Printable View
Can anyone recall a fighter refusing a greater payday to make a more important (as in resume enhancing) fight?
For example - Mosley turned down around $12m for a third fight with Oscar to unify with Wright for about $2m.. but I believe the Oscar fight fell through because Mosley was demanding MORE than $12million. So wasn't really about Mosley looking to enhance his legacy.
For what reason - other than wonga - do pro fighters fight? Money drives every decision, no?
Surely even if Mosely had pissed Oscar off they could have agreed on more than $2 million dollars. Winky was a much riskier fight, so I think that is one example that won't work. Except for that one though, I can't think of any.
What about Juan Manuel Marquez against Chris John. He went to his hometown and apparently he got a ridiculous low purse.
Boxing is all about marketability.. if you take a lower payday than what you may be able to get, it most likely is with the intent to set up a bigger payday in the future..
Let's face it, in boxing if you're undefeated you're always marketable, but the more losses you have that marketability starts to fade, with the exception of some elite fighters.. With undefeated fighters there is always that excitement factor of, "will he be the first one to beat him?!" which gains interest from a lot of casual fans.
Although, i wouldn't say that they don't fight for glory. Boxers are as competetive as any other sportsman. But, i would say that money comes first, then glory.. but there is plenty of glory.
Marquez fought John for $30,000 after a 2nd Pac fight fell through. It wasn't a fight to enhance his legacy though, they probably thought John was an easy fight. And all it really highlights is Nacho Beristain is a crap manager.
Booze, I think it was just a case of negotiations breaking down with Oscar, so the fight was scrapped. So probably just Mosley playing the game badly.
RP33, I agree the glory is there, but it's second to the money. The money comes before glory, although it's not portrayed like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Can we all agree that fighting Chris John at his home for $30,000 is the dumbest fight ever made?
You cant pay your mortgage with glory.
obviously moneys important, but for boxers who are not at the absolute height of the sport the money is not all that great- often leading to many boxers even at national level, still having a day job, making the glory a key reason for fighting. Furthermore, there is no money for being recognised as the p4p king yet every fighter would love this honour. I don't know of any fighter who would not want to secure their legacy. Money has taken a larger role due to promoters etc. I think real boxers want glory and legacy just as much as money. Another part of the money issue is generally the champion or fighter recognised as the best secures the highest proportion of the purse, so you can say that the money is a status thing- more money= better reputation as a fighter.
I much did past fighters make? surely not as much as fighters now because the past fighters fought more often.
Can anybody make a decade by decade salary list for fighters beginning in the early 1900s. Im curious to know how guys like Jack Johnson made, or Jake Lamotta.
Lennox took the lesser purse against Holyfield to unify the titles and get the glory and there by making more money.
As with pretty much any other sport
I cant remember the last time i heard of a sportsman putting his legacy before money
if i was offered 12k a year to be a respectable bank clerk but 25k to work as a binman i sure as hell know what job id take and it wouldnt involve me wearing a suit!!!!!!!!!!
For every one champion that makes a decent paycheck there are a hundred fighters that don't. (And yes. I just pull that out of thin air! the statistic is probably closer 500:1, or 1000:1 for boxers never going beyond 4 rounders and quit.)
When JMM opted to exchange a $750,000 purse with a $30,000 purse (and a loss), I think that time he was trying to regain his lost glory/legacy... That time, IBF just recently stripped JMM of his featherweight title for failing to have a mandatory fight since no promoter willing to spend a minimum $50,000 purse bid in JMM's mandatory defense (you know JMM's style is boring)... JMM losing his IBF title resulted to WBA withdrawing his "super champion" status... JMM ended without any titles/belts then he's demoted as the mandatory challenger to Chris John's regular WBA featherweight title... JMM tried to regain his legacy/title but failed during that time... It was the lowest point in JMM's career...:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
But props for JMM for fighting for glory... It's seldom seen in a professional boxer since being a professional boxer, you're expected to choose money over glory anytime...;)
.
Realistically,yeah guys want and deserve to get payed in worth but I dont think its all about money for all of them,they are not all that transparent.Ego,pride come into the equation more often than not for many fighters.Alot of older guys hang on trying to recapture the glory of days gone by,chasing shadows and wanting to 'prove' that they still have it....and far to often the non stars and ones that blew it all have to stick around for the bucks alone.
Well, as a fan I don't like it when the right fights don't get made because of the money route. But as a former boxer I override this dislike because boxing is a temporary job and a sport with bad intentions. It can all be over in a millisecond. So I never get down on a boxer thinking more about the money than the legacy because they have families and bills to take care of and no amount of legacy raises children. Boxers are used like higher priced goons and so it is an intelligent business decision for them to take the most money route everytime. Promoters and networks should take a paycut if they want to please the fans. Don't blame the two guys who are being offered to kill each other. Make them an offer they can't refuse.