Context doesn’t override the official result. The logical entailment of your claim is that wins and losses are interchangeable. You said that Jones win versus Reyes is equal to an Aspinall loss because of “context.” If we can make official wins into losses because of this arbitrary “context” that varies from person to person, then effectively decision wins and losses meaningless because they are the same thing.
Like I said, you can argue the merit of a win ie the quality or how much of a win it is. You can even say that the win is a net zero. But you can’t say it’s equal to a loss or in the negatives. Jones win versus Reyes would in no way be equal to a potential loss for Aspinall here, no matter what way you try to spin or repackage it.
In another thread, you verbatim said that Jones vs Hamill counts as a loss for Jones— I agreed (this is what’s called logical consistency). But now all of a sudden Yan didn’t lose to Sterling? The only difference here is you like Yan and dislike Jones. Every argument you make is dictated by how you feel in the moment.
When Lewis beat Volkov, he had to reinvent himself, make a comeback and put in considerable work with a winstreak before people favored him over Tuivasa. If they threw Volkov in there with Tuivasa immediately after the Lewis KO before any of the aforementioned occurred, Tuivasa would have been the favorite (and for good reason). So is your argument that Aspinall could work on his game potentially come back to be on Jones level later in his career?
No one said it means everything. We’re just not going to pretend it means nothing. A loss never means nothing. It means Aspinall is not the fighter he was advertised to be. Gane is not a good fighter. He’s not even supposed to be on Tom’s level. This isn’t supposed to be difficult for him. When there’s supposedly this many levels between the two fighters, the “styles make fights” doesn’t really apply. And then what’s more, it’s not even a bad style match up for him on paper. Remember, Gane has the takedown defense of an infant apparently.
Anything short of domination will be an embarrassment. And I’ll keep it a buck with you— if what the original poster says came true, it would be catastrophic. Not for Tom per se, but for the people who tried to advertise him as this future GOAT candidate and dogpiled on anyone who so little as questioned it. Cry all you want about that, but it’s the truth (if he loses which admittedly he likely won’t). It’s just crazy to me how the bar is so low now for this kid that a loss means nothing. The favoritism is on another level.
