being put off boxing

I am being put off boxing by the constant scaadal and politics which surrounds the sport. I have watched the sport since I was five and I feel it is at an all time low in public perception at least. Is anybody else being put off boxing by current events?

It annoys me but i'll still watch all the big fights and the fights I think will be entertaining.

Scandal seems to hit many sports i.e. cycling, cricket, footy (Italian scandals) and seems to survive it just gets embarrassing!

Terrestrial TV and in-turn the public wandered away from boxing before the recent scandals, however this just doesn't help matters.

but football and cricket have stable seasons which allow them tv exposure and tv companies naturally want those sort of sports instead of boxing because there is a lot less risk involved in broadcasting those sports, and wwhat with sky seemingly wanting to pull out of the sport i feel the sport is heading down a dark path

Not put off but very saddened my friend.

davidemore wrote:Not put off but very saddened my friend.

Yes and it has to be said these sanctioning bodies are making matters worse

I think my frustration with the sport is there appears to be no inclination at the top of the game to do anything to address the issues. The governing bodies seem more interested in introducing more belts rather than reducing the number and the major promoters seem more unwilling than ever to work with each other. It is hard to be optimistic about the future of the sport without those who could influence things being willing to acknowledge there is a problem to be addressed.

spot on rowley

wheelchair1991 wrote:

davidemore wrote:Not put off but very saddened my friend.

Yes and it has to be said these sanctioning bodies are making matters worse

I doubt we'll ever fix the problem of the sanctioning bodies, look at the national sanctioning body for instance, the BBBC.

The BBBC runs boxing in Britain, and for the most part they do a good job. But people are quite happy to see them undermined and made to look foolish just so that they can see a Haye v Chisora fight.

That saddens me.

the haye chisora debarcle has been degrading and disgusting for the sport

the terrible judging decisions, the bribes, certain people being too powerful, the sanctioning bodies, the drugs, people not fighting who they should be - they have always been about but recently they appear to be happening all at once.

its a sad time for the sport and the man on the street is becoming less and less bothered about it.

I think there is two sides of the coin. The actualy structure of the sport with the sanctioning bodies and lack of real regulation is in a horrible state and I would echo rowleys comments that from a fans perspective its really frustrating not seeing these issues even attempted at being addressed.

But the plus side is I think good fights are actual being made quite regularly and even moreso, boxing is so accessible nowadays. Youtube, streaming, the internet and even subscription channels mean that I can watch more boxing now than ever before. And if I miss a fight live, I can usually watch it with in a day or two either by recording or checking it out online. This is a big improvement even on the 80s and 90s but I can only imagine what it was like back in the 40s/50s with very limited television exposure and boxing fans having to make do with radio or newspaper reports the day after for the most part.

I think there is a tendancy to overplay the scandals a bit. Its not that they arent ugly for the sport, but its just the fact that theyve always been there so I dont think its anything new in that regard.

I second what rowley said above but towards manos de piedra I don't think technological advancements over the years can detract from the fact that boxing is on the decline. The fact that you have the ability to see a fight the day after if you missed it doesn't make up for the state it is currently in IMO.

Week in/Week out we are hearing about dodgy judge scores, another belt being introduced to the game, boxers testing positive for illegal substances, fights not getting made etc.

Manos, I agree watching a fight on a computer does make boxing more accessible to those with the inclination. But the problem lies with sitting in your house on a Sunday morning, with a laptop on your knee, while you're taking a dump not being a social sporting event.

Problem is that these things have always happened for one reason or another - race,money, fear and when a golden period crops up again these things will seem much less brazen. The lifelong fans will always remember but for the most part people tend to forget in happier times that these things happened all throughout the history of the sport. Foreman ducked Shavers - even though It would probably be an easy win - he even said it himself. Don King screwed 101 fighters out of their money and cornered the market by allowing his fighters to go on binges and drugs and women. Fixes, dives, handwraps - judge tampering, judge incompetence, referee incompetence. I think they are in the glare alot more now which accounts for the perception that boxing has gone TOO corrupt, when its just as corrupt as it ever was. Find myself agreeing with both Rowley and Manos - the belts and sanctioning bodies are a releatively recent phenomenon and that those at the top are falling over to take advantage is disheatertening but there is nothing (barring this) that hasn't ever happened before.

wheelchair1991 wrote:the haye chisora debarcle has been degrading and disgusting for the sport

Agree 100%. However, in the fights "defence", it will lift non boxing fans off their seats to watch it.


A classic grudge match between two British fighters who were all over the national papers after a fist fight in Munich.


For the general public, this match is a MUST!


Especially if they are fans of Big Brother!


I for one will be watching.


It is undermiming, it is dispicible and it is not a legitimate fight in terms of how the got there. But the point is bringing fans back to the sport, and i think Frank Warren may put a few bums on the seats.


And of course money in his greedy ass pocket!

TheMackemMawler wrote:Manos, I agree watching a fight on a computer does make boxing more accessible to those with the inclination. But the problem lies with sitting in your house on a Sunday morning, with a laptop on your knee, while you're taking a dump not being a social sporting event.

You can watch it on youtube a day or two after at a time that suits you.

Since the internet has become mainstream the amount of boxing Ive been able to watch has gone up massively. Not just current fights, but stretching back to times before I even watched boxing. I definately think its far superior to the days where it was just the odd big fight on tv plus highlights on the odd show.

TheMackemMawler wrote:Manos, I agree watching a fight on a computer does make boxing more accessible to those with the inclination. But the problem lies with sitting in your house on a Sunday morning, with a laptop on your knee, while you're taking a dump not being a social sporting event.

you could invite some friends round... take a dump together... sell some tickets.... that would make an event of it.

I don't love the sport like i once did, but then i love football far less than i used to. I suspect with me it's old age rather than the scandals... they've always been there.

Without a single world governing body, offical rankings, enforced mandatory match-ups etc its impossible to have a definitive champion like pretty much every other sport has. given the physicality of the sport and the infrequency of competition associated with it, what i have descibed would be nigh on impossible to facilitate regardless. So we are left with individual promoters marketing their own product anyway they can to get bums on seats, which means protecting their fighters and 'buying' belts.

But hey, we still get the odd good match up, that gets the blood up.

SharkSoul wrote:
I second what rowley said above but towards manos de piedra I don't think technological advancements over the years can detract from the fact that boxing is on the decline. The fact that you have the ability to see a fight the day after if you missed it doesn't make up for the state it is currently in IMO.

Week in/Week out we are hearing about dodgy judge scores, another belt being introduced to the game, boxers testing positive for illegal substances, fights not getting made etc.

I would agree that the sport has become marginalised pretty badly.

But, out of curiosity when did you start following boxing? I dont think sport has ever really been in proper "state". Its always struggled with regulation, race issues, politics, bad decisions, corruption and everything else going back over 100 years. Just because there was one belt back in those days didnt really mean the sport was clean. Its always struggled with its demons.

Not sure I agree with all of that, SharkSoul.

The ridiculous proliferation of belts, yes, I agree there one hundred percent. Silver, Diamond, Regular Champion, Super Champion....Turns my stomach.

However, dodgy scores are no more common these days than in any other era, really. Some of the shenanigans taking place in the four-city stronghold (New York, Chicago, Detroit and Philadelphia) of Owney Madden, Jim Norris and, later on, the IBC (the likes of Frankie Carbo under their wing) from the late thirties to the early sixties make some of today's unusual results look insignificant in comparison. For anyone interested, I thought that Kevin Mitchell's 'Jacobs Beach' was a really good read on this subject. The Kefauver investigation revealed a sport in far worse fettle than the one we currently have, at least where blatant larceny and stitch ups are concerned.

Again, big fights not being made is nothing new; I remember Scott, when he was still here, posting a couple of old articles from the 'Ring' Magazine (I believe they were from the early or mid eighties?) stating the ten fights they hoped to see in the upcoming twelve months. From memory, I believe only around a third (or certainly no more than half) of these fights came to fruition.

In fact, as Manos has already said, I think we do tend to get most of the big fights we'd like. If we don't, then I don't think it's with any more regularity than a lot of other eras.

Drugs, again I agree partially - however, I'm of the opinion that performance enhancers have probably been a problem in boxing for decades now, but that, as the old saying goes, the chemists are usually a step or two ahead of the testers. Even track & field, a sport with much more stringent testing routines than boxing, were unable to catch but a few of many, many offenders in the eighties and early nineties which have only just come to light.

Too many belts and the performance enhancers issue are the two biggest issues right now, I believe, along with PPV, a concept which I truly detest. However, as Rowley says, boxing fans have almost always had a host of problems to contend with - it's the fact that so little seems to be done to correct these problems which is the real annoyance.

Manos - I've only followed it for about 15 years or so I am still in my infancy of being a boxing fanboy per see. Although I've only followed it for a short period of time I have a basic understanding of 'yesteryear' and I'm fully aware of the crooks and the corruption dating back to the 30's and 40's.

Maybe it is just the frequency recently which has me worried more than anything else. On the flipside of it then, if it has always struggled with said 'atrocities' then in a way it could be viewed as a good thing that they're becoming more of a talking point and recognised by many as the problems with the sport.

When I think about the drug abuse, it's always been there so maybe it should be viewed in a positive light that 'said' culprits are getting found out. I guess I would just prefer a more hardened stance by all those that 'love' the sport and are in a position to do something about it.

Anything is an improvement on the colour line which used to be in place, no level of cheating, corruption, failed drugs or loaded gloves come close to comparing to that single disgrace.

SharkSoul wrote:
Manos - I've only followed it for about 15 years or so I am still in my infancy of being a boxing fanboy per see. Although I've only followed it for a short period of time I have a basic understanding of 'yesteryear' and I'm fully aware of the crooks and the corruption dating back to the 30's and 40's.

Maybe it is just the frequency recently which has me worried more than anything else. On the flipside of it then, if it has always struggled with said 'atrocities' then in a way it could be viewed as a good thing that they're becoming more of a talking point and recognised by many as the problems with the sport.

When I think about the drug abuse, it's always been there so maybe it should be viewed in a positive light that 'said' culprits are getting found out. I guess I would just prefer a more hardened stance by all those that 'love' the sport and are in a position to do something about it.

I more or less agree. I think the sport desperately needs a global governing body to tackle and erradicate the problems.

My only side point would be that basically boxing has almost always had terrible afflictions plaguing it, and while now the sport has become more marginalised, I dont think the problems are knew by any means. Nowadays people will talk of guys like Paul Williams or Erislady Lara being avoided fighters but going way back there have been some really excellent fighters that were frozen out completely either due to race or politics. And this was at a time when boxing was in its golden age.

The multi-belt system is a joke these days (titles are almost meaningless) but not being able to fight for a title because you are black or not a favourite with the suits running the promotions, or fixed fights being commonplace meant that the one belt system still came at a pretty heavy price.