Printable View
When fighter's just get beat, and we say past his best, Eubank, Benn, age to many hard
fights father time catching up with them.!
So many great fight never no when to just walk away,! do they damage there greatness,
in doing so, RJJ for instance.
Name me fighters you think, carried on to long fighting.
Holyfield
Holyfield
Holyfield
Toney
Yep both of them, don't no when to just pack it in, I feel they have lost to manyQuote:
Originally Posted by imp
brain cells.
Probably a lot easier to name the ones who retired too soon...;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dia bando
Khan as well.
I know khan is young but he really might have passed his best at this early stage.
The change of trainers wont help him and i hope he gets through the rest of his career unscathed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BritkidProbably a lot easier to name the ones who retired too soon...;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dia bando
YES, by far the majority hang on for to long, very few get away at the right time.
There are so many.
Johnson
Leonard
Armstrong
Robinson
Mosley
Hearns
Ali
Tyson
Louis
Comacho
Duran
Benitez
Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuit
Roy Jones jr has embarrassed himself and when he lost to Danny Green i think it was one of the saddest moments i have seen in boxing.
Smokin' Joe Frazier should've retired after the Thriller In Manila, but he continues on and fights Foreman...again!
Maybe Hagler did the right thing and retired when he did? Maybe he thought he couldn't beat Leonard in a rematch? Think about that for a minute, if Hagler fights Leonard again and loses again his legacy is chopped in half instantly.
Aaron Pryor was crazy to fight again 1985
There are so many, but all fighters have huge ego's and they all think they can still do what they did at 24 or 25 years of age when they are 34 or 35 or pushing 40?
Most fighters are on the decline post 32 years, you do have exceptions, but the peak years are probably 25-30, it's all down hill after that.
We tend to forget that someone like Duran was already a 70+ fight veteran by the time he lost to Leonard in 'No Mas'. He was past his peak the moment the final bell rang in Montreal!
That is a really good point although it was the first fight that was held in Montreal but nevertheless you can certainly make the case that he did start his decline during that six month period and two fights.Quote:
Originally Posted by THE THIRD MANQuote:
Originally Posted by IamInuit
Roy Jones jr has embarrassed himself and when he lost to Danny Green i think it was one of the saddest moments i have seen in boxing.
Smokin' Joe Frazier should've retired after the Thriller In Manila, but he continues on and fights Foreman...again!
Maybe Hagler did the right thing and retired when he did? Maybe he thought he couldn't beat Leonard in a rematch? Think about that for a minute, if Hagler fights Leonard again and loses again his legacy is chopped in half instantly.
Aaron Pryor was crazy to fight again 1985
There are so many, but all fighters have huge ego's and they all think they can still do what they did at 24 or 25 years of age when they are 34 or 35 or pushing 40?
Most fighters are on the decline post 32 years, you do have exceptions, but the peak years are probably 25-30, it's all down hill after that.
We tend to forget that someone like Duran was already a 70+ fight veteran by the time he lost to Leonard in 'No Mas'. He was past his peak the moment the bell rang in Montreal!
Saad Muhammad. Its one thing to watch a favorite drag it out at a lower level with rusty guile and worn resiliency but remaining upright most of the time...its another when they are just a memory being regularly blasted out by guys who couldn't touch them in their best.
The list would be much longer than most fans would believe. It's too bad, but most fighters don't know when to quit. Not all, but most fighters hang around too long for a couple of fights at least, in my opinion.
"Past your best" also gets overplayed. There are other factors to consider than simply - a fighter got "old." Once you reach a certain level the competition is genuinely tougher. If you are consistently competing at the highest level you are more likely to lose. That's just basic common sense. Contrary to what some people claim nobody is "Superman," indestructible or unbeatable.
Obviously many cases are clearcut.
However, boxing is the ultimate "hindsight" sport. You match a contender with a proven respected champion? The contender wins - it's because the proven champion is past his best. The prospect loses - it's because he was overrated.
Many fighter's carry on fighting, a major problem is no money weather bad investments, divorce ,
or they just can't handle money.
Careers can span 25years or more, boxing from a early age armature, then pro all you no is boxing
it must be hard, to finish it's all you no it's been your LIFE.!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Excellent post.
Its certainly not finite and even if its obvious is some cases physically its certainly not always the case.
It does seem like in many cases the minute the historic winner begins to lose the "not at his best" terminology starts to circle the wagons. I'm sure Moore was all but written off when he finally got a title shot at age 39 and 160 fights.
Apollo Creed .... Such a sad thing that crazy Russian did to him in the ring! Good job his mate trained all on his own in Siberia and avenged his defeat. Pure dedication considering it was against someone twice his size and it was Christmas Day and he left his son in America. Anyway that is how the Cold War ended!