are we forgetting what the point of boxing is?

[goti71]

It's the modern mainstream money-making culture.

People have always craved for intense entertainment (and pro boxing is just that, of course) but the thing is that audiences have become too numerous and you can't expect so many people to be very demanding on subtlety.

The same thing for music and films; 30 years ago it was the innovative and/or quality stuff that hit the mainstream; now the mainstream is packed with a mish-mash of rubbish year after year. No room for "weird" music like The Doors or David Bowie on Top of the Pops.

It all benefits the more mediocre artists whilst the good ones get the scraps.

ha


this thread need to be renamed


"talk utter bollox and mention the good old days"

Not bollocks at all. Sadly it's just the way it is with mainstream; the wider the public, the more it can or has to be dumbed down to make cash.

And I don't give a sod about the good old days.

[erics44]

It's the modern mainstream money-making culture.

People have always craved for intense entertainment (and pro boxing is just that, of course) but the thing is that audiences have become too numerous and you can't expect so many people to be very demanding on subtlety.

The same thing for music and films; 30 years ago it was the innovative and/or quality stuff that hit the mainstream; now the mainstream is packed with a mish-mash of rubbish year after year. No room for "weird" music like The Doors or David Bowie on Top of the Pops.

It all benefits the more mediocre artists whilst the good ones get the scraps.

ha


this thread need to be renamed


"talk utter bollox and mention the good old days"

Not bollocks at all. Sadly it's just the way it is with mainstream; the wider the public, the more it can or has to be dumbed down to make cash.

And I don't give a sod about the good old days.

boxing (and sport in general) is played at a much higher level nowadays than ever before


the "sluggers" of today would KO the finest slickest boxers of yesteryear with in a few rounds


boxing is at a peak with skill, fitness, athleticism etc


the public are better educated, the world demands better athletes and that's what it has


so unfortunately matey, I completely disagree with what you are saying, I don't really think you have thought it through

[goti71]

It's the modern mainstream money-making culture.

People have always craved for intense entertainment (and pro boxing is just that, of course) but the thing is that audiences have become too numerous and you can't expect so many people to be very demanding on subtlety.

The same thing for music and films; 30 years ago it was the innovative and/or quality stuff that hit the mainstream; now the mainstream is packed with a mish-mash of rubbish year after year. No room for "weird" music like The Doors or David Bowie on Top of the Pops.

It all benefits the more mediocre artists whilst the good ones get the scraps.

ha


this thread need to be renamed


"talk utter bollox and mention the good old days"

Not bollocks at all. Sadly it's just the way it is with mainstream; the wider the public, the more it can or has to be dumbed down to make cash.

And I don't give a sod about the good old days.

boxing (and sport in general) is played at a much higher level nowadays than ever before


the "sluggers" of today would KO the finest slickest boxers of yesteryear with in a few rounds


boxing is at a peak with skill, fitness, athleticism etc


the public are better educated, the world demands better athletes and that's what it has


so unfortunately matey, I completely disagree with what you are saying, I don't really think you have thought it through

A bit off-topic that (I've just re-read my post and I don't know where I said boxing was better in the good old days) but "Sluggers" of today would KO the slickest of yesteryear? I don't know. I didn't mention anything to imply that.


As for the topic, people are more educated, yes, but then why do a whole load of them say slick boxing is "running"? Why do they boo at the fights of Rigondeaux, Lara, Ward? They actually make up a big percentage of the PPV and ticket buyers, as you know.

I drew a parallel with the music and film industry not because I see the past with rose-tinted glasses but to make a point that people seem to accept lower standards in entertainment in general. And boxing gets a touch of this tendency too.*

*Edit: that was my point.

[generalbulldog]

Boxing fans today are the same as the boxing fans of yesteryear. Nothing has changed. Many boxing fans have always wanted action fights and action fighters, this crosses all eras of the sport. Rigondeaux would still stink out the joint during the golden age of boxing, which would be the 20s to 50s and would not attract fans. The boxing fans have never changed. Here's a documented example:

Boxing's biggest current attraction is a roughneck middleweight from Manhattan's tough Mulberry Street. Rocco ("Rocky") Graziano packed them in at Madison Square Garden last week for what fans thought would be his sixth straight knockout, a new Garden record. He fooled himself and the fans by winning on points from ex-Sailor Sonny Home.
As a boxer, Rocky Graziano is a joke, but he has the top two requisites to ring fame & fortune — a paralyzing punch, an iron jaw. His 155 lbs. ace mounted on a sturdy pair of legs that would never per form fancy ring steps. He mauls in...

Sport: The Making of Rocky - TIME

This Time Magazine article was dated January 1946, during the Golden Age of boxing. Rocky Graziano, who was a banger and slugger sold out Madison Square Garden numerous times because he was an all out action fighter that brought out people. He had little boxing ability but possessed the punching power, chin, and most important of all the all out action to be a marquee attraction. Rocky Graziano was the Provodnikov of his day. Want another example? The great Jack Dempsey whom even boxing writers back then described as an all out brawler sold out stadiums and became the most famous athlete in the world, he even surpassed Babe Ruth in terms of popularity during the roaring 20s. How about another example? The very 1st heavyweight champion, John L. Sullivan aka the Boston Strong Boy, was described as a brawler and mauler who brought out the masses because he was exciting, while Gentleman Jim Corbett who outboxed and ko John L. Sullivan was described as boring and not as exciting as Sullivan. Sounds familiar?

The boxing fans have never changed, we have always wanted the action fighter and action fights. A Rigondeaux would not be fighting in Madison Square Garden and selling it out even during the Golden Age of boxing, that arena was only reserved for the marquee attractions.

[Beanflicker]

A Rigondeaux would not be fighting in Madison Square Garden and selling it out even during the Golden Age of boxing, that arena was only reserved for the marquee attractions.

What about Willie Pep? A feather-fisted runner who's motto was "he who hits and runs away lives to fight another day"? He was a fixture at MSG.

[Beanflicker]

Listen, nobody is going to argue that entertaining brawlers don't have more mass appeal than counter fighters. Tons of guys have made great living for themselves in boxing because, despite having little/mediocre talent, they had an entertaining style and/or an endearing/interesting personality. And on the flip side, there are a ton of guys who had elite talent but a boring style and/or personality, and went grossly underpaid and under appreciated during their careers. People like to see blood, violence, and knockouts. That's something we all like, from the casual who knows nothing about boxing to the hardcore boxing aficionado, we all appreciate violent wars and brutal knockouts.

But if you consider yourself a true boxing fan, you should have an appreciation for the art and science of boxing as well. Guys like Floyd, Rigo, Ward, ect are elite level fighters - guys who exemplify true "sweet science" - and if hardcore boxing fans don't appreciate the talent that these guys have, then boxing is FUCKED. The UFC is more exciting and violent than boxing. If the art of the sweet science doesn't even interest the hardcore boxing fans, than boxing is clearly a sinking ship.

I think if you're one of those guys who complains about how boring Floyd/Rigo/Ward/ect are and think that guys like Ward should start being loud and playing a "character" like Floyd does to promote himself, and think they should abandon their art and fight stupidly for your entertainment, you should be ashamed of yourself and you're little more than a casual fan.

Nobody is saying you can't enjoy the bloody wars, but give respect to the guys who have dedicated their lives to the art of the sport too.

[generalbulldog]

A Rigondeaux would not be fighting in Madison Square Garden and selling it out even during the Golden Age of boxing, that arena was only reserved for the marquee attractions.

What about Willie Pep? A feather-fisted runner who's motto was "he who hits and runs away lives to fight another day"? He was a fixture at MSG.

Pep was not a feather fisted puncher in his prime. He actually had decent power that can ko you if given the opportunity and he dazzled in the ring. I can't say the same when I watch a Rigondeaux fight. Yes he has great technical skills and that's about it.

That's beside the point, my point being is that pro boxing since it's birth has been carried by action fighters, sluggers, brawlers, ko artists or guys like ALi that dazzled in the ring. Guys that had it and brought it into the ring. Some posters here think that in some bygone era that Rigondeaux will be more appreciated while action fighters, brawlers, ko artists, won't be because the fans were more "evolved" and "knowledgeable" is patently false. Rigondeaux if placed in the golden era won't be selling out stadiums like Dempsey, Marciano, Louis, Robinson, Lamotta, etc. This sport has and will always be carried by the likes of the action guys. Who says? Boxing history says. So it's not a devolvement of the sport and its fan base if fans prefer a Pacquiao, Duran, Hagler, 80s Tyson, Pryor, Holyfield, Chavez to a Rigondeaux. It's ridiculous to suggest otherwise and it's also ridiculous to suggest fans that don't like the style of Rigondeaux isn't a "true" or "real" boxing fan.

[erics44]

It's the modern mainstream money-making culture.

People have always craved for intense entertainment (and pro boxing is just that, of course) but the thing is that audiences have become too numerous and you can't expect so many people to be very demanding on subtlety.

The same thing for music and films; 30 years ago it was the innovative and/or quality stuff that hit the mainstream; now the mainstream is packed with a mish-mash of rubbish year after year. No room for "weird" music like The Doors or David Bowie on Top of the Pops.

It all benefits the more mediocre artists whilst the good ones get the scraps.

ha


this thread need to be renamed


"talk utter bollox and mention the good old days"

Not bollocks at all. Sadly it's just the way it is with mainstream; the wider the public, the more it can or has to be dumbed down to make cash.

And I don't give a sod about the good old days.

boxing (and sport in general) is played at a much higher level nowadays than ever before


the "sluggers" of today would KO the finest slickest boxers of yesteryear with in a few rounds


boxing is at a peak with skill, fitness, athleticism etc


the public are better educated, the world demands better athletes and that's what it has


so unfortunately matey, I completely disagree with what you are saying, I don't really think you have thought it through

A bit off-topic that (I've just re-read my post and I don't know where I said boxing was better in the good old days) but "Sluggers" of today would KO the slickest of yesteryear? I don't know. I didn't mention anything to imply that.


As for the topic, people are more educated, yes, but then why do a whole load of them say slick boxing is "running"? Why do they boo at the fights of Rigondeaux, Lara, Ward? They actually make up a big percentage of the PPV and ticket buyers, as you know.

I drew a parallel with the music and film industry not because I see the past with rose-tinted glasses but to make a point that people seem to accept lower standards in entertainment in general. And boxing gets a touch of this tendency too.*

*Edit: that was my point.

films are better now than ever before, what are you on about?

[goti71]

It's the modern mainstream money-making culture.

People have always craved for intense entertainment (and pro boxing is just that, of course) but the thing is that audiences have become too numerous and you can't expect so many people to be very demanding on subtlety.

The same thing for music and films; 30 years ago it was the innovative and/or quality stuff that hit the mainstream; now the mainstream is packed with a mish-mash of rubbish year after year. No room for "weird" music like The Doors or David Bowie on Top of the Pops.

It all benefits the more mediocre artists whilst the good ones get the scraps.

ha


this thread need to be renamed


"talk utter bollox and mention the good old days"

Not bollocks at all. Sadly it's just the way it is with mainstream; the wider the public, the more it can or has to be dumbed down to make cash.

And I don't give a sod about the good old days.

boxing (and sport in general) is played at a much higher level nowadays than ever before


the "sluggers" of today would KO the finest slickest boxers of yesteryear with in a few rounds


boxing is at a peak with skill, fitness, athleticism etc


the public are better educated, the world demands better athletes and that's what it has


so unfortunately matey, I completely disagree with what you are saying, I don't really think you have thought it through

A bit off-topic that (I've just re-read my post and I don't know where I said boxing was better in the good old days) but "Sluggers" of today would KO the slickest of yesteryear? I don't know. I didn't mention anything to imply that.


As for the topic, people are more educated, yes, but then why do a whole load of them say slick boxing is "running"? Why do they boo at the fights of Rigondeaux, Lara, Ward? They actually make up a big percentage of the PPV and ticket buyers, as you know.

I drew a parallel with the music and film industry not because I see the past with rose-tinted glasses but to make a point that people seem to accept lower standards in entertainment in general. And boxing gets a touch of this tendency too.*

*Edit: that was my point.

films are better now than ever before, what are you on about?

Yes if your mental age is 14.

[erics44]

It's the modern mainstream money-making culture.

People have always craved for intense entertainment (and pro boxing is just that, of course) but the thing is that audiences have become too numerous and you can't expect so many people to be very demanding on subtlety.

The same thing for music and films; 30 years ago it was the innovative and/or quality stuff that hit the mainstream; now the mainstream is packed with a mish-mash of rubbish year after year. No room for "weird" music like The Doors or David Bowie on Top of the Pops.

It all benefits the more mediocre artists whilst the good ones get the scraps.

ha


this thread need to be renamed


"talk utter bollox and mention the good old days"

Not bollocks at all. Sadly it's just the way it is with mainstream; the wider the public, the more it can or has to be dumbed down to make cash.

And I don't give a sod about the good old days.

boxing (and sport in general) is played at a much higher level nowadays than ever before


the "sluggers" of today would KO the finest slickest boxers of yesteryear with in a few rounds


boxing is at a peak with skill, fitness, athleticism etc


the public are better educated, the world demands better athletes and that's what it has


so unfortunately matey, I completely disagree with what you are saying, I don't really think you have thought it through

A bit off-topic that (I've just re-read my post and I don't know where I said boxing was better in the good old days) but "Sluggers" of today would KO the slickest of yesteryear? I don't know. I didn't mention anything to imply that.


As for the topic, people are more educated, yes, but then why do a whole load of them say slick boxing is "running"? Why do they boo at the fights of Rigondeaux, Lara, Ward? They actually make up a big percentage of the PPV and ticket buyers, as you know.

I drew a parallel with the music and film industry not because I see the past with rose-tinted glasses but to make a point that people seem to accept lower standards in entertainment in general. And boxing gets a touch of this tendency too.*

*Edit: that was my point.

films are better now than ever before, what are you on about?

Yes if your mental age is 14.

what films are you watching?

[Beanflicker]

That's why boxing is going to be in BIG trouble in the next few years when guys like Floyd and Manny are retired.

Boxing has become a spectacle, a cash grab. And they're not going to out-spectacle the UFC, at least not without Manny and Floyd.