Is the idea of a big name fighter needed to draw a crowd a myth?
This question puzzles me.
It's always said, both in the case of Margarito fighting Floyd, Kessler fighting Calzaghe and countless other examples that these fights won't sell because the likes of Margarito and Kessler arn't big enough names to sell a pay per view.
I'm always puzzled by these statements because if you reflect on them it's kind of an absurd viewpoint.
My belief is that all real boxing fans know the names of Margarito and Kessler and would love to see these fighters get involved in the big fights, so presumably this cliche isn't targeting real fightfans.
So who is it aimed at then? I'm guessing it's the general public and the casual fightfans.
Well lets examine.....
First I should say that I'm English so the situation may be different in the US but over here the Calzaghe Lacy fight was huge, even my non boxing fan friends watched the fight.
Now what is interesting is though, that despite Lacy being a supposed big name, NONE of my casual boxing fan friends had ever heard of him before this fight with Calzaghe was announced.
They tuned in because they heard Lacy was supposed to be a badass and were expecting to see a very entertaining fight.
I remember 15 years or so ago watching Nigel Benn take on Gerald McClellen. There was a huge attraction to that fight because the papers and media were reporting that McClellen was a huge puncher and this was going to be a war.
Whats interesting though is that before the fight I, along with all my friends and I guess almost the entire British public had never heard of McClellan! It was hyped as a big fight before hand so people tuned in.
I know that my casual fight fans all tuned to watch Ricky Hatton fight Kosta Tyszu without having any idea who even Kosta Tyszyu was, once again they just heard in the media that he was a great fighter and so wanted to watch the fight.
Now fast forward to today and we have people constantly saying things like Kessler is not a big enough name to fight Joe or Margarito is not a big enough name to fight Floyd and it just makes no sense.
We know that these fighters are well enough known to real boxing fans so once again we must assume that they are talking about the casual fan.
But the casual fan, and the general public at least over here in the UK had never heard of Jeff Lacy, Kosta Tyszu, even Floyd Mayweather.
In fact I could be reasonably confident that less than 10% of my mates have heard of even Oscar De La Hoya, or if they have it's just a name that they couldn't put a face to.
The idea of Lacy being a big name whilst Kessler is not would be lost on them as they wouldnt have heard of either!
My point is this, it's not the fame of a fighter that attracts but rather reports of his ability and especially knockout power.
If Kessler fought Calzaghe in the UK it would be huge, bigger than Lacy Calzaghe as Kessler would be hyped as an ubeaten double world champ like Calzaghe and people would want to watch the fight.
The idea, over here at least, that Peter Manfredo is a bigger name is just laughable. Most people dont know who either fight is and the ones that do vaguely know Manfredo from a reaility tv show would likely see that as off putting if anything.
Anyways I'd like to hear your opinions. It's long been one of the things that really bugs me, tired old cliches that the sport of boxing is filled with :-\
Re: Is the idea of a big name fighter needed to draw a crowd a myth?
Well it helps to sell tickets when the crowd knows who both guys are and that it will be interesting because of who those two guys are. I also think that if you take a champion and sign him up against a not so well known guy but it's hyped up that the unknown may cause problems for the champ i think it would sell well too.
Re: Is the idea of a big name fighter needed to draw a crowd a myth?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
This question puzzles me.
It's always said, both in the case of Margarito fighting Floyd, Kessler fighting Calzaghe and countless other examples that these fights won't sell because the likes of Margarito and Kessler arn't big enough names to sell a pay per view.
I'm always puzzled by these statements because if you reflect on them it's kind of an absurd viewpoint.
My belief is that all real boxing fans know the names of Margarito and Kessler and would love to see these fighters get involved in the big fights, so presumably this cliche isn't targeting real fightfans.
So who is it aimed at then? I'm guessing it's the general public and the casual fightfans.
Well lets examine.....
First I should say that I'm English so the situation may be different in the US but over here the Calzaghe Lacy fight was huge, even my non boxing fan friends watched the fight.
Now what is interesting is though, that despite Lacy being a supposed big name, NONE of my casual boxing fan friends had ever heard of him before this fight with Calzaghe was announced.
They tuned in because they heard Lacy was supposed to be a badass and were expecting to see a very entertaining fight.
I remember 15 years or so ago watching Nigel Benn take on Gerald McClellen. There was a huge attraction to that fight because the papers and media were reporting that McClellen was a huge puncher and this was going to be a war.
Whats interesting though is that before the fight I, along with all my friends and I guess almost the entire British public had never heard of McClellan! It was hyped as a big fight before hand so people tuned in.
I know that my casual fight fans all tuned to watch Ricky Hatton fight Kosta Tyszu without having any idea who even Kosta Tyszyu was, once again they just heard in the media that he was a great fighter and so wanted to watch the fight.
Now fast forward to today and we have people constantly saying things like Kessler is not a big enough name to fight Joe or Margarito is not a big enough name to fight Floyd and it just makes no sense.
We know that these fighters are well enough known to real boxing fans so once again we must assume that they are talking about the casual fan.
But the casual fan, and the general public at least over here in the UK had never heard of Jeff Lacy, Kosta Tyszu, even Floyd Mayweather.
In fact I could be reasonably confident that less than 10% of my mates have heard of even Oscar De La Hoya, or if they have it's just a name that they couldn't put a face to.
The idea of Lacy being a big name whilst Kessler is not would be lost on them as they wouldnt have heard of either!
My point is this, it's not the fame of a fighter that attracts but rather reports of his ability and especially knockout power.
If Kessler fought Calzaghe in the UK it would be huge, bigger than Lacy Calzaghe as Kessler would be hyped as an ubeaten double world champ like Calzaghe and people would want to watch the fight.
The idea, over here at least, that Peter Manfredo is a bigger name is just laughable. Most people dont know who either fight is and the ones that do vaguely know Manfredo from a reaility tv show would likely see that as off putting if anything.
Anyways I'd like to hear your opinions. It's long been one of the things that really bugs me, tired old cliches that the sport of boxing is filled with :-\
Well put it this way, just 'coz u don't live ona forum, look through papers for articales or go through telly text daily looking for boxing news does not mean that you are not a real boxing fan.
The term the 'general' boxing fan is used way to much. I have used it, and alot others seem to refer to anyone who doesn't live on forums, downloading fights the night after they were viewd rather than w8ing for it to come on tv as just a 'general fan'
I only came on this forum after the Calzaghe lacy fight, coz i was so shocked to hear so many people had given calzaghe no chanc,e i came to see if this was true. untill then i had never heard, or never reamember hearing about this floyd mayweather, yet he was something like top 3 Pound for pound then? i follow boxing by watching it on Tv when it's on. Now i normaly log on and check this forum daily, check any news thats here read some threads etc etc, but i don't consider my self to be any more of a fan now than i was before...
The friends i have who watch boxing love it, they only knew who mayweather was through me, or who baldi was, who jab judah was lol
So my point is, yeah you need big name fighters to still pull big crowds to say "real boxing fans" know who the kesslers are is not right at all lol.. maybe the fanatics do, 'coz you know what? this might take you all by suprise here.. but IMO the real fan is the one who sits down sometimes not knowing who either fighter is, but watching the fight 'coz they love the sport.
Half the people who post on here aint 'real' fans. They may know countles names, and who holds what belt, but a large amount of people on here either follow a few fighters, a certain country and just want to argue that 'their boy' is better than sm1 elses - and in general they wont buy PPV's or got o fights unless thier boy is fighting!
Re: Is the idea of a big name fighter needed to draw a crowd a myth?
HBO is where the doughs at
Kessler-Calzaghe doesn't have an American TV audience
HBO have given Calzaghe two dates for 07
FW has said regardless of the opponent Calzaghe can sell 20,000 plus at the millenium stadium. And regardless of the opponent (however disappointed/disgusted boxing nuts are with the fight) people in Britain will still tune in to watch (casual fans don't care, they can be sold any old opponent). If the Americans tune into watch - which apparently they will against an American like Manfredo - Calzaghe will raise his profile in the USA which will set up a PPV special against Jermain Taylor later on in the year...and everyone earns $$$ happily ever after...there you go, simple as :-\
So I think one of the points is
It's the American's fault Kess-Cal aint happening ;D
Lacy (new Mike Tyson, new American superstar), Kostya (Legend, fights in USA) and McCllean (American superstar come to bash Benn up) - all had American interest.
Re: Is the idea of a big name fighter needed to draw a crowd a myth?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
HBO is where the doughs at
Kessler-Calzaghe doesn't have an American TV audience
HBO have given Calzaghe two dates for 07
FW has said regardless of the opponent Calzaghe can sell 20,000 plus at the millenium stadium. And regardless of the opponent (however disappointed/disgusted boxing nuts are with the fight) people in Britain will still tune in to watch (casual fans don't care, they can be sold any old opponent). If the Americans tune into watch - which apparently they will against an American like Manfredo - Calzaghe will raise his profile in the USA which will set up a PPV special against Jermain Taylor later on in the year...and everyone earns $$$ happily ever after...there you go, simple as :-\
So I think one of the points is
It's the American's fault Kess-Cal aint happening ;D
Lacy (new Mike Tyson, new American superstar), Kostya (Legend, fights in USA) and McCllean (American superstar come to bash Benn up) - all had American interest.
Actually I can see where you are coming from. I guess for an American audience to be interested in a Calzaghe fight, he needs to be fighting an American fighter.
I mean if Floyd Mayweather and Oscar De La Hoya decided to fight over in England and for the fight to be screened on Sky PPV it would probably attract barely a 5% of the audience it would attract in the US.
But if you swapped either fighter for Ricky Hatton it would be huge in the UK.
So I guess what I'm saying is that for any country to be really interested in a fight, then it needs to have one of their own countrymen fighting in it.
From that perspective a Manfredo fight makes more sense, as he's American and the Americans will tune in to watch him.
So I see what you are saying. Calzaghe needs to fight an American if America is to have any interest in his fights.
Re: Is the idea of a big name fighter needed to draw a crowd a myth?
Germany is the 2nd biggest ppv source in the world so Calzaghy v Kessler would be big biusness plus youd get a lot of Americans veiwing the fight too.
Re: Is the idea of a big name fighter needed to draw a crowd a myth?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrap
Germany is the 2nd biggest ppv source in the world so Calzaghy v Kessler would be big biusness plus youd get a lot of Americans veiwing the fight too.
But would the Germans want to watch an Englishman fight a Dane?
Re: Is the idea of a big name fighter needed to draw a crowd a myth?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrap
Germany is the 2nd biggest ppv source in the world so Calzaghy v Kessler would be big biusness plus youd get a lot of Americans veiwing the fight too.
But would the Germans want to watch an Englishman fight a Dane?
Especially when Calzaghe just gave up a title instead of fighting a german, Roger Styl Klitz or whatever.
Re: Is the idea of a big name fighter needed to draw a crowd a myth?
I'll say this Joe vs. Bika was supposed to be Joes coming out party..... We all saw what happened..... So who gives a rats ass!!! If the entire world doesn't know Kessler, did anyone know Bika.....
And to be honest EVERYONE would know Kessler by the end of the fight IF it ever happens.... ;)
Those comments are just said to defend and used as excuses by people here and boxers who are afraid to step up and fight.....
'nough said.....
Re: Is the idea of a big name fighter needed to draw a crowd a myth?
Re: Is the idea of a big name fighter needed to draw a crowd a myth?
There are a lot of factors that determine how big of a crowd will come to a fight.
the 2 fighters, their records, where they are from, what their nationality is, their style, their personality, the undercard, when the fight is being held, where, and how much the tickets are.
Name is part of it but not the whole deal...I mean Arturo Gatti is no world beater but he is exciting and that's how he got a big name.
Mikkel Kessler isn't very well known in America among everyday people....in Denmark I am sure he can't walk down the street without a mob following him. Pacquiao was the same way in the Phillipeans even before he showed up big in the US.
