DEFEAT: Hurt, Humbled, Avoided or Accepted

He’s the best super-middleweight in the world; I’ve got to be honest.

Froch after the Ward defeat

A negative experience will quite often leave an ongoing legacy in a person’s memory. How many adults, for example, can remember horrible events at school as vividly as if they happened yesterday? Strange when you think those events occurred many years ago and, to quote Alice Cooper, “School’s out forever!”

In a fighting sense, and quite obviously, there’s nothing worse than losing a decision. If a fight is close then it’s still hard to take, but lose in a big way and there’s inevitably going to be some mental as well as physical scars. Either way, being defeated is something that most fighters have to accept and learn to live with – although they don’t have to like it. But how does a professional sportsperson handle the negativity of losing?

Straying from boxing for a moment, I remember reading in Ian Botham’s autobiography, “Don’t tell Kath”, that he’d blame defeats on anything but himself. This, I suppose, is the equivalent of the sports professional’s comfort blanket: a tactic to elude the reality of the situation – sometimes referred to as “avoidance”. To clarify the point further, just think of some of the excuses boxers use when they’re beaten (Haye’s broken toe, for one). Like Botham then, does this help some fighters justify a loss in their own minds?

What surprised me recently is the aforementioned quote made by Froch after his defeat to Ward. Prior to this statement, Froch had given reasons for his defeat – including not getting off to a faster start and being more suited to 15 rounds. In a strange twist, he then goes on to say Ward is the best super-middleweight on the planet. For me, however, the most interesting part of the interview was the fact that he underlined this statement with the words “I’ve got to be honest”. Was he being honest to the interviewer or was he being honest to himself?

It just goes to show that a superlative performance can humble even the proudest of men, and I respect Froch, just that little bit more, for momentarily throwing away the comfort blanket and considering his defeat could actually be down to a better opponent.

Bearing these things in mind:

Can you think of instances where a fighter has struggled to come to terms with a defeat to the point where it affected their life away from the ring? (Hatton’s defeat to Pacquiao is one example)

What reasons, outrageous or otherwise, have boxers given for losing a fight? Do you feel they were using these reasons to justify the loss to themselves or to the viewing public?

And lastly, like Froch, have you seen a fighter humbled after suffering a loss? (Tyson’s defeat to Lennox is the one that sticks with me)

Tysons defeat to Lewis was a humble one! I agree with your article, very well put. It is rather annoying when fighters use an excuse to cover up the fact that they either didnt perform on the night or the fact that they simply were not good enough.

Haye simply was not good enough yet he used the broken toe as an excuse for not getting his right hand off on Wlads chin. Yet in the 12th he landed it flush and had Wlad hold for a few seconds. If he could do that after 12 rounds then his toe, to me, wasnt the problem.

Hatton went off the rails after pacman and Froch was humble in saying he wasnt fast enough and that Ward is the best at the weight. He held no grudge or no cheap talk. Just straight to the point where he wasnt good enough on the night.



What, out of interest, did Ortiz say after his fight with Mayweather? I can remember the interview, but after throwing flying headbuts all night i just wondered!

Interesting stuff as per usual, Mediacat.

I believe that Henry Cooper is very possibly the embodiment of many of these complex issues combined together.

On one hand, Cooper seemed to know very well that he wasn't a heavyweight of genuine world class. Both he and his manager, Jim Wicks, admitted to not being prepared to go anywhere near Sonny Liston because he was ' too nasty. ' They would later say the same thing about Joe Frazier. Furthermore, when Cooper unexpectedly beat Zora Folley he became entitled to a shot at Patterson ( who would later absolutely pole axe Cooper with his not so storied right hand, ) but Wicks opined that Cooper was not ready and so Brian London went over to fight Patterson in his stead.

On the other hand, Cooper was more than willing to wring every drop out of the knocking down of Ali and hold it up - for years - as being proof that he was a major player who simply got unlucky with cuts and just as unlucky with the ( ridiculous and, thankfully, now discredited, ) ' split glove ' conspiracy.

I believe that Cooper genuinely thought he could exploit Ali's unorthodoxy but I also believe that, deep down, he knew he wasn't among the elite.

Cooper further cements his position as the living embodiment of the points raised in the article by having displayed the most appalling behaviour for years following his razor thin loss to Bugner. Bugner, himself, was caught up in it all and never did receive the backing of the British public because of Cooper's bitter and juvenile whining, which included his refusal to speak to referee and sole judge until many years after the fight.

To cap it all, Cooper uttered the most ludicrous excuse I have ever read to explain his knockout loss to Ingemar Johansson. Our ' Enery, you see, was only knocked out because - now wait for it - he didn't see the punch coming on account of the Sun being in his eyes.

Nice enough chap, was Cooper, but a very poor loser.

As windy said, interesting questions as always, mediacat.

Without opening up a can of worms about which is the better win, personally, I've always thought that the defeat to Floyd took more out of Hatton than the defeat to Manny did. Whilst the defeat to Manny was probably physically more devastating, the defeat to Floyd robbed Hatton of his own feeling of invincibility. I don't think he ever looked the same fighter or man again after he lost to Floyd and I'm sure it contributed to his problems outside the ring.

As for excuses, I once read an interview with Pete Coleman who caddied for Bernard Langer for years. Coleman said that Langer never once admitted to him that he had hit a bad shot and always used some form of excuse to justify a shot that had gone array. He'd claim there was a gust of wind or would blame Coleman for giving him the wrong club or yardage. Coleman believed that it was because Langer couldn't admit to himself that he hit a bad shot or was out of form as this would psychologically damage his chances of performing as his best.

I guess that could explain why in boxing we see losing fighters blame a defeat on a varierty of external factors e.g. the referee in Hatton (Cortez v Mayweather) and Khan's case or some real, imaginary or ridiculous physical ailment (David Haye's little toe falling into the latter category). Given the phsyical dangers, perhaps in boxing the need to do this is more pronounced. I can't imagine it would do your psyche much good for future fights if you go around admitting your physical limitations.

I suspect that protestations by fighters that they are "the best" are as much about psychological self preservation as they are about bravado.

Picking up on superfly's point about Langer. does it strike anybody else as being odd that tennis players rarely succumb to on court injuries necessitating retirement from a match which they are winning?

Also, Serena Williams normally breezes through early rounds of Grand Slam events with no signs of injury, only to appear on court with a thigh or knee bandage the first time she is meeting somebody who is deemed to represent a threat.

If only she'd stick a bandage down her neck.

HumanWindmill wrote:Picking up on superfly's point about Langer. does it strike anybody else as being odd that tennis players rarely succumb to on court injuries necessitating retirement from a match which they are winning?

Also, Serena Williams normally breezes through early rounds of Grand Slam events with no signs of injury, only to appear on court with a thigh or knee bandage the first time she is meeting somebody who is deemed to represent a threat.

GOOD POINT

That's an interesting point, windy. Nadal is always very gracious in defeat but a couple of years ago he very rarely suffered a defeat without either calling out the trainer when he was losing or his coaching team later claiming that he was suffering some injury or other.

This trend has lessened somewhat but I do think that Nadal, Murray and Djokovic are quite fond of calling out the trainer for treatment to a supposed injury. Perhaps it is to maintain their ego and belief that they are not being outplayed. .

Federer, on the other hand, never seems to ask for treatment. Perhaps his air of nonchalent arrogance means he doesn't have to claim to be injured when he's being beat.

I've not really got anything to properly contribute except for a few examples, but just wanted to say really good article.

Examples:
Bernard Hopkins always said the only time he has truly lost was when he fought RJJ the first time, but he blamed that on not being as experienced enough at the time.

Tend to be someone Alex who does see Hopkins way of thinking even when he lost.

Jones, Calzaghe and Taylor all have mitigating circumstances to them with three being very very close with the other being a relative novice.

Michael Moorer would never give Foreman credit, saying it was a lucky punch. Me, I'm not a believer in "lucky punches." Why is it that Sugar Ray Robinson never fell foul to the lucky punch but Michael Moorer did? Could it be that Robinson was an infinitely better boxer? Although I can understand Moorer being miffed at Foreman milking it for all it was worth. Foreman talked of dreaming he KO'd Moorer in the 10th with a right hand and has always maintained he'd was setting a trap for Moorer the whole time.

In truth it's surely as simple as this: Foreman was a massive puncher. Massive punchers only need 10 seconds to win a fight.

Thank you all for the comments.

Any idea how high the Swedish sun climbs in May, HumanWindmill? Just saw a picture of Cooper vs Johansson and it looks pretty bright in there.

With all this talking of tennis and blaming the sun, it reminds me of the tennis match between Terry Thomas and Ian Carmichael in the original "School for Scoundrels". Very funny and worth watching if you haven't seen it.

Regarding Hatton, superflyweight, I agree. Floyd was the fighter who introduced Hatton to the concept of defeat.

Ha!

Absolutely no idea, MediaCat, though I would guess that - contrary to Cooper's opinion, no doubt - the sun shines equally on the righteous and the villain and that Mr. Johansson would, therefore, have also needed to contend with the light.

Cooper was quality this guy almost beat Ali! Dont get me wrong Ali was a much better fighter but Cooper caught him and was very unlucky that the bell came in for Ali who was in trouble the corner also had to rip his glove to give him more time because he was dazed. Sometimes this can hapen in boxing look at Lewis he got caught against Rahman and lost this is what could have happened to Ali against Cooper but like Lewis I reckon Ali would destroy Cooper in a rematch when he was fully focused.

Lewis was our best heavyweight of all time but I reckon Cooper could be number two how many people can say they floored Ali with one punch? Mabe Joe Frazier but not many others!

Someones been at the sherry bottle over Christmas..

I always felt Hattons loss to Pacquiao was more of a psychological blow. He performed reasonably credibly against Mayweather and he had the ready made excuse that he was the guy stepping up in weight. Even after the loss he would go on about "his" division being 140 and thats where he was the king. Pacquiao pretty much annihilated him in his own division in a blow out which I think really hurt him. I get the feeling if he had retired post Mayweather he would have been ok with the feeling that he was unbeaten at his natural weight and stepping up with a reasonable performance against a fighter of Mayweathers class was alright. All his post career problems seem to indicate it was the Pacquiao loss that really got to him.

I like honesty in a fighter and Froch is one of the most honest out there. But really Id find it hard for a fighter in that spot who has lost convincingly to say anything other than he was beaten by the better fighter, at least on the night. I still think Froch said he thinks he could beat Ward on a different day and in the pre fight build up Ward caught him out a bit in regards to the Dirrell fight saying Froch ws legitimately worried which way the decision would go - despite Froch backtracking and saying he won it handily which wasnt really true.

Lewis was another guy who wasnt shy about dishing out the excuses for any loss or poor performance!

The likes of Murray and Macklin have struck me as decent guys in how they accepted their loss and draw. Murray actually admitted he felt he had not done enough to wrestle the title off the champion and while Macklin said he thought he won he admitted it was a close fight - Khan and Haye take note!

Waingro, do you ever write anything that isn't some soundbite cliché which you've picked up without even bothering to do any research?

Even Cooper himself and his manager knew he wasn't a player on the world stage, as I pointed out in my earlier post. That isn't my opinion but, rather, it's public knowledge.

Waingro wrote:Cooper was quality this guy almost beat Ali! Dont get me wrong Ali was a much better fighter but Cooper caught him and was very unlucky that the bell came in for Ali who was in trouble the corner also had to rip his glove to give him more time because he was dazed. Sometimes this can hapen in boxing look at Lewis he got caught against Rahman and lost this is what could have happened to Ali against Cooper but like Lewis I reckon Ali would destroy Cooper in a rematch when he was fully focused.

Lewis was our best heavyweight of all time but I reckon Cooper could be number two how many people can say they floored Ali with one punch? Mabe Joe Frazier but not many others!

Jesus Christ, I have nothing to say to it.

Lewis was our best heavyweight of all time but I reckon Cooper could be number two

Luckily no-one values your opinion. Fitz, Farr, Bugner (go and google them)

Glen Johnson always felt he was robbed even if he lost fair and square. It's only recently he's started saying that he lost to the better man.

In other sport Steve Cram always struck it with me as someone who always had mitigating circumstances when he lost. It was always due to an injury or illness as to why he lost races and never his fellow runners being simply too fast for him. He always says the reason he never won the Olympics was for being injured at the wrong times.

Thinking about Atheltics for a second Boon, take Hansen and Holmes for instance had the latter not finally won could you not legitimately say that they both had mitigating circumstances for never performing at an olympics? Not too clued up on Cram personally but some athletes are simply unlucky with injuries.

although i dont like khan's crying, his situation was different from Murray's and Macklin's, he was the champ and he was in a close fight despite 2 point deductions from the ref - the ref did not give a single official warning, which is to stop the action and warn the fighter. I had this fight 113-112 Khan

Froch and haye both got outclassed, Froch admitted ward was better, i had 116-112 ward.
Haye said wlad was better, but he also blamed his toe - maybe he was trying to sell a rematch of wlad vs Healthy Haye. I had this fight 117-110

Macklin and Murray both lost a close fight at sturms home and their behaviour was very respectable, haven't seen the murray fight but in the macklin fight i thought sturm may have won by 1 point or a draw would have been fine.

KO-KING wrote:although i dont like khan's crying, his situation was different from Murray's and Macklin's, he was the champ and he was in a close fight despite 2 point deductions from the ref - the ref did not give a single official warning, which is to stop the action and warn the fighter. I had this fight 113-112 Khan

Froch and haye both got outclassed, Froch admitted ward was better, i had 116-112 ward.
Haye said wlad was better, but he also blamed his toe - maybe he was trying to sell a rematch of wlad vs Healthy Haye. I had this fight 117-110

Macklin and Murray both lost a close fight at sturms home and their behaviour was very respectable, haven't seen the murray fight but in the macklin fight i thought sturm may have won by 1 point or a draw would have been fine.

I heard him say on SEVERAL occasions "Stop pushing, Khan"...you can get much clearer than that. The fighters both recieved their instructions in the dressing room and they've had them given NUMEROUS times during the course of their careers. Did Amir suffer memory loss on the way to the ring? What part of "good clean fight" did he interpret as "push your opponent unnecessarily"?

Khan's fault for a lack of discipline and for not being able to negate Brewster's work by conventional/fair means.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Thinking about Atheltics for a second Boon, take Hansen and Holmes for instance had the latter not finally won could you not legitimately say that they both had mitigating circumstances for never performing at an olympics? Not too clued up on Cram personally but some athletes are simply unlucky with injuries.

I think Cram was unlucky with injuries generally but the fact he never, (at least back when I used to watch athletcs in the halcyon days of British middle distance dominance) admitted he lost to the better man or if he did he would usually asterisk this with having been partially injured or recovering from injury. You could definitely say that Holmes would have claimed mitigating circumstances as she was often injured and had considered retirement before 2004. However, I actaully think she got lucky in that the fileds for 800m/1500m were a bit weak that year and Mutola was not her usual self.

Am not saying that Cram or even Hansen didn't get bad luck, just in keeping with the theme of the article, Steve Cram for sure never seemed humble in any way and that defeat was terrible bad luck, someone else's fault or whatever but it never seemed to be down to him not being good enough. I suppose that's a good way to be but it can be irritating for everyone else..............oh yeah wait this is the boxing forum!

coxy0001 wrote:

Lewis was our best heavyweight of all time but I reckon Cooper could be number two

Luckily no-one values your opinion. Fitz, Farr, Bugner (go and google them)

Cooper would beat these guys imo he was very unlucky not to beat Ali who was in serious trouble against him. I reckon the fight would have been over if Ali was not saved by the bell look at Lewis he was stopped against McCall if the bell had gone he would have survived and destroyed McCall. It also shows Cooper had amazing power Ali has a great chin but he was floored and almost knocked out how many guys have done that to Ali not even Foreman who had serious power could floor him?

Imo Lewis is the best fighter we have had in Britain but Cooper would be up there he showed against Ali he could floor the best and almost win that would have been the best ever win for any British fighter. Cooper against Lewis is a fight I would like to see I reckon Lewis would win but Cooper had power if he could floor Ali then he has the power to floor Lewis but overall Lewis would have too much skill he would outjab him like he did Tua or maybe stop him on cuts which Cooper was well known for.

Brut is quality IMO. Lewis may have worn Old Spice but Cooper wore Brut. Brut would school Old Spice and bring excitement back to the aftershave market.

Waingro wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

Lewis was our best heavyweight of all time but I reckon Cooper could be number two

Luckily no-one values your opinion. Fitz, Farr, Bugner (go and google them)

Cooper would beat these guys imo he was very unlucky not to beat Ali who was in serious trouble against him. I reckon the fight would have been over if Ali was not saved by the bell look at Lewis he was stopped against McCall if the bell had gone he would have survived and destroyed McCall. It also shows Cooper had amazing power Ali has a great chin but he was floored and almost knocked out how many guys have done that to Ali not even Foreman who had serious power could floor him?

Imo Lewis is the best fighter we have had in Britain but Cooper would be up there he showed against Ali he could floor the best and almost win that would have been the best ever win for any British fighter. Cooper against Lewis is a fight I would like to see I reckon Lewis would win but Cooper had power if he could floor Ali then he has the power to floor Lewis but overall Lewis would have too much skill he would outjab him like he did Tua or maybe stop him on cuts which Cooper was well known for.

Cooper lost to Bugner Waingro.

Your basing a huge amount on Cooper flooring Ali. Ok it was a good achievement but he lost the fight and lost again thereafter. The rest of his record gives a better indication of where his overall level was. Probably closer to European level than bonafide world class heavyweight.

DAVE667 wrote:

KO-KING wrote:although i dont like khan's crying, his situation was different from Murray's and Macklin's, he was the champ and he was in a close fight despite 2 point deductions from the ref - the ref did not give a single official warning, which is to stop the action and warn the fighter. I had this fight 113-112 Khan

Froch and haye both got outclassed, Froch admitted ward was better, i had 116-112 ward.
Haye said wlad was better, but he also blamed his toe - maybe he was trying to sell a rematch of wlad vs Healthy Haye. I had this fight 117-110

Macklin and Murray both lost a close fight at sturms home and their behaviour was very respectable, haven't seen the murray fight but in the macklin fight i thought sturm may have won by 1 point or a draw would have been fine.

I heard him say on SEVERAL occasions "Stop pushing, Khan"...you can get much clearer than that. The fighters both recieved their instructions in the dressing room and they've had them given NUMEROUS times during the course of their careers. Did Amir suffer memory loss on the way to the ring? What part of "good clean fight" did he interpret as "push your opponent unnecessarily"?

Khan's fault for a lack of discipline and for not being able to negate Brewster's work by conventional/fair means.

thats not a hard warning, no one has EVER got a point taken off without a Hard warning for pushing, Hard Warning is when the ref stops the action to warn a fighter, e.g. Mosley vs Mayweather, Bayliss stopped the action to warn mosley (don't know what round but it was when floyd punched mosley when mosley was talking)

HumanWindmill wrote:Interesting stuff as per usual, Mediacat.

I believe that Henry Cooper is very possibly the embodiment of many of these complex issues combined together.

On one hand, Cooper seemed to know very well that he wasn't a heavyweight of genuine world class. Both he and his manager, Jim Wicks, admitted to not being prepared to go anywhere near Sonny Liston because he was ' too nasty. ' They would later say the same thing about Joe Frazier. Furthermore, when Cooper unexpectedly beat Zora Folley he became entitled to a shot at Patterson ( who would later absolutely pole axe Cooper with his not so storied right hand, ) but Wicks opined that Cooper was not ready and so Brian London went over to fight Patterson in his stead.

On the other hand, Cooper was more than willing to wring every drop out of the knocking down of Ali and hold it up - for years - as being proof that he was a major player who simply got unlucky with cuts and just as unlucky with the ( ridiculous and, thankfully, now discredited, ) ' split glove ' conspiracy.

I believe that Cooper genuinely thought he could exploit Ali's unorthodoxy but I also believe that, deep down, he knew he wasn't among the elite.

Cooper further cements his position as the living embodiment of the points raised in the article by having displayed the most appalling behaviour for years following his razor thin loss to Bugner. Bugner, himself, was caught up in it all and never did receive the backing of the British public because of Cooper's bitter and juvenile whining, which included his refusal to speak to referee and sole judge until many years after the fight.

To cap it all, Cooper uttered the most ludicrous excuse I have ever read to explain his knockout loss to Ingemar Johansson. Our ' Enery, you see, was only knocked out because - now wait for it - he didn't see the punch coming on account of the Sun being in his eyes.

Nice enough chap, was Cooper, but a very poor loser.

Remember reading that a long time ago...Without doubt the worst excuse I have ever heard.

Mosley has come up with some corkers in recent times as well...bad neck against Mayweather...blisters and wrong shoes when he fought Manny.

I agree with you Windy,"our enery" was never world class. Apart from a win against Folley which was later avenged in a second round Knockout he never came close to winning against a top heavy weight, unless you count the first Clay fight were the result may have been different had the blow landed a few seconds earlier.He was European champion and I did think he sqeaked it against Bugner but that's only my opinion.