|
|
| *SportsComet>>>Boxing |
At what point is a fighter considered past his prime and thus given a pass for late career losses? |
I think that because of the lack of deepth in boxing today that fighter can fight longer at a higher level than in the past. When Ray Leonard (age 36) fought a young Terry Norris Ray was destroyed. I think today the older fighter has more of a chance and would have more ring savy to beat the younger fighter. So at what point do we disregard the loss? You never totally disregard a loss, no matter when it occurs. That said, there are physical differences between a 20 year old and a 40 year old that obviously make the same fighter at those two ages very different. There are any number of factors that formulate the idea of a fighter in his prime, or for that matter the definition of a "shot" fighter. The level of competition, physical injury, wear and tear on the fighter and skill level all play a role in formulating a label. The label is a general opinion of each individual based on the overall deterioration or improvement of each fighter's performance which makes each fighter so labeled a constantly changing evaluation. There is no set of rules or standards that can be applied across the board it is a general opinon. It varies with each fighter from fight to fight, and it extreame cases (like the Tarver left hook) a fighter can go from the P4P best to a shot fighter in the blink of an eye. No true competitor ever "disregards" a loss and the concept of a fighter in their "Prime" or a "shot" fighter is an evaluation based on performance factors that changes with circumstance. this really depends on the fighter. its about heart zab judah is only 29 and people think he is past his prime and why is that? after tzyu chicken danced him he lost his confidence and has not found a way to get it back. bernard hopkins is 40+ years old and he can still work the best in the business at his weight class presently. why is that ? heart and determination and he has lost some speed but made up for it in ring command and smarts. oscar was said to be washed up but he gave floyd a run for his money and he is 34 and if age is the requirement for past his prime floyd is quickly coming up on 31 so will he be past his prime? its a double edged sword. so really it varies on who the loss is to and if they still want it bad enough after that fight. On this forum at least, the criteria is as follows: If you lost to Rocky Marciano - you were over the hill. If you lost to Ricky Hatton- you were over the hill. If you lost to Floyd Mayweather- you were still prime- you just lost to a superior boxer. Print this out so you will know how to discuss boxing properly. Until we can get rid of the alphabet soup of titles, we will have great fighters fighting well past their prime. Not to say that they cant still put up an entertaining fight, but with the advent of other sports sweeping up all the boxing talent, we better get ready to see older fighters fighting well into their 40's and beyond. We disregard a loss when the fighter has shown clear signs of slowing down. Roy Jones's losses to Tarver and Johnson for example, Leonard's losses to Norris and Camacho. Ali's losses to Berbick and Holmes. Tyson is an odd case because he was only great for a few years, and then either decent or sucked the rest of his career. |
| Tags |
| Cycling Cricket Boxing Basketball Baseball |
Sports Categories--Copyright/IP Policy--Contact Webmaster |