- Joined
- Jul 13, 2017
- Messages
- 7,184
- Reaction score
- 5,848
I’m seriously interested in when people think a fighter explaining a loss is considered making an excuse?
For example, if the reason given is false, then it is obviously an excuse.
But what if the reason given is true past a reasonable doubt, then do the extent to which we look down upon it as an excuse depend on how much we think it is relevant to the fighter’s performance?
Or should you go the Robbie Lawler route and just never give any reason for a bad performance, even if it’s something like a torn ACL?
For example, if the reason given is false, then it is obviously an excuse.
But what if the reason given is true past a reasonable doubt, then do the extent to which we look down upon it as an excuse depend on how much we think it is relevant to the fighter’s performance?
Or should you go the Robbie Lawler route and just never give any reason for a bad performance, even if it’s something like a torn ACL?
Last edited: