge fan of Muhammed Ali (mainly because of his political views) but I revere the guy more than I do Mayweather in a boxing sense. And that's because Ali did fight the best. When Frazier came up, Ali fought him. Foreman too. Ali may have lost his "0" to Frazier but gained even more respect than he already had before that fight. It turned into an awesome Trilogy and Ali got the best of Joe in the end. Sugar Ray Leonard had 3 losses but in my opinion, is currently still regarded higher than Mayweather, and they have the same amount of fights. His wars with Duran were awesome. So to the boxing public (we already know about some fighters), what does being undefeated really mean to you the fans?

Undefeated records mean nothing to hardcore fans but when a fighter loses the loss is almost always used to knock them. Boxing fans are terrible hypocrites.

As this thread is really about Floyd, he like many other boxers particularly respect the '0'

"Pacquiao been beat three times, he been knocked out, whatever I do to Pacquiao been done before"

"If I beat Shane Mosley they gonna say 'whoope doo, you beat Shane Mosley, he's 38 with 5 lost.' You beat an old man"

"Hatton was undefeated when I beat him"

Floyd facts ;)

Exactly right, and yes, I have to admit this thread was aimed at Floyd a little. I'm not saying he isn't great but I'm getting a little tired of it all. I'm hoping the growing rumor of Floyd not wanting to fight Mosely is false. If it turns out that Floyd doesn't make that fight, I think he puts his legacy in real danger. To the hardcore boxing fan, he's in danger of being viewed in a very negative light for the rest of his days. Also, if he doesn't fight Mosely, I think he'll have to make serious concessions to get Pacquiao in the ring. That could make up for negative blips but if he doesn't take this Mosely fight, no one is going to care about his "0"

Apparently being undefeated is the standard for getting the good contracts though. Arum, GBP, Warren et. al. when they get young guys more times than not, they are looking for someone with a story, a marketable style, a built in audience and an undefeated record. Yes Floyd's zero is BS, because he hasn't taken the risks he should have to be called p4p # 1. But although the spotlight is on Floyd, this is not a phenomena exclusive to him. I remember before Calzaghe/Kessler fought there were 8 out the top 10 super middleweights with undefeated records. Also, think back at how many bad decisions (by judges, undoubtedly influenced by promoters) have been made to keep a certain fighters perfect record intact. It has become much more common place for fighters to emphasize record over quality in recent years.

As a fan of course this is all BS, we just want to see good fights. When there are two undefeated guys at the top of their weight class they should fight period. But this is where politics get involved, and diva-osity becomes more rampant as we get higher in the game.

I understand it is en vogue to bash on Floyd and he deserves most of what he gets, but come on it's getting old. Floyd is not the only professional boxer out there.

Although if he does back out of the fight with Mosley, he will be remembered as fondly as fellow undefeated Sven Ottke.

Undefeated means Undefeated. How special that record is depends soley on who has been defeated during that unbeaten run and in which manner. Also taken into the equation is how many matches have been avoided in order to keep that zero intact. I have more respect for the Cotto's of this world than I do for the Ottke's.

Resume and quality of fights are the most important criteria. Undefeated record is only for the general public and newbie fight fans to get orgasmic about.

If Floyd retired now he'd have one of the best undefeated records in history.

Undefeated records mainly concern prospects/novice champions. It's rare for a fighter to retire unbeaten and be considered a great.

Nobody considers Ottke a great (or unbeaten).. Floyd is a proven great whether he faces Mosley/Pac or not. Even if you try to pick holes in his resume, the man has been top 10 P4P ranked for ten years. How can a fighter be considered one of the very best in the world for such a time without being a great? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

If Floyd retired now he'd have one of the best undefeated records in history.

Undefeated records mainly concern prospects/novice champions. It's rare for a fighter to retire unbeaten and be considered a great.

Nobody considers Ottke a great (or unbeaten).. Floyd is a proven great whether he faces Mosley/Pac or not. Even if you try to pick holes in his resume, the man has been top 10 P4P ranked for ten years. How can a fighter be considered one of the very best in the world for such a time without being a great? ;)

---

He was retired during that time and p4p is subjective, has he fought any dangerous welters in the time he has been there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

If Floyd retired now he'd have one of the best undefeated records in history.

Undefeated records mainly concern prospects/novice champions. It's rare for a fighter to retire unbeaten and be considered a great.

Nobody considers Ottke a great (or unbeaten).. Floyd is a proven great whether he faces Mosley/Pac or not. Even if you try to pick holes in his resume, the man has been top 10 P4P ranked for ten years. How can a fighter be considered one of the very best in the world for such a time without being a great? ;)

---

He was retired during that time and p4p is subjective, has he fought any dangerous welters in the time he has been there?

---

Yes P4P is subjective but it's also a leading argument used by hardcore boxing fans, "experts" and fighters themselves. You can't ignore the fact that "experts" ranked him top 10 P4P before he even fought at welterweight.

Since then he's beaten Zab, Baldomir (to become lineal champion), Oscar, Hatton and Marquez.

Were there a couple of other dangerous guys he could have fought? I guess Cotto, Mosley and Margarito? Problem is, they all beat eachother up and NONE were worth the money Oscar and Hatton were. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

If Floyd retired now he'd have one of the best undefeated records in history.

Undefeated records mainly concern prospects/novice champions. It's rare for a fighter to retire unbeaten and be considered a great.

Nobody considers Ottke a great (or unbeaten).. Floyd is a proven great whether he faces Mosley/Pac or not. Even if you try to pick holes in his resume, the man has been top 10 P4P ranked for ten years. How can a fighter be considered one of the very best in the world for such a time without being a great? ;)

---

You know that statement was just for effect.

To me..... Nothing.
Problem is fighters do seem to lose some marketability when they get beat!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killersheep

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

If Floyd retired now he'd have one of the best undefeated records in history.

Undefeated records mainly concern prospects/novice champions. It's rare for a fighter to retire unbeaten and be considered a great.

Nobody considers Ottke a great (or unbeaten).. Floyd is a proven great whether he faces Mosley/Pac or not. Even if you try to pick holes in his resume, the man has been top 10 P4P ranked for ten years. How can a fighter be considered one of the very best in the world for such a time without being a great? ;)

---

You know that statement was just for effect.

---

Ottke was good to highlight my point though.