Fighters pride!

Following Haye's excuse that his little toe stopped him from landing his big shots and effectivley ruining his chances of winning, I ask what would you do? Fighters have huge pressure to come across as macho for use of a better term. When a fighter looses a fight where he knows he has under performed he may look elsewhere to explain himself. Lets say that Haye's toe really was broken which I believe it was, would you keep quite about it or would the pressue to put forward a legit reason for your performance?

Imo I think the right thing to do is keep quite, except the loss like a man, give credit to your opponent and leave it at that, BUT when people are throwing insults at you like fraud, coward, all talk no action, excuse maker and phoney like the such levelled at Haye at the mo would you not feel obliged to reveal a truth no matter how silly it sounds?

I know people will say that it is best not to sound like a sore looser but has anyone been in that position. Joe Frazier went his whole career BLIND in 1 eye and only revealed this fact YEARS after his career had ended. He could have blamed some of his defeats to the disadvantage he clearly had. Tyson kept his Bronkitis condition quite and never used it to explain a defeat or poor performance although the broken back excuse is a classic. So guys what would you do?

I suppose it is tempting to explain yourself but as you say, the right thing to do is swallow it and take defeat like a man.

Was his toe broken? Personally I don't think so. My sister broke her little toe once and she couldn't walk without the aid of crutches for quite some time.

All fighters have lumps and bumps going into contests, Klitschko included.

If you have a problem that is that bad it will totally hinder your performance, you don't fight - simple as that.

By agreeing to fight you are committing to saying you are ready and fit to box. You can't claim after that injury caused your loss.

He is much sorer than his toe when it comes to losing.

Certainly was blinding Foreman's performance against him..

How did Frazier get through the physical if he was blind in one eye!? And even if he was and managed to cover it up, you would keep it quiet wouldn't you or get your licence taken away.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Following Haye's excuse that his little toe stopped him from landing his big shots and effectivley ruining his chances of winning, I ask what would you do? Fighters have huge pressure to come across as macho for use of a better term. When a fighter looses a fight where he knows he has under performed he may look elsewhere to explain himself. Lets say that Haye's toe really was broken which I believe it was, would you keep quite about it or would the pressue to put forward a legit reason for your performance?

Imo I think the right thing to do is keep quite, except the loss like a man, give credit to your opponent and leave it at that, BUT when people are throwing insults at you like fraud, coward, all talk no action, excuse maker and phoney like the such levelled at Haye at the mo would you not feel obliged to reveal a truth no matter how silly it sounds?

I know people will say that it is best not to sound like a sore looser but has anyone been in that position. Joe Frazier went his whole career BLIND in 1 eye and only revealed this fact YEARS after his career had ended. He could have blamed some of his defeats to the disadvantage he clearly had. Tyson kept his Bronkitis condition quite and never used it to explain a defeat or poor performance although the broken back excuse is a classic. So guys what would you do?

Please refer to the highlighted portion of the quote.

The only problem with this explanation is that Haye started making his excuses IMMEDIATELY, i.e right after the fight, BEFORE any of those slurs could be hurled at him.

The Frazier stuff is BS......

Like a lot of Frazier's opinions these days..