Printable View
is everyone who has lost an unbeaten record a hype job?
at what point does someone stop being a hype job, as in how high up the ladder does someone have to go before a loss is acceptable
for example canelo just lost to mayweather and many times i have read on here that he is a hype job as shown by the defeat
yet he just lost to the best fighter in the world
if you are a popular fighter in the media, are you a hype job if you cant beat mayweather?
Here is a good hype job -
Attachment 2908
oh come on Al. youre being too hard on the lad. his hero is: cut him some slack :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al
http://2013ufc.com/wp-content/upload...pions_1776.jpg
Canelo is a hype job if you're trying to goad certain American/Mexican posters. Every other boxing fan watched a young talented fighter get schooled by an all-time great. No disgrace in that.
Fury aint a hype job. The only people who think hes the best ever is himself and ross. Everyone else knows hes shitQuote:
Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al
Michael Grant.
Jerk-offs like max kellerman were acting like this young prospect was already practically the Heavyweight Champ of the World. Doing it officially in the ring was just a matter-of-time, "These aren't your grand-father's Heavyweights."
No $#!t, max, 'cause Michael Grant for damn sure was no Joe Louis...
And Alvarez ain't a hypejob.
For $#!t's sake, people..
Boxing fans, for the most part, are complete shit heads. If you gain ANY kind of success, fame, ect in this sport, you can bet there are a ton of people just itching for you to fall from grace so they can shit on you.
If Canelo would have caught Floyd with a punch and knocked him out, you can bet there would be people on here saying "see! I told you Mayweather was overrated! He sucks it was just a matter of time until he fought a REAL opponent". People would be talking about Mayweather finally being exposed. One punch would have negated a 17 year career of beating everyone, including 15 years of being a world champion and fighting other champions.
Instead, we have people saying "ohh no Canelo sucked, he is a pure hype job, garbage, ect." I don't remember seeing anyone calling this a mismatch or a bullshit fight before hand, but after Floyd dominated him, now you have guys coming out of the woodworks saying "ohhh you all were stupid for believing canelo had a chance, it was a mismatch from the start."
Maybe Canelo is a good, solid fighter with fantastic skills and attributes, who just lost to a vastly superior fighter? Naaahh, everyone is either awesome or a bum. There's no middle ground :rolleyes:
Canelo is an excellent fighter. He clearly lost the fight. But he lost to the best fighter in the world and by no means was he embarrassed. He'll be back
Hype job is when a fighter was deliberately exposed to cab drivers in his own country to build up good stats. There is a good part in it, because, a fighter without serious amateur experience, builds his confidence in such fights.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
That sums up Wilder perfectlyQuote:
Originally Posted by NVSeminHype job is when a fighter was deliberately exposed to cab drivers in his own country to build up good stats. There is a good part in it, because, a fighter without serious amateur experience, builds his confidence in such fights.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo-Bo24That sums up Wilder perfectlyQuote:
Originally Posted by NVSeminHype job is when a fighter was deliberately exposed to cab drivers in his own country to build up good stats. There is a good part in it, because, a fighter without serious amateur experience, builds his confidence in such fights.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
Well, to be a bit controversial, a wins a win! The upcomer can do no better than win, its just a question of when he takes the big shot and against who. This has been the boxing way for years, where an o is ridiculously overvalued and 'defeated' fighters become targets for the new up and comers, dodgy judges and referees then hit the defeated fighter rather than the new boy.
Sad but true, as a consequence of the above we've had ridiculously over rated fighters with o's going for world titles, and those with minus 1's or 2's being shit on by promoter friendly refs and judges.
David Haye, through clever management and promoter selection avoided this problem, bloody good luck to him and well done Adam Booth!
Come on guys! Don't be so binary!
All fighters (and entertainers) are the products of a certain amount of hype.
Equally, TV and the Internet has meant that undeserved hype and media bullshit doesn't really wash much anymore.
Someone like Primo Carnera wouldn't have made the money (for someone anyway) that he did if he was fighting today. I remember Michael Olajide, or Pele Reid .... They were a bit overhyped but don't forget that boxing IS the hype game
Someone like Alvarez is most certainly not a hype job.
Not necessarily a hype job, the man beat Austin Trout and had a world title. But by no means was he the darling of the Mexican public that was made out to sell the fight. But thats the sort of hype that boxing is about like you sayQuote:
Originally Posted by X
Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
The easy, simple way is to look only at the number of wins and losses.
The more correct, more involved way is to look at the quality of opponents in that record.
The line can be a little fine at times. I mean when you think about it, the sport today and how it is run essentially provides the stage for some of the real hype jobs to get away with it. However in this fickle environment a guy that was never a hype job gets labelled one because he loses a fight at or near the top. From my experience of being an avid fan for many years I find that in many cases if not most, it is power itself that is the hype job and once again the times we are in support it. Instant gratification. Some are addicted to the highlight reel. Some are bored by a boxing match so its best as fans that we be careful in using such a word along with many of its cousins. In many cases we also have the benefit of hindsight.
Fighter A is the favourite going into a scrap with Fighter B. Fighter A is expected to stop Fighter B because Fighter B is overrated or some might say a bit of a hype job. Not the fighter his record suggests. Fighter A is expected to knock Fighter B out because of his one shot power w/o even mentioning his pretty sound boxing skills for such a puncher. Fighter B then goes about to beat Fighter A. Not only does Fighter B beat Fighter A but he takes his best shots and drops Fighter A for the first time in his career on his way to winning a unanimous decision. Fighter A is then immediately reduced to overrated. So in essence and overrated fighter beat what some actually called an underrated fighter thereby making the underrated fighter overrated and the overrated fighter underrated.;D Had the once overrated now underrated fighter have lost lets say by ko he would have been a hype job.
Another term over used imo is the word "exposed". I don’t even no what it means anymore the way it’s thrown around and loosely used.
So are you admitting that Canelo is not a hype job ? The best way to assess a fighters pedigree is to watch them fight with an open mind. If you wear blinkers then you end up seeing exactly what you want to see.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
The easy, simple way is to look only at the number of wins and losses.
The more correct, more involved way is to look at the quality of opponents in that record.
Chavez Jr was a hype job because he wasn't that good and got gift decisions. I honestly think Canelo will be a good/great fighter. Problem is people lash out at him rather than his promoters for making him bigger and better than he actually is. Truth of the matter is that he is still a pretty solid boxer and heck I'd love to see him vs Cotto, Lara, Molina, Kirkland and the rest.
Could someone tell me why Canelo is not a hype job? In particular answer the below:
What was he hyped to be? An all time great? A top 5, 10 P4Per? A dominant world champion?
Did he or will he reach this?
What has he done to deserve this hype? Who has he beat who was any use? Had he beat anyone who several other guys in the div wouldn't beat?
I think he is a hype job because people thought he was the 2nd coming. People were telling me he would beat Floyd and be one of the best boxers of his generation. I thought this was nonsense. I'm not saying he's a shit fighter, he's world class but he was still hyped beyond his abilities which makes him a hype job to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzSo are you admitting that Canelo is not a hype job ? The best way to assess a fighters pedigree is to watch them fight with an open mind. If you wear blinkers then you end up seeing exactly what you want to see.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
The easy, simple way is to look only at the number of wins and losses.
The more correct, more involved way is to look at the quality of opponents in that record.
You don't post as much on the main board as you do the others, but this particular topic seems to have sparked your interest. Yeah ok, I'm not gonna pretend I had absolutely no bias while watching the fight. But some things are just plain factual. That Canelo's previously unbeaten record of 42 victories doesn't stack up well against those of other fighters with less wins and some losses? You can argue against that, but you'd be wrong. That the Canelo-Floyd fight was hyped more than just about any recent fight on record? That's pretty clear also, I believe. And that Canelo failed to deliver what many expected, given the gaudy record and the hype? Well.... most observers had it as a shutout, maybe charitably giving Canelo one round.
Maybe if I hadn't expressed myself so fervently about the fight, you'd be singing a different tune yourself. But rather, you wait to see which side you should take, and then take it. No problem.
As much as the term can be overused or abused like so much other boxing terminology which we can all be guilty of I have to side with @TitoFan a bit on this specific case but much of the hype is not even the kids fault. He was being touted as the guy that would do what no other had yet to do by Golden Boy, the media and forum fans. He had every advantage going for him starting with his youth which was probably also his downfall coupled with the fact that outside of Trout he was fed a steady diet of much smaller and less then elite worn out gentlemen. To cap it off, his team believed that he was actually capable of going in and out boxing Floyd and then went with that plan pretty much until the end of the fight. He never once tried to pull a Lamotta. So in that sense he was a hype job. He never at that point in time lived up to the standards others placed on him. But that does not mean that he is a hype job today as a fighter. He's only 23 and just fought this era's Robinson and is still at the elite level.
Imo its what comes after this fight that will prove one way or the other whether he is or was a hype job as a fighter. That is not to be determined by his next fight but rather what he accomplishes over the next few years. A challenge for him may be that he has to go to 160 because 154 is starting to look dryer then a popcorn fart. I doubt Floyd has any intentions on defending or fighting anyone else out of that crop. Alvarez could start by getting both belts he lost back and the unifying the division. If he folds or implodes the guess what? He is and was both a literal and figurative hype job.
Btw and ftr I think its unfair to accuse Titofan of being clouded about everything he says concerning fighters that happen to be Mexican just because at times the Mex/PR rivalry gets out of hand. That’s as unfair as what he's accused of or inferred to be doing. Lots of his thoughts on contests that may have included Mexican fighters both past and present since I joined the site have been spot on and even when I disagreed valid. I've also seen him prop countless Mexican fighter’s lots of times in all kinds of conversations and threads.
I'm not qualified to speak about this hype question but I have a few thoughts
1)boxing fans, the media, and casual fans have become far too quick to dismiss fighters. A few losses used to be accepted as part of the process. If you overreact to a loss you feed into the failing system. Promoters may not pay direct attention to the fans but be sure that they have someone on staff thatt is paying direct attention. If fans overreact promoters feel more need to protect records and we lose out. We can't expect better from boxing if we aren't better ourselves.
2)Canelo may have put on a poor performance against Mayweather but he showed some good qualities while failing in others. Qualities that bode well for his future. He showed more ring intellect than I thought he would. There were more but here are a few quick examples
(A)When Floyd gets into the forward posture and raises his trail heel he is looking for the pull counter. Canelo is the first fighter I recall to resist the trap of leading into it. You have to respect the awareness.
(B)when Floyd throws the lead right he looks to duck and back out to his right because he knows the left hook will follow. Canelo smartly didn't bother with the left hook in these instances and tried to catch Floyd with the uppercut as he ducked out. He was unable to connect but it was a very clever adjustment.
I wasn't really a fan before but I'm eager to see where his career goes partly because of clever manuveurs like those. I had figured he coasted on size but his intellect is intriguing as well.
Sorry so long
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzSo are you admitting that Canelo is not a hype job ? The best way to assess a fighters pedigree is to watch them fight with an open mind. If you wear blinkers then you end up seeing exactly what you want to see.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
The easy, simple way is to look only at the number of wins and losses.
The more correct, more involved way is to look at the quality of opponents in that record.
You don't post as much on the main board as you do the others, but this particular topic seems to have sparked your interest. Yeah ok, I'm not gonna pretend I had absolutely no bias while watching the fight. But some things are just plain factual. That Canelo's previously unbeaten record of 42 victories doesn't stack up well against those of other fighters with less wins and some losses? You can argue against that, but you'd be wrong. That the Canelo-Floyd fight was hyped more than just about any recent fight on record? That's pretty clear also, I believe. And that Canelo failed to deliver what many expected, given the gaudy record and the hype? Well.... most observers had it as a shutout, maybe charitably giving Canelo one round.
Maybe if I hadn't expressed myself so fervently about the fight, you'd be singing a different tune yourself. But rather, you wait to see which side you should take, and then take it. No problem.
I start plenty of threads on the main board and have always said that Canelo is underrated. So your nonsense just doesn't wash.Your last 30 odd posts have been about Canelo being unjustly rewarded and it just sounds like sour grapes. You have been calling everyone left right and centre who disagrees with you a cunt. I am not alone in noticing this. I am trying to be civil but your output is overwhelmingly negative and confrontational and its getting old fast. You have preconceptions about everyone and everything so it is pointless even trying to show you common courtesy but just as a heads up, for everyone else around the world the Mexican-Puerto rivalry is a bit childish.
From 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzI think your right I remember first seeing Alvarez hurt by Jose Cotto in the 1st round last year and it seemed to wake him up. This is why Chavez will struggle his instincts will lead him to believe that he can dominate in his own weight division but the more he puts on Alvarez the better he will get. He also showed against Rhodes he can fight on the backfoot and is far from one dimensional, unlike Chavez he has continued to test himself and his rate of improvement is greater. Chavez is no bum but "Canelo" has the potential to become HOF great.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeightonAlvarez is lazy in fights. He seems to want to win without breaking a sweat. He usualy comes to life for a few seconds when he gets hit too much. I have a feeling that if Chavez puts him in a position hes never been in, you will see a very deadly Alvarez. Thats just an assumption though. To me he looks like that sort of person.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboFor me Canelo get hits too easily and too often. So far he hasn't fought any punchers but moving up to light middle he will be in with somebody bigger than himself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mars_axThat's very possible Bilbo, a lot of us however, would like to Canelo win, by KO would be even sweeter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
I'm not sold on Canelo's power or skills yet. I can't shake off the memory of Matthew Hatton coasting the 12 rounds with him. Gomez was schooling him until the premature stoppage. He can improve, he's only young so foolish to judge him as if he's the finished article, but I've been impressed with Chavez lately. He's maturing into a decent fighter and in his last fight showed he has real heart and a desire to win.
This would be a great clash, and boxing heaven for those who like body punches. They will both have sore ribs the next day for sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
well done for effortQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzFrom 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzI think your right I remember first seeing Alvarez hurt by Jose Cotto in the 1st round last year and it seemed to wake him up. This is why Chavez will struggle his instincts will lead him to believe that he can dominate in his own weight division but the more he puts on Alvarez the better he will get. He also showed against Rhodes he can fight on the backfoot and is far from one dimensional, unlike Chavez he has continued to test himself and his rate of improvement is greater. Chavez is no bum but "Canelo" has the potential to become HOF great.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeightonAlvarez is lazy in fights. He seems to want to win without breaking a sweat. He usualy comes to life for a few seconds when he gets hit too much. I have a feeling that if Chavez puts him in a position hes never been in, you will see a very deadly Alvarez. Thats just an assumption though. To me he looks like that sort of person.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboFor me Canelo get hits too easily and too often. So far he hasn't fought any punchers but moving up to light middle he will be in with somebody bigger than himself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mars_axThat's very possible Bilbo, a lot of us however, would like to Canelo win, by KO would be even sweeter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
I'm not sold on Canelo's power or skills yet. I can't shake off the memory of Matthew Hatton coasting the 12 rounds with him. Gomez was schooling him until the premature stoppage. He can improve, he's only young so foolish to judge him as if he's the finished article, but I've been impressed with Chavez lately. He's maturing into a decent fighter and in his last fight showed he has real heart and a desire to win.
This would be a great clash, and boxing heaven for those who like body punches. They will both have sore ribs the next day for sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzQuote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzSo are you admitting that Canelo is not a hype job ? The best way to assess a fighters pedigree is to watch them fight with an open mind. If you wear blinkers then you end up seeing exactly what you want to see.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
The easy, simple way is to look only at the number of wins and losses.
The more correct, more involved way is to look at the quality of opponents in that record.
You don't post as much on the main board as you do the others, but this particular topic seems to have sparked your interest. Yeah ok, I'm not gonna pretend I had absolutely no bias while watching the fight. But some things are just plain factual. That Canelo's previously unbeaten record of 42 victories doesn't stack up well against those of other fighters with less wins and some losses? You can argue against that, but you'd be wrong. That the Canelo-Floyd fight was hyped more than just about any recent fight on record? That's pretty clear also, I believe. And that Canelo failed to deliver what many expected, given the gaudy record and the hype? Well.... most observers had it as a shutout, maybe charitably giving Canelo one round.
Maybe if I hadn't expressed myself so fervently about the fight, you'd be singing a different tune yourself. But rather, you wait to see which side you should take, and then take it. No problem.
I start plenty of threads on the main board and have always said that Canelo is underrated. So your nonsense just doesn't wash.Your last 30 odd posts have been about Canelo being unjustly rewarded and it just sounds like sour grapes. You have been calling everyone left right and centre who disagrees with you a cunt. I am not alone in noticing this. I am trying to be civil but your output is overwhelmingly negative and confrontational and its getting old fast. You have preconceptions about everyone and everything so it is pointless even trying to show you common courtesy but just as a heads up, for everyone else around the world the Mexican-Puerto rivalry is a bit childish.
Don't get your blood pressure up, gramps. No one is calling anyone a cunt here. You blatantly ignored my points about being more even-handed toward Mexican fighters than you're giving me credit for. But that's ok, really. I'm way past caring what you think, since that seems to be engraved in stone anyway.
And you know what? The rivalry does get a bit childish. Everyone could use a little lightening up, including myself.
http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Epi...82_1793941.jpg
Think about it. (Say what you see)
:vd:
Ok so your pointed witticism went to waste, as the illustration did not show as intended (at least on my screen). No doubt it was a funny slam, intended to ridicule, and avoid the "just-posed" question.
Shame though. I'm sure it was pretty funny.
P.S. - BTW, you never did address my assertion of being even-handed toward Mexican fighters in general. Why is that? Does it undermine your point and your funny monologue? Why can't we just address the issue without the "winks to the side"? Can you do that?
Epic Face Palm. Exasperation. Disbelief. Incredulity. Really? WTFness, etc.