Boxing Fans: The most hypocritical of the lot.

Evening fellow 606v2 users:

There have been many issues which have cropped up in boxing lately that have got me thinking about our views as boxing fans and whether we as 'sports fans' are more hypocritical than most.

Now of course most of us follow a number of different sports, however when we have our 'boxing hat' on are we more hypocritical?

Case in point Ricky Hatton and his recent announcement of his return to the boxing ring. Now we all have our views on whether his decision to comeback is right or not....but is it for us to condemn him for doing so?

In many articles and topics posted with regards to the matter I have seen plenty of people talk of how Ricky should not come back and by doing so he is risking his health. Now of course whilst it is nice for people to be thinking about it do we have the right to use it as a reason for him not returning? After all he is a boxer and regardless of when he steps between the ropes his health is always at risk.

If we were all completely honest then I would bet a fair wad of money that come November 24th most people on this board will be tuning in to see his return. Some will be those who claimed that Ricky is stupid for risking his health....yet ultimately people will still watch the fight and to a large degree take satisfaction out of it. If we were that concerned about his health is it right for us to do so?

There are plenty more examples of our hypocrisy as fans also:

The old argument as to whether a fighters legacy is hurt when their opponents are not fighting in their natural weight class.

A prime example of this is of course Manny Pacquiao...his victories over the likes of De La Hoya & Cotto are, by some, tainted because they were at catchweights (or had some weight stipulation tied to them).

Two weeks ago Andre Ward beat Chad Dawson at Super Middleweight...a division Chad had not fought at for 7 years. Now whilst some raised the issue as to whether that version was too drained/uncomfortable at the weight the general consensus was that at the end of the day Chad agreed to the weight class and was more than comfortable fighting their...

However surely that is consensus should then be the same for any of Pacmans opponents or for that matter any other fighters who have faced the same allegations...once a fight is made then one has to think that whatever weight class it has been agreed to take place at, both fighters are happy with. If they weren't then the fight would not have taken place..

Drug tests -

Another issue and one which is gradually coming to the forefront of the boxing world is failed drugs test. Last year saw three high profile cases in Lamont Peterson, Andre Berto & Antonio Tarver. All 3 pleaded their innocence with various excuses. However the fact of the matter is that they failed a test and as professionals should have either been more careful (if indeed it was a case of contamination) or indeed more honest (Peterson with the boxing authorities).

Now following these failed drug tests boxing fans almost universally condemned such actions...with various views on how they should be handled. Some people will believe that they should never step into the ring again (I'm in that category)..others may believe that they should serve a lengthy ban and then be given a 2nd chance. Regardless of the view...only a few months later hypocrisy is shown.

This board has seen many posts on Amir Khan since his defeat to Garcia...somewhere amongst them the topic of his next fight invariable rears its head. Now if we go back and look through you will find people talking about either exacting revenge or simply use Petersons name and say they should rematch...

So we believe that boxers should be banned yet are more than happy to band about their name when discussing potential opponents for fighters...that doesn't make sense to me.

Of course you could argue that it is merely a discussion, which it is, but by even bringing their names to forefront aren't we merely saying that we would be happy to give these boxers who have failed tests another chance?

Some might say, well if the authorities will allow them back then what are we to do...but we as fans can make the difference. We could not give any attention to them...we could not clamour to see them back in the ring. If boxing fans stuck to their guns and refused to watch them in action then the simple fact of the matter is companies would not make money from them and would therefore not show them.

Im sure there are other instances of hypocrisy as well Race, Boxing Politics, etc ....Can you think of any?

I know that I myself have been hypocritical at some point but why is it do you think it occurs more so in boxing...or do you even think/agree that it does?

What are some of the worst cases you can cast your mind back to?

Look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Agree but Cotto had the catch weight forced on him. Either you make 145 or the Pacquiao fights for the vacant title.

What were the weight stipulations for the de la Hoya/Pacquiao fight? Ive never been able to find any evience that it was anything other than a contracted welterweight fight but I repeatedly see it reffered to as having weight stipulations.

Manos - Same here to be honest pal. I'm not sure there were any...think people just assumed it was given how drained De La Hoya seemed to be.

The examples given were just that really...to show where we as fans can tend to be hypocritical. We express our views yet in this sport especially it seems to change as and when we see fit...or we just don't show the kind of actions that we should given certain views.

Well yeah, I would pretty much agree. But still wouldnt rate it as bad as the often mind numbing hypocrisy displayed by various football fans week in week out blaming a dive here or a ref there only to change their tune when it goes the other way a week later. Chelsea fans blaming Gerrard for Englnds poorness, Liverpool fans blaming Lampard, Everyone else blaming both....

You only just catching onto this Ozzy?

I think we are very hypocritical as fight fans and also very revisionist (great article btw). Fighters get dismissed b4 fights and then their achievements belittled whent hey pull of upsets. Numerous cases in point here. People downgrading Froch win over Bute when literally no one gave him a chance. Infuriates me this sort of thing. Boxing seems to bring a level of bravado with it like no other sport, and stuborness

Cheers Sean...

Agreed, I think that is probably the area in which fans hypocrisy is shown up the most.

Alex & Manos -

It's not a case of me only just catching onto, more so that I think that it has shown up a lot more recently and on issues which are a little more serious.

As you rightly point out Manos it occurs on a weekly basis in the Premiership but for me I wonder whether we can afford to be critical in a sport where people's lives/health are on the line. The example of drugs being a prime example...

It is all well and good being slightly hypocritical on minor issues but to do so on an issue such as failed drugs tests leaves a bad taste in my mouth because to a certain degree our hypocrisy actually allows people back into the ring when they have no right being there.

Many people will feel the likes of Peterson, Berto should never step foot in the ring again....but they will. Of course part of that is because of promoters but as I alluded to we could stop it by simply not paying to watch it...be it live or be it on TV.

Chavez is a great example. Plenty of people fear he is on PED's of some kind and have expressed their serious concern for opponents. Yet I guarantee almost all of us tuned in in some manner to watch the fight...regardless of whether it was to see him lose or not. We helped a bloke we feel shouldn't be in the ring get a payday..

Chavez is a great example. Plenty of people fear he is on PED's of some kind and have expressed their serious concern for opponents. Yet I guarantee almost all of us tuned in in some manner to watch the fight...regardless of whether it was to see him lose or not. We helped a bloke we feel shouldn't be in the ring get a payday..

__________________________________________________

Agreed. I am absolutley convinced he is on PED's and I still watched, albeit I was hoping to see him ge hammered.


One are I won't bend, or haven't yet, is I have stopped paying for TR cards. Didn't buy this one on Saturday gone in the end, just can't stand Arum

manos de piedra wrote:What were the weight stipulations for the de la Hoya/Pacquiao fight? Ive never been able to find any evience that it was anything other than a contracted welterweight fight but I repeatedly see it reffered to as having weight stipulations.

The issue relating to the ODLH v Pacman fight, was that Oscar's ring weight had to be 147lbs, the weight in was before the fight rather than 24 hours before hand. As such there was no time to rehydrate.

Roach said when at the start of the fight he seen needle marks on Oscars arms, figured they tried to rehydrate him in the chaning rooms via a drip, and knew that he was fooked.

Oscar was a wilting flower that night. No question, but his fault. He was biggest draw in boxing, why did he agree to that?

I don't see the argument of Junior being on PEDs. It simply doesn't make sense. Perhaps diuretics to lose weight. Steroids make you gain weight and he needs to boil down to make weight. Doesn't add up.

azania wrote:I don't see the argument of Junior being on PEDs. It simply doesn't make sense. Perhaps diuretics to lose weight. Steroids make you gain weight and he needs to boil down to make weight. Doesn't add up.

Oh that's ok then.

Seanusarrilius wrote:

azania wrote:I don't see the argument of Junior being on PEDs. It simply doesn't make sense. Perhaps diuretics to lose weight. Steroids make you gain weight and he needs to boil down to make weight. Doesn't add up.

Oh that's ok then.

azania wrote:

Seanusarrilius wrote:

azania wrote:I don't see the argument of Junior being on PEDs. It simply doesn't make sense. Perhaps diuretics to lose weight. Steroids make you gain weight and he needs to boil down to make weight. Doesn't add up.

Oh that's ok then.

I just don't want to engage Az. we have debated this numerous times

I don't recall that I have but no worries.

jimdig wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:What were the weight stipulations for the de la Hoya/Pacquiao fight? Ive never been able to find any evience that it was anything other than a contracted welterweight fight but I repeatedly see it reffered to as having weight stipulations.

The issue relating to the ODLH v Pacman fight, was that Oscar's ring weight had to be 147lbs, the weight in was before the fight rather than 24 hours before hand. As such there was no time to rehydrate.

Roach said when at the start of the fight he seen needle marks on Oscars arms, figured they tried to rehydrate him in the chaning rooms via a drip, and knew that he was fooked.

The weigh in was the day before the fight. On a Friday. The fight was on the Saturday. As far as I now and what I can find, Oscar was going to be fined heavily for every pound he came in over the welterweight limit, which is standard enough practice. But as for having to weigh a certain amount or not being allowed rehydrate? Where does it say this? Is there any link out there? Id be interested to read it. Ive read interviews with de la Hoya himself and he blames himself for not bringing his weight down gradually and having to cut too much too soon. Ive never seen him say he was forced to fight at a certain weight. It was Oscar who wanted the fight at 147 in the first place. Ive always thought Oscar just botched making weight.

manos de piedra wrote:

jimdig wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:What were the weight stipulations for the de la Hoya/Pacquiao fight? Ive never been able to find any evience that it was anything other than a contracted welterweight fight but I repeatedly see it reffered to as having weight stipulations.

The issue relating to the ODLH v Pacman fight, was that Oscar's ring weight had to be 147lbs, the weight in was before the fight rather than 24 hours before hand. As such there was no time to rehydrate.

Roach said when at the start of the fight he seen needle marks on Oscars arms, figured they tried to rehydrate him in the chaning rooms via a drip, and knew that he was fooked.

The weigh in was the day before the fight. On a Friday. The fight was on the Saturday. As far as I now and what I can find, Oscar was going to be fined heavily for every pound he came in over the welterweight limit, which is standard enough practice. But as for having to weigh a certain amount or not being allowed rehydrate? Where does it say this? Is there any link out there? Id be interested to read it. Ive read interviews with de la Hoya himself and he blames himself for not bringing his weight down gradually and having to cut too much too soon. Ive never seen him say he was forced to fight at a certain weight. It was Oscar who wanted the fight at 147 in the first place. Ive always thought Oscar just botched making weight.

I don't have a source reference I'm afraid. Its just my memory of what happened at the time. There was definitely a stipulation about oscars ring weight being no more than 147lb, by proxy meaning he couldn't rehydrate.
But yes you are correct that it was all driven by oscar, at the time he was trying to make a fight that was deemed a mismatch palatable.
You'll probably get all the details in HBO 24 / 7.

I remember watching the 24/7 at the time and it didnt register obviously at the time then. I just find it strange that I cant find any sort of evidence of it. All I can find in the build up is that Oscar was going to face huge fines if he came in over the agreed 147 limit for the weigh in. This may explain why he came in so light but I dont see anything that said he could not rehydrate as normal if he wanted.

Yes we are allowed to proffer an opinion....

why is it hypocritical of us to use health reasons.....he's always took plenty of punishment and as he's older... and his skills were receding anyway...

Then it's right to be worried...

and he should be grateful people care...