"He's in it for the money"

[bzkfn]

Someone is paying Haye really, I didn't know he could get payed for doing what he does!
Which is nothing from my vantage point! Ray.

Too right Ray. He does absolutely nothing. I'm sure you know this because you've seen every one of his fights. I'm also sure you've achieved plenty more than Haye in your life. Maybe one of these days he'll get off his lazy arse, make an opinion about someone else and sign it "Dave". That'll be worth a boatload of money.

[El Kabong]

I understand the issue with the saying, but there are guys who LOVE boxing that are no good (a good example is Mickey Rourke who left Hollywood to be a boxer) at it and there are guys who are really talented at boxing but don't really enjoy it as a career and only wish to do it because it could springboard them into another career or because it could make them quick cash. David Haye is the PERFECT example...if David Haye loved boxing, respected boxing, and truly wished to do well in the sport he's talented enough to make that happen.....BUT he seems to enjoy running his mouth more and being in front of camera. So I would agree with Lennox Lewis, he enjoys what boxing affords him and he is not in boxing to prove anything about himself or to the fans.

[Vendettos]

I understand the issue with the saying, but there are guys who LOVE boxing that are no good (a good example is Mickey Rourke who left Hollywood to be a boxer) at it and there are guys who are really talented at boxing but don't really enjoy it as a career and only wish to do it because it could springboard them into another career or because it could make them quick cash. David Haye is the PERFECT example...if David Haye loved boxing, respected boxing, and truly wished to do well in the sport he's talented enough to make that happen.....BUT he seems to enjoy running his mouth more and being in front of camera. So I would agree with Lennox Lewis, he enjoys what boxing affords him and he is not in boxing to prove anything about himself or to the fans.

Once again I agree. Just don't think it's needs to be pointed out like its a bad thing.

[Fenster]

I understand the issue with the saying, but there are guys who LOVE boxing that are no good (a good example is Mickey Rourke who left Hollywood to be a boxer) at it and there are guys who are really talented at boxing but don't really enjoy it as a career and only wish to do it because it could springboard them into another career or because it could make them quick cash. David Haye is the PERFECT example...if David Haye loved boxing, respected boxing, and truly wished to do well in the sport he's talented enough to make that happen.....BUT he seems to enjoy running his mouth more and being in front of camera. So I would agree with Lennox Lewis, he enjoys what boxing affords him and he is not in boxing to prove anything about himself or to the fans.

For fucks sake....

So those 90 odd amateur bouts, including silverware at the highest level, and "world" titles in two weight divisions, is the "perfect example" of an underachiever that showed no love or respect for boxing and just conned his way to a few quid.

You'll find this hard to believe but David Haye actually existed before he challenged the Klitschkos. He didn't just appear out of thin air.

[Onetime]

I understand the issue with the saying, but there are guys who LOVE boxing that are no good (a good example is Mickey Rourke who left Hollywood to be a boxer) at it and there are guys who are really talented at boxing but don't really enjoy it as a career and only wish to do it because it could springboard them into another career or because it could make them quick cash. David Haye is the PERFECT example...if David Haye loved boxing, respected boxing, and truly wished to do well in the sport he's talented enough to make that happen.....BUT he seems to enjoy running his mouth more and being in front of camera. So I would agree with Lennox Lewis, he enjoys what boxing affords him and he is not in boxing to prove anything about himself or to the fans.

For fucks sake....

So those 90 odd amateur bouts, including silverware at the highest level, and "world" titles in two weight divisions, is the "perfect example" of an underachiever that showed no love or respect for boxing and just conned his way to a few quid.

You'll find this hard to believe but David Haye actually existed before he challenged the Klitschkos. He didn't just appear out of thin air.

Belts and amateur careers don't mean you love boxing it just means talent, if Mikey Garcia becomes a great no one will be shocked he wanted to be a cop he doesn't love boxing.

[Fenster]

I understand the issue with the saying, but there are guys who LOVE boxing that are no good (a good example is Mickey Rourke who left Hollywood to be a boxer) at it and there are guys who are really talented at boxing but don't really enjoy it as a career and only wish to do it because it could springboard them into another career or because it could make them quick cash. David Haye is the PERFECT example...if David Haye loved boxing, respected boxing, and truly wished to do well in the sport he's talented enough to make that happen.....BUT he seems to enjoy running his mouth more and being in front of camera. So I would agree with Lennox Lewis, he enjoys what boxing affords him and he is not in boxing to prove anything about himself or to the fans.

For fucks sake....

So those 90 odd amateur bouts, including silverware at the highest level, and "world" titles in two weight divisions, is the "perfect example" of an underachiever that showed no love or respect for boxing and just conned his way to a few quid.

You'll find this hard to believe but David Haye actually existed before he challenged the Klitschkos. He didn't just appear out of thin air.

Belts and amateur careers don't mean you love boxing it just means talent, if Mikey Garcia becomes a great no one will be shocked he wanted to be a cop he doesn't love boxing.

Which brings us back to the original point - "He's in it for the money"

90% of fighters in history would never have been fighters without the money incentive. The other 10% are nutters

[Vendettos]

I understand the issue with the saying, but there are guys who LOVE boxing that are no good (a good example is Mickey Rourke who left Hollywood to be a boxer) at it and there are guys who are really talented at boxing but don't really enjoy it as a career and only wish to do it because it could springboard them into another career or because it could make them quick cash. David Haye is the PERFECT example...if David Haye loved boxing, respected boxing, and truly wished to do well in the sport he's talented enough to make that happen.....BUT he seems to enjoy running his mouth more and being in front of camera. So I would agree with Lennox Lewis, he enjoys what boxing affords him and he is not in boxing to prove anything about himself or to the fans.

For fucks sake....

So those 90 odd amateur bouts, including silverware at the highest level, and "world" titles in two weight divisions, is the "perfect example" of an underachiever that showed no love or respect for boxing and just conned his way to a few quid.

You'll find this hard to believe but David Haye actually existed before he challenged the Klitschkos. He didn't just appear out of thin air.

Belts and amateur careers don't mean you love boxing it just means talent, if Mikey Garcia becomes a great no one will be shocked he wanted to be a cop he doesn't love boxing.

Which brings us back to the original point - "He's in it for the money"

90% of fighters in history would never have been fighters without the money incentive. The other 10% are nutters

Most boxers come from deprived areas, money is their ONLY incentive.

[El Kabong]

Most boxers come from deprived areas, money is their ONLY incentive.

True and they aren't usually the smartest either.


HOWEVER some guys still have this thing called pride and they will seek out opportunities to prove themselves as the best.


@Fenster David Haye had 1 fight in 2012.....just 1. Does that tell you anything about how seriously he takes the sport? Tomaz Adamek had 4 fights in 2012, Wladimir had 3, Wilder had 6. Haye likes the "flashy flash" he's all style and no substance...he's not a real boxer he's a sideshow and he's made himself that. The way Haye acts he's little better than Butterbean.

[bradlee180]

Professional prizefighting is mostly about fighting for money, but that's not the whole story: the competitive nature certainly plays a part as dos the drive for personal fame, to be somebody.
Some of these guys really want to prove they're the best, or can at least compete with the best.

Take mixed martial arts: most ufc guys, even the champions, are fighting for peanuts compared to the lion's share of the ppv dollars that goes to dana white and the fertittas. For them, apparently, the money isn't the most important factor.

When a guy's only in it for the money, that's when fight's end up not being on the level, when guy's throw fights and take dives if the money's right, and some prizefighters with real Heart just don't have it in them to lay down for anybody at any price...

[IamInuit]

"He's in it for the money"

@Vendettos

I have deep philosophical problems with that phrase my friend. When I say problems I mean my own. Bit of a love hate relationship after 40 years. It starts with the grey matter that rests in between Archie Moore making literally 50 bucks a fight and his massive pay day of 800 dollars for a title fight against Maxim finally after 160 fights and a man that makes 30 million a fight and only fights once every year or two.

That was a rather long sentence.

Moore had to toil in obscurity to get enough money in order to feed himself to pursue legacy. Same goes for the rest of the Murderers row. They had to fight each other over and over. So I suppose in that sense "he was in it for the money"

My issue deep down is how money has taken over legacy. I mean from a puritan standpoint, the twisted interpretation of another phrase namely "risk and reward" is geared to that end. They have it ass backward.

[Vendettos]

"He's in it for the money"

@Vendettos

I have deep philosophical problems with that phrase my friend. When I say problems I mean my own. Bit of a love hate relationship after 40 years. It starts with the grey matter that rests in between Archie Moore making literally 50 bucks a fight and his massive pay day of 800 dollars for a title fight against Maxim finally after 160 fights and a man that makes 30 million a fight and only fights once every year or two.

That was a rather long sentence.

Moore had to toil in obscurity to get enough money in order to feed himself to pursue legacy. Same goes for the rest of the Murderers row. They had to fight each other over and over. So I suppose in that sense "he was in it for the money"

My issue deep down is how money has taken over legacy. I mean from a puritan standpoint, the twisted interpretation of another phrase namely "risk and reward" is geared to that end. They have it ass backward.

I understand. Boxing and in general technology has evolved in a way that now a billion or more people could potentially watch a fight the same time, if they all paid £1 quid each then the purse is huge. Now this isn't an exact number but you understand the logic?

As opposed to Murderers row fighting each other once a week or whatever in front of at the very most 1000 people.

Television has made it all a little easy on the fighters now financially.

But at the same time, that ain't David Hayes fault.

[Fenster]

"He's in it for the money"

@Vendettos

I have deep philosophical problems with that phrase my friend. When I say problems I mean my own. Bit of a love hate relationship after 40 years. It starts with the grey matter that rests in between Archie Moore making literally 50 bucks a fight and his massive pay day of 800 dollars for a title fight against Maxim finally after 160 fights and a man that makes 30 million a fight and only fights once every year or two.

That was a rather long sentence.

Moore had to toil in obscurity to get enough money in order to feed himself to pursue legacy. Same goes for the rest of the Murderers row. They had to fight each other over and over. So I suppose in that sense "he was in it for the money"

My issue deep down is how money has taken over legacy. I mean from a puritan standpoint, the twisted interpretation of another phrase namely "risk and reward" is geared to that end. They have it ass backward.

Do you honestly think those old-timers were pursuing legacy over money? They'd laugh their fucking nuts off today (or possibly cry) looking back at what they went through for virtual peanuts compared with modern fighters. And swap places in a heartbeat.