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.
Maybe, maybe not. in one sense it's about money, in another sense it's not. You could argue that for some money is a yardstick by which glory is measured. And you'll never see a top fighter do it for free, but...
A guy like deLahoya really isn't in it purely for the money these last few years. He's got more money than he'll ever be able to spend. He loves the action.
Top pro athletes, whether they be into boxing, basketball, golf, whatever, arguably have a moral obligation to go for as much money as possible. You raise the bar for the top dogs, and you raise the bar for everyone else down the line. You see a ball player take a lesser contract than he can get, and he will be scorned by the other guys in the league.
case in point. In pro Golf, Joe Average is a lot better off financially when you have a superstar like Woods winning all the tournaments and making a ton of dough.
Not sure about that. In fact, the money is more important for lower tier fighters. Would they have a job if they could earn enough as a full-time fighter? Don't think so. And they still get paid. I'm sure many love the game but they wouldn't fight for free, right? (well maybe a few nutters would ;D)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bethnal Green
But both scenarios are driven by money. The glory hunters wouldn't fight for free. Either they are looking for the riches success once gave them or need to fight to earn dough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
Many of the top boxers have had extensive amateur careers where there is very little money involved. Obviously they get into it initially from a love of the sport and a desire to challenge themselves. So, in that respect it isn't really about money at that stage. Or maybe that's a naive way of looking at it?
At the professional level money is obviously the thing that motivates a hungry fighter, but again I think when you reach a certain level, money ceases to be the main motivating force. Ali didn't keep fighting for as long as he did solely because of the fiscal benfits. I think he was addicted to the limelight and the glory, as much, or if not more, than the money.
But in most cases I would say it is about the money rather than the glory. But you get certain fighters like Duran and Chavez who you really feel just loved to fight above all other considerations.
It's an interesting one.
I agree. I think the majority of boxing fans view the sport through rose-tinted glasses.Quote:
Originally Posted by blegit
"Show me the man who says he ain't fighting for money, and I'll show you a fool." Larry Holmes
"When you're fighting, you're fighting for one thing - money." Jack Dempsey
"Fighters want to fight for titles, but not as much as we want to fight for MONEY." Roy Jones jr
Exactly, and who can blame them, they get hit in the face by some of the toughest punchers on the planet (relatively speaking even guys who aren't big punchers in the sport would be if they were Joe average on the street). I don't think Ali & Oscar were good examples. Ali was not as wealthy as people think when he was fighting Holmes & Berbick, its only since the 90s and the more mainstream love for Ali that he has got richer. Oscar was only fighting in fights where he was getting the majority of the cash & if they were superfights. If it wasn't about the money he wouldn't have cared if the PBF & Pac fights were split 50-50. Agree with blegit. The TV networks & promoters who don't cough up the extra dough are the ones I blame if a 'fans fight' doesn't happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterI agree. I think the majority of boxing fans view the sport through rose-tinted glasses.Quote:
Originally Posted by blegit
"Show me the man who says he ain't fighting for money, and I'll show you a fool." Larry Holmes
"When you're fighting, you're righting for one thing - money." Jack Dempsey
"Fighters want to fight for titles, but not as much as we want to fight for MONEY." Roy Jones jr
I usually am reluctant to give the guy credit, but Froch came to the US to fight Taylor, and although I'm sure he was paid handsomely to do so, he took a risk he didn't have to take. He could easily have stayed in Nottingham fighting nobodies and making the same amount of money. He did it without any british tv exposure either.
Thats a good example. He really didnt need to take that fight so early on as a belt holder but went out and did it regardless. Nearly cost him, but it worked dividends. That's a possible quest for glory IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rantcatrat
Kid Thunder fights for 50 pence and a bunch of grapes, so that aint about the Benjamins ;D
To clarify, i think that we could split the boxing world up into two tiers, to be general.. The first would be the guys who want to become champs. These are the guys who still may be unproven and will do anything to get in the spotlight and get a title.. these are the guys who would take any fight which felt they would have a better chance to become the champ, nearly regardless of pay, because they know if they succeed they will have better pay-days in the future.
the second tier would be current/former champs. these guys know, or at least feel they are worth a certain amount. it's one of those, "if you want to see me fight, and i know you do, pay me"..
In other sports, it's the same way, but players don't get criticized because they're on a team and it's not completely up to that one player to make matchups happen. But plenty of football and baseball players hold out until they get what they feel they are worth.. It again comes back to the whole, "i know that someone else will pay me" idea..
I'm not sure that we can criticize too much about this topic, considering if i were offered another job, which may be more challenging but i get paid more money, i would take it.. or if i was offered a difficult job for a pay that i felt wasn't sufficient, i may not take it.. It's just when you have guys like PBF and the lot that demand a certain ridiculous amount, and don't get it, and then the fight doesn't get made, that bothers me........
Which reminds me, I haven't seen much of Trainer around lately. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Hmm... maybe, Froch deserves credit for this fight butQuote:
Originally Posted by milesThats a good example. He really didnt need to take that fight so early on as a belt holder but went out and did it regardless. Nearly cost him, but it worked dividends. That's a possible quest for glory IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rantcatrat
1. Froch got a career high payday - around £500,000. He would have needed a few home defences to make that (i would guess).
2. The fight was on-off, on-off, on-off.. why? Money. Team Taylor said Froch wanted too much, Team Froch said Taylor's demands were unreasonable.
Had Froch had a more lucrative offer to fight a lesser name at home, does anyone truly believe he would have turned it down to get Taylor's scalp? I would highly doubt it. ;)
They do and i don't blame any of them. When it's all said and done try gathering up all your fans to help your 75 year old ass pay your medical bills with a big fat check of glory. Try sending you kids to college and say you wanna pay with glory, hell even the movie glory aint worth shit today. These guys risk thier lives (especially with guys like marga cheato out there) fans will talk shit about ya, say you're ducking blah blah and ask ricky hatton where they all are when you loose, and shit he's only lost to the two best fighters on the planet. Look i hate it too, i think it's crummy that guys like b-hop can sit around sucking up a ranking by outpricing himself to everyone, when he really should fight dawson so on and so forth....but it's just the way things are. All athleates are like this these days, you can't even collect playing cards these days the guys hop around from contract to contract so much. Money is king. Sad but true.
To lump all fighters into one category with such a sweeping statement, seems ludicrous, IMO. You got your fighters that only care about money, and you got your fighters that truly enjoy the sport, and care about their place in boxing history. Maybe when you're starting out, or when you're a journeyman fighter, maybe then you only care about money. But when you've reached the upper echelons of the sport, and you've already made your first few millions... how much more money do you really need? If I thought that money was the ONLY thing that all fighters ever cared about, I'd probably wouldn't be such a fan.
Any pro fighter who does not fight for money as one off the primary reasons he fights, should lose his licence there and then, as he is clearly punch drunk.
"One of..." Very important qualifier, and very different from "only."Quote:
Originally Posted by Britkid
;)
Can you name the fighters that have earned a few million who then chase nothing but glory (resume enhancing) fights at the expense of bigger money? (That was one of the questions asked in the very FIRST post of this thread. It wasn't just a title ;))Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
Money dictates the match-up. If the money isn't RIGHT the fight doesn't happen. Simple as.
What if fighters avoid big pay days to go after fights which pay less, but are less risky.. Hence to keep their zero.. But that's not really fighting for glory either.. it's fighting to look good on paper.... Even if it costs you money...Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterCan you name the fighters that have earned a few million who then chase nothing but glory (resume enhancing) fights at the expense of bigger money? (That was one of the questions asked in the very FIRST post of this thread. It wasn't just a title ;))Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
Money dictates the match-up. If the money isn't RIGHT the fight doesn't happen. Simple as.
If I was a boxer i'd fight for glory...
We all say that, but none of us are world-class boxers we can't really comment. Most fighters go after the bigger payday regardless IMO. The reason we're seeing more big fights recently is because promoters are having to cut their share (e.g. Pacquiao-Hatton) to make it happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by DizasterWhat if fighters avoid big pay days to go after fights which pay less, but are less risky.. Hence to keep their zero.. But that's not really fighting for glory either.. it's fighting to look good on paper.... Even if it costs you money...Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterCan you name the fighters that have earned a few million who then chase nothing but glory (resume enhancing) fights at the expense of bigger money? (That was one of the questions asked in the very FIRST post of this thread. It wasn't just a title ;))Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
Money dictates the match-up. If the money isn't RIGHT the fight doesn't happen. Simple as.
If I was a boxer i'd fight for glory...
Not only a low purse but a ridiculously home cookin decision against him. From what i say, marquez won that fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by leftylee
Felix Trinidad have fought for glory. Did Trinidad duck anybody?
I remember that if Tito was to beat B-Hop he want it RJJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Kid Thunder:bucktooth:......................... so I disagree Fen' :)
If PAC fights one of the 147 belt holders for his 7th division title instead of waiting for the huge money fighting the winner of PBF-JMM then PAC is fighting for legacy over money... ;)
.
Well then tell me why Evander Keeps fight i heard alot about his money problems but he should of retired long before that i mean my god. He fights for glory and the sad part is it going to hurt him some time i am a huge Evander Holyfeild fan i just wish they would of gave him the win he deserved and let him have his happy ending but i guess they could not.
He's only fighting because of his money problems and because he can't stop having kids. Probably the best example of someone fighting for money. All these guys only fight on for money, the only possible (and I say this because I'm not sure) exception I can think of is Roy Jones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140