What does the saying "you have to really beat the champ to take his title" mean?
I heard this said since I started following boxing and I still hear it to this day in person, on forums, social media, Youtube comments, ect.
For those that subscribe to this theory, what does it mean to you?
Should a challenger have to stop a champion to get his title?
Should a challenger have to completely dominate a champion to get his title?
Does it mean that close rounds automatically go to the champ?
If a challenger wants to win a round, by how big of a margin should he win the round?
I'd also like to know the origin of this if anyone knows.
Has this ever been introduced or acknowledged by any sanctioning body?
How did this saying come about and why is it still perpetuated?
Re: What does the saying "you have to really beat the champ to take his title" mean?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
I heard this said since I started following boxing and I still hear it to this day in person, on forums, social media, Youtube comments, ect.
For those that subscribe to this theory, what does it mean to you?
Should a challenger have to stop a champion to get his title?
Should a challenger have to completely dominate a champion to get his title?
Does it mean that close rounds automatically go to the champ?
If a challenger wants to win a round, by how big of a margin should he win the round?
I'd also like to know the origin of this if anyone knows.
Has this ever been introduced or acknowledged by any sanctioning body?
How did this saying come about and why is it still perpetuated?
Means you have to beat the living daylights out of him for at least 2/3rds of the fight, including the final round. Score a knock-down at least. You also have to buy the judges to ensure "fair" scoring.
Re: What does the saying "you have to really beat the champ to take his title" mean?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
beenKOed
The first time I heard it was from George Foreman.
What I have always believed it to mean is that that you came for the belt, you didn't come to negotiate, you didn't come for a decision, you came to prove to everyone watching or listening that you want it more, deserve it more, did more, and the only way you are leaving is with the belt period. You are not going leave a spread of doubt in anyone's mind that that belt belongs to you.
So how does it work in practice?
Assuming there isn't a knock out or stoppage, a fight is scored by who wins the most amount of rounds. Should judges score rounds to the champ if the challenger doesn't completely dominate them?
Or hypothetically, lets say we have a back and forth fight. The challenger wins 6 rounds and the champion wins 6 rounds, and when I say win I mean CLEAR winner, no room for interpretation. But the champ is deducted a point in one round for a foul. So the challenger, on the cards, wins the fight by the slimmest of margins: one point. Does the challenger deserve the belt? Or do the judges go back and retroactively give the champ one of the rounds he lost to give him the win?
Re: What does the saying "you have to really beat the champ to take his title" mean?
I believe it originates to when we gave merit and validity to a championship title belt, more so when there were not 101 divisions and 3-6 guys claiming one. The thinking being that the Man to beat was clearly defined and respected. An odd term in boxing I know. A good amount of the time today you don't have to necessarily beat up a champ so much as wait them out to surrender it on the scale because they know they can be handed a top ranking one division up or be stripped for political bs.
Ideally and the way I see it a champ comes in as a Jon dough as far as scoring and assessing a winner. A champ can have his ears boxed off just like anyone else and it doesn't matter if you can pronounce the other guys name or not.
Re: What does the saying "you have to really beat the champ to take his title" mean?
Usually means that in a close fight, the Champ retains his crown. No real logic to it. Max Kellerman is a strong advocate of it.
The notion has been around since I have followed boxing and that tracks to 1945.
Re: What does the saying "you have to really beat the champ to take his title" mean?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
holmcall
Usually means that in a close fight, the Champ retains his crown. No real logic to it. Max Kellerman is a strong advocate of it.
The notion has been around since I have followed boxing and that tracks to 1945.
So that means giving the closer rounds automatically to the champ?
Re: What does the saying "you have to really beat the champ to take his title" mean?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
Quote:
Originally Posted by
holmcall
Usually means that in a close fight, the Champ retains his crown. No real logic to it. Max Kellerman is a strong advocate of it.
The notion has been around since I have followed boxing and that tracks to 1945.
So that means giving the closer rounds automatically to the champ?
Kinda of, yes. If the judges can redo their cards at the end, they can do it more easily. This might help some: http://www.reddit.com/r/Boxing/comments/1d0xrj/traditionally_in_boxing_did_you_have_to_beat_the/
Re: What does the saying "you have to really beat the champ to take his title" mean?
Arghh Erragh, how the f--k do you make a link work?
Re: What does the saying "you have to really beat the champ to take his title" mean?
Yeah it's a weird one to hear today. When you had more undisputed champions fighting a lot more often, it may have held some clout, I dunno. If you have a challenger who is fairly unknown or untested, against a guy who has really established himself, then maybe the latter will get some benefit of the doubt, or score points for "ring generalship" in the late rounds of a close fight just having been there before, that kind of thing.
Re: What does the saying "you have to really beat the champ to take his title" mean?
The 1st time the phrase was 'coined'.
Joe Louis vs. Jersey Joe Walcott 'I'
Boxing Pundits,
How can you give the Decision to Jersey Joe, when he fought going backwards for most of
the bout. You have to really beat the Champion to take his title.
There is no way a Challenger can win a 'close' Decision over the Champion. The Champion gets
the benefit of the doubt in close Rounds.
Re: What does the saying "you have to really beat the champ to take his title" mean?
If there isn't a KO stoppage, you have to outbox the champ convincingly enough to make the eventual robbery look as outrageous as possible.
Re: What does the saying "you have to really beat the champ to take his title" mean?
to me bro, it means the champ is the chamo and to win the title you have to win it convincingly, its not like 2 guys who neither is the champ , and one shaves the other one by 1 point, etc. No champion is gonna get shaved by 1 point, its gotta be 3 points to shave a champ. Or a KO of course :)
