great quote by Don King

[maracho]

Anybody with common since knows that Don King is bad for boxing and should protest the likes. Has he ever had a fighter that he has not taken advantage. All of his past fighters and most of his present ones have made public complaints about him.

Don King was with Mayorga last night but was also promoting the Showtime fights as well and as usual a boxer got robbed after fighting their guts out. Nicaraguan Perez did not even come close to winning that fight against the russian yet two judges in cahoots with Mr. King and Showtime had him way ahead.

[SimonH]

Anybody with common since knows that Don King is bad for boxing and should protest the likes.

The Rumble in the Jungle

The Thrilla in Manila

The Heavyweight Unification Tournament of 86 to 88

Revenge; the rematches

Chavez/Haugan in front of 135,000

Without King, perhaps none of this would of happened....

King is a Genius, and like all Genius' he is flawed; and he is badly flawed.

But you have to weigh King up, and make a personal judgement, it is a tough call IMO.

One thing I would say is that rarely are boxing fans neutral when it comes to opinions on King.

[bigragu]

"You never get what you deserve. You get what you negotiate. You got a right to say yay or nay."

he's bad for boxing and always has been..don't forget this is the same guy that ripped off "The Greatest"......He had separated the titles and if he couldn't get his fighter a title shot he created one "IBF" for Holmes....the fact that boxing has allowed all the different titles allows this man to manipulate it.....if things went back to 1 title and the #1 challenger got the shot you would see the great boxing of old...until then we have to settle for poor champs that are only champ because of watered down divisions.....ala Chirs Byrd, Haseem Rahman, Ruiz, Spinks (both), smith, witherspoon, tubbs, berbick, mercer, morrison, bentt, hide, moorer, seldon, botha, akinwande, toney, and brewster none of these guys listed had or has the talent to be a true champion....with only 1 title we would know this outright. instead you have decent fighters fighting other decent/halfassed fighters and becoming champ.....oh yeah, and with out the leaches the fighters that truely deserve a title shot gets it.....the fans could have a say as to who's the #1 challenger or you could make the NABF champ the automatic #1 challenger.

[SimonH]

He had separated the titles and if he couldn't get his fighter a title shot he created one "IBF" for Holmes....the fact that boxing has allowed all the different titles allows this man to manipulate it.....if things went back to 1 title and the #1 challenger got the shot you would see the great boxing of old...until then we have to settle for poor champs that are only champ because of watered down divisions.....ala Chirs Byrd, Haseem Rahman, Ruiz, Spinks (both), smith, witherspoon, tubbs, berbick, mercer, morrison, bentt, hide, moorer, seldon, botha, akinwande, toney, and brewster none of these guys listed had or has the talent to be a true champion....

The IBF was created by Bob Lee when he threw his toys out the pram after failing to get elected as WBA President.

One Champion in each division, also means potentially great fighters being avoided because they lack the right connections. It also might lead to less wages for fighters who although not good enough to be the World Champ, are good enough to be a titlist, and make a decent living at the moment.

Rahman, Moorer and both the Spinks were at one time or another The TRUE World Champions which you are talking about; Michael Spinks at two weights.