Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

do great fighters, ruin there legacy when they continue way past-prime

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    #1

    do great fighters, ruin there legacy when they continue way past-prime

    sasy muhammad ali continued after berbrick, and lost or you know fought bums or c-class fighters, would that ruin his legacy....

    for example evander holyfeild an ATG, HOF you name it... but is him continuing to fight, way past prime somewhat "ruining" his legacy...
    #2
    not to me.

    once your accomplishments are already locked in, its all just extra credit from then on out imo.

    its a good wakeup call for delusional fans when their fighter finally is past prime though.

    Comment

      #3
      depends on the fighter. I think roy jones hurt his legacy a little bit. people thought he was invincible so that disappeared under a lot of guys eyes. People say he would have been KO'd by so and so and use the Tarver KO as proof.

      Comment

        #4
        It matters. It's like when jordan came back on the wizards. you know he wasn't the MJ of old but when he drops 30 or 40 it's just a little icing on the cake of a great career, but when he performs poorly you just accept it because he's old.

        On the other hand it is a little depressing seeing a ATG look flabby and sick in the later part of their career.



        Last edited by Jupiter Jab; 08-28-2011, 01:42 PM.

        Comment

          #5
          Originally posted by Steak View Post
          not to me.

          once your accomplishments are already locked in, its all just extra credit from then on out imo.

          its a good wakeup call for delusional fans when their fighter finally is past prime though.
          I agree, and don't understand why a fighter would hurt their legacy by continuing to fight past prime. It does not change what they have already done.

          Ali could have gotten knocked out by a featherweight in the 80s and it wouldn't change what he had already accomplished. I feel that way about any fighter.

          Comment

            #6
            Originally posted by ИATAS206 View Post
            depends on the fighter. I think roy jones hurt his legacy a little bit. people thought he was invincible so that disappeared under a lot of guys eyes. People say he would have been KO'd by so and so and use the Tarver KO as proof.
            That's ridiculous though. Roy's career pre-Tarver didn't change at all because he lost to Tarver. If people want to ignore what the drop down from heavyweight did to Roy and pretend he was no different than the guy who beat Toney, that's their problem.

            A fighter's legacy is their legacy. Once they've done something there's no erasing it.

            Comment

              #7
              Originally posted by bojangles1987 View Post
              I agree, and don't understand why a fighter would hurt their legacy by continuing to fight past prime. It does not change what they have already done.

              Ali could have gotten knocked out by a featherweight in the 80s and it wouldn't change what he had already accomplished. I feel that way about any fighter.
              that being said I wish most ATGs would retire once theyre past prime, not because of legacy but because of health. Holyfield and Jones are pissing me off with how long theyre sticking around, I really really dont want to see them end up permanently hurt.

              Comment

                #8
                Originally posted by Steak View Post
                that being said I wish most ATGs would retire once theyre past prime, not because of legacy but because of health. Holyfield and Jones are pissing me off with how long theyre sticking around, I really really dont want to see them end up permanently hurt.
                Yeah, that's a different discussion. I don't see how anyone actually sanctions fights involving those two anymore.

                Comment

                  #9
                  I think they do, though it depends on the fighter and what they did in the prime of their careers. Some fighters make such an indelible imprint on fight fans' minds that no matter how badly they perform in later fights, their image remains intact. Tyson would be a good example of that, though I think Tyson only really became shot after Lennox.

                  A fighter like Jones though is harming his legacy, or at least his aura of invincibility which he possessed in his prime. Seeing him get brutally KOed time and again by lesser fighters leaves its own kind of imprint to the point where both the successes and the failures start to indelibly mingle together.

                  It's a tricky question though, and relies on one's perception of a fighter and what you associate them as being.

                  Comment

                    #10
                    not really, once they achieve greatness and they prove it against everyone in their prime is where it's at

                    rjj is still an ATG and always will be even if he lost to dennis lebedev.

                    tyson losing to mcbride, who gives a **** hes still one of the best heavyweights of all ****ing time

                    or as you say evander holyfield fighting for financial reasons...if he lost to journeymen hes still an ATG

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP