The meaninlessness of being unbeaten

[JonnyFolds]

Well first welcome to the forum. Interesting post.

I have to say I disagree almost totally with you though

Yes Michael Phelps, Tiger Woods etc have all lost, but had they not are you saying they would be less regarded? Surely they would regarded as almost immortal.

Other sports: tennis, swimming, golf... These guys are constantly pitted against and thrust into the world level of opposition. On top of that, they can play day after day. In boxing I like that you only get 3-4 months to show up in the best form you possibly can for one night.
Any given day Federer will play Nadal; Woods/Mickelson; Kobe/L James

If you are saying that everybody is human, therefore everybody loses, then anyone who has bucked that trend surely stands out? You argument to me leads to the very opposite conclusion to which you point.

Floyd and Marciano stand out precisely because they never lost their unbeaten records. It might have made no difference to their quality as fighters had Castillo got the nod in the first fight with Floyd, or Marciano has lost to La Stanza but it would have meant they were no longer seperated from the rest.

I think Floyd would have the same draw with his one loss in the past. The difference would be that the Castillo would have had another 12 rounds to try and upend Mayweather. That would have been more interesting than anything he has done >140.

To complete a career and never lose is a virtually unheard of achievment. So precisely because of it's rarity it must be a big deal.

Everybody dies too, so by your loic defying death would not matter?

Regarding over protection, I agree to an extent, but again not really. Boxing, as Fenster points out is not like other sports. Just have a look after a fighter loses on any weekend and how many threads will go up saying that he has been exposed, was never any good and isn't worth shit any more. Losing in boxing matters to the fighter.

Some fighters take their losses and make light of it, Christobal Cruz has 11 defeats, Salido, Augustas? Losing does not mean you can't win your next fight, so I think the air of invincibility is only burst for an undefeated fighter if he is exposed. If someone lays a blueprint.

You point out Katsidis as someone who keeps losing and still remains popular, but that's an exception rather than the rule. Henry Akinwande only lost to Lennox Lewis, but nobody wanted him back on the big screen.

Nobody cared about Akinwande. Only people watched LLewis' crappy fights were to see if someone would knock his block off again.

Chris John's HBO career was over when he drew, he's still unbeaten but he's not on any more PPV's.

Chris John beat Juarez on the undercard of Marquez Mayweather. That was after the Draw. Since he is not calling out any featherweights (Salido/Gamboa/Lopez)

Generally speaking, for most fighters if you lose you're quickly forgotten and are forced to rebuild in relative obscurity.

I think it more relies on how you fought and how you lost.

How avidly are you still following the careers of Roman Karmazin, Kasim Ouma, Christian Mijares and Sechew Powell?

[COLOR="rgb(0, 100, 0)"]All these guys are so past it. And we can see they do not have the talent that can upturn a division. Furthermore, I think his post mentioned nothing about Pacquiao. So I give him full credit for creating an unbiased post[/COLOR]