Thread: Who deserves the bigger purse?

Do you think something would change in boxing if the winner got the bigger purse instead of having the more popular of the two boxers get it?

I think this is a reason why sometimes champions loose inspiration and end up loosing against fighters who nobody ever heard of.

Chino

Originally Posted by Chino

Do you think something would change in boxing if the winner got the bigger purse instead of having the most popular of the two boxers get it?

I think this is a reason why sometimes champions loose inspiration and end up loosing against fighters who nobody ever heard of.

Chino

absolutely........a 60-40 or even better 70-30 would really create an atmosphere that has been missing.....I might have been saved the embarrassment of the "Buster" Douglas/Holyfield fiasco.......but we dont see other sports doing it so maybe we should just keep it the same......

I love the ideology [click]

Sadly as simple and brilliant as the idea is, we live in a Capitalist society...

Or have a winning bonus like the UFC does. When David Terrell (UFC fighter from round here, my brother helps him out with his wrestling a lot) fought Evan Tanner a while back, he got $15,000. If he would have won he would have got double. Tanner still got more money but had he lost he wouldn't have got that winning bonus.

I think the best way for it to work would be for each fighter to get a base amount of money (depending on who the fighter is would determine how much they got) and then a bonus for winning, like somebody already mentioned. Even going this way the "name" fighter would still end up with more money, but it would at least give the non name fighter a chance to earn more. But then again throwing more money at fighters isnt going to solve anything.

Originally Posted by Chino

Do you think something would change in boxing if the winner got the bigger purse instead of having the most popular of the two boxers get it?

I think this is a reason why sometimes champions loose inspiration and end up loosing against fighters who nobody ever heard of.

Chino

The reason the purse is so big is because of the champion, if it was a nobody vs nobody that purse would not be close so to say that whoever wins the fight should get the top purse is a robbery. But the fact that the best fighters would be more motivated over it is true.

Originally Posted by TyBuff

I think the best way for it to work would be for each fighter to get a base amount of money (depending on who the fighter is would determine how much they got) and then a bonus for winning, like somebody already mentioned. Even going this way the "name" fighter would still end up with more money, but it would at least give the non name fighter a chance to earn more. But then again throwing more money at fighters isnt going to solve anything.

Totally Agree!!!

Its great in theory , but what you would have is a serious game of dodge ball, nobody would fight anyone dangerous. , now if there was an incentive on top of the agreed purse, that would help. Or a non performance penalty, Example like for heavyweights. A fighter comes in 15 - 20 lbs over his best fighting weight , penalize his purse. I think things like this could help fighter stay focused during training .
but really in the lighter divisions fighters are usually are at their best. its the Heavyweights that blow up into worthlessness. Just my opinion