De la Hoya expects Cotto v Canelo to hit 1.5 million numbers.

First topic message reminder :

It would be great to see, but I think he is reaching a little high.

I do think this fight could hit the million. I think I originally predicted 700-800k, but both guys have a good following and are on a decent run recently.

If it is a great fight like I expect it will be, then perhaps this could be a good boost for the sport next year.

I don't know whether that was aimed at Adam, me or both catchy. But golovkin's team were talking ward up as a potential opponent, and then did turn down a 50:50 purse split offer from him. They admitted this... And gave their reasons, one of which was timing, another being they didn't think ward was worth a 50:50 split.

I really like golovkin as a fighter, I don't doubt that his struggles to get decent opposition have largely been guys running scared/looking for easier options. I have no beef with him wanting to clean up middle, although I'd like to see him in with better fighters at other weights from a fan's perspective, if cotto/Alvarez don't want the fight.

Sanchez has done plenty of mouthing off on golovkin's behalf though, about weight jumping for the big names...and the bluff was called by ward on this occasion. They aren't the saints among sinners.

I have to admit I don't know the ins and outs of the Ward negotiations, Milky. Ward however is another fighter low on a boxers wish list this Christmas.

I think most of us are kind of agreeing, although I've lost the meaning of the original point I made.

I think the problem with boxing really comes down to being able to select who you face. In most sports you get told, face everyone and although it's the hardest way to the top you get your rewards. Boxing doesn't ensure you get a fair crack and I understand that. My original point was just that those that do make it 'big' (as AdamT put it) usually are the top fighters in the sport as proven by winning tough fights against other top fighters, therefore big PPV's are a relevant point of discussion... at least I think that's where I started with all this.

usually they get there in the end DH. Both golovkin and rigo were late to the pro game... with stellar amateur records... But both were relatively old without too much time on their hands to build a pro resume. Golovkin has kept active and got attention for his ko's... He now has a team really working for him.

Rigo, with a less traditionally attractive style, gets dumped on by his own promoter as being unmarketable. Tough.

Like you say... The one sport where you can choose your opponent and without one 'pinnacle' in the sport, you can always find an easier mountain to climb should you wish.

It's the number of belts and champions at each weight that's killing the ambition fighters should have to beat THE man at that weight.

DuransHorse wrote:I have to admit I don't know the ins and outs of the Ward negotiations, Milky. Ward however is another fighter low on a boxers wish list this Christmas.

I think most of us are kind of agreeing, although I've lost the meaning of the original point I made.

I think the problem with boxing really comes down to being able to select who you face. In most sports you get told, face everyone and although it's the hardest way to the top you get your rewards. Boxing doesn't ensure you get a fair crack and I understand that. My original point was just that those that do make it 'big' (as AdamT put it) usually are the top fighters in the sport as proven by winning tough fights against other top fighters, therefore big PPV's are a relevant point of discussion... at least I think that's where I started with all this.

The original point, as I understood it, that you made was there was a direct correlation between how good an boxer is and their earnings. I dont neccessarily think this is true in boxing. Fundemanetally maybe, but overall its driven by a multitude of factors.

If Saul Alvarez is from Khazakstan he probably doesnt get any of the fights he has got so far and could wind up just another fighter plying his trade. If Golovkin was Mexican or American he might be the biggest ppv star in the sport right now. Its hugely significant.

milkyboy wrote:I don't know whether that was aimed at Adam, me or both catchy. But golovkin's team were talking ward up as a potential opponent, and then did turn down a 50:50 purse split offer from him. They admitted this... And gave their reasons, one of which was timing, another being they didn't think ward was worth a 50:50 split.

I really like golovkin as a fighter, I don't doubt that his struggles to get decent opposition have largely been guys running scared/looking for easier options. I have no beef with him wanting to clean up middle, although I'd like to see him in with better fighters at other weights from a fan's perspective, if cotto/Alvarez don't want the fight.

Sanchez has done plenty of mouthing off on golovkin's behalf though, about weight jumping for the big names...and the bluff was called by ward on this occasion. They aren't the saints among sinners.

I dont believe Ward ever offered Golovkin any serious fight. When was this supposed to have happened? Ward has gone about about as conservatively as you could imagine in coming back from an extended lay off. Are we to belive that he was willing to dive straight in to a Golovkin fight when he has been looking to to fight sparring sessions? I think its a load of bollix from Ward. Just like I think that if a fight with Kovlaev was put to im next he would skip it to fight Joe Nobody. Hes full of sh1t. Kovalev has called Wards bluff on making a fight and Wards reaction has been to go into reverse gear.

Im not naive about Golovkin. His team clearly have a pecking order of guys they would like to fight. Obviously they are going to promote him as best they can. Does that mean they will go all out to fight someone like Ward at Wards weight in his hometown for shag all money instead of trying to get a fight with Cotto or Alvarez at their own weight for way more money? Of course not. They have offered fights for the most lucrative challengers available. Martinez dodged him, Chavez passed, Froch retired when these fights could have been made. So far Cotto and Alvarez dont like obliging a fight. This is not something that deserves to be held against Golovkin, but frequently is.

What you get is then leftfield accusations. Forget that Golovkin fights as a middleweight in the middleweight division but is not being considered by the biggest names in the division without some kind of crippling catchweight. Forget that he made offers to Chavez and Froch who opted out. Instead its represented that because he wouldnt fight say Ward, in a different division, on Wards terms, when Ward ahsnt really been availabe to fight. Or because say, he hasnt signed to fight Lara, who is the division below. This is must mean he doesnt want big fights, and that no one is avoiding him and that actually Golovkins plan is to fight nobodies for his whole career. This strategy will fool a few morons into thinking hes an unbeatable monster by gum, but wont ever land him any big cash fight. Makes sense.

Golovkin, like Rigondeaux is a victim of boxings messed up politics. Hes not the problem. His team have done what they can to make him marketable and to try land the biggest fights. Its been hard work and slow progress. He seems to burn some peoples ass. I think in that regard his biggest crime was to be touted as a Mayweather oppenent. Its amazing how many Mayweather fans have it in for Golovkin.

i understand all of that catchy and agree with most of it... but. Don't say you'll fight at 154 to get a big fight and then complain too much about 'canelo weight' - yes its ridiculous to have middleweights setting catchweights for the middle title. It stinks. But don't say you'll fight at 154 and then baulk at a huge money fight there.  Don't say you'll fight super middles and chuck ward's name out as an opponent and then turn down the fight when it's offered.

It's not golovkin doing this, his team are shouting out for names because stupid boxing politics means they feel they need to for publicity.

I do think golovkin would be happy to fight any of these guys at any of these weights. His team are managing his career as best they can. They have a very high risk fighter who doesn't yet bring the cash to the party that will encourage other fighters to risk having their career finished by him, so they're mouthing off a lot and getting a bit of egg on their face, when they decide that their monster actually wants to stick at middle for a while.

Of course he wants the winner of cotto, alvarez at middleweight. That's the fight he should want. Neither of those guys see themselves as middleweights though even if one has a belt. Most think GGG v the winner is unlikely to happen which is why his team have looked at higher weights and why they look no better than anyone else when they subsequently turn round and decline the fight.  Yes ward wanted a warm up first, maybe he wasn't really serious. But he made an offer and it was declined.

sanchez dictating 164:
http://www.boxingscene.com/golovkins-coach-andre-ward-go-164-no-fight--93850
loeffler admitting he was offered a fight by ward
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-3242537/Andre-Ward-slams-Gennady-Golovkin-rejecting-fight-offer.html


Now there are plenty of reasons why a ward fight wouldn't be right for golovkin right now... but then there are lots of reasons why fighting golovkin isn;t right for other fighters. The noises about ward not being a draw etc sound familiar to the reasons others have given for avoiding golovkin.

Catchy, Canelo has only one loss, to a P4P great, in almost 50 fights by age 25. He's worked hard and proven he is one of the best around. That's why he earns the big bucks and draws the big crowds. He may earn a bit more for being Mexican but unlike GGG he's been matched tougher of late and has now bagged the cotto fight. Whether GGG wants that fight or deserves it more, its Canelo thats got to beat Cotto next so he deserves the better paycheck. He is getting significantly more for fighting a more dangerous fighter, not just because he is Mexican... although that helps ice the cake. Is GGG definitely the best of the three? I'd put money on GGG to beat both but despite rehydration I class GGG as the bigger man. In general, even in boxing, there is still the blindingly obvious relationship between your ability, your fanbase and your earnings. As I've said, yes there are fluctuations and anomalies, being Mexican, heavyweight or an exciting fighter help, but the first and most important factor in money making is always: be better than your competition. GGG has not been able to prove that yet at the very top, even if it's not his own fault. On the bright side, like Calzaghe before him, his career is safer and although the paychecks may be smaller they will be steadier and more regular. Cotto and Canelo both know a one sided loss will mean serious rebuilding or end of life in the spotlight. GGG's time will probably come.

DuransHorse wrote:Catchy, Canelo has only one loss, to a P4P great, in almost 50 fights by age 25. He's worked hard and proven he is one of the best around. That's why he earns the big bucks and draws the big crowds. He may earn a bit more for being Mexican but unlike GGG he's been matched tougher of late and has now bagged the cotto fight. Whether GGG wants that fight or deserves it more, its Canelo thats got to beat Cotto next so he deserves the better paycheck. He is getting significantly more for fighting a more dangerous fighter, not just because he is Mexican... although that helps ice the cake. Is GGG definitely the best of the three? I'd put money on GGG to beat both but despite rehydration I class GGG as the bigger man. In general, even in boxing, there is still the blindingly obvious relationship between your ability, your fanbase and your earnings. As I've said, yes there are fluctuations and anomalies, being Mexican, heavyweight or an exciting fighter help, but the first and most important factor in money making is always: be better than your competition. GGG has not been able to prove that yet at the very top, even if it's not his own fault. On the bright side, like Calzaghe before him, his career is safer and although the paychecks may be smaller they will be steadier and more regular. Cotto and Canelo both know a one sided loss will mean serious rebuilding or end of life in the spotlight. GGG's time will probably come.

No I dont agree. A gigantic proportion of Alvarez marketablity comes from being a Mexican with a celebrity status. If he had the exact the same talent as he has now, but was from Khazakstan instead of Mexico then he never would have got the Mayweather or Cotto fights in the first place and would likely be in no mans land. His earnings hugely outweight his talent. Compare him to two fighters he beat by the thinnest of margins - Lara and Trout - and compare what they can expect to earn on average. The disporoportion is gigantic.

Chavez Jr is another example, Victor Ortiz - the list goes on.

milkyboy wrote:i understand all of that catchy and agree with most of it... but. Don't say you'll fight at 154 to get a big fight and then complain too much about 'canelo weight' - yes its ridiculous to have middleweights setting catchweights for the middle title. It stinks. But don't say you'll fight at 154 and then baulk at a huge money fight there.  Don't say you'll fight super middles and chuck ward's name out as an opponent and then turn down the fight when it's offered.

It's not golovkin doing this, his team are shouting out for names because stupid boxing politics means they feel they need to for publicity.

I do think golovkin would be happy to fight any of these guys at any of these weights. His team are managing his career as best they can. They have a very high risk fighter who doesn't yet bring the cash to the party that will encourage other fighters to risk having their career finished by him, so they're mouthing off a lot and getting a bit of egg on their face, when they decide that their monster actually wants to stick at middle for a while.

Of course he wants the winner of cotto, alvarez at middleweight. That's the fight he should want. Neither of those guys see themselves as middleweights though even if one has a belt. Most think GGG v the winner is unlikely to happen which is why his team have looked at higher weights and why they look no better than anyone else when they subsequently turn round and decline the fight.  Yes ward wanted a warm up first, maybe he wasn't really serious. But he made an offer and it was declined.

sanchez dictating 164:
http://www.boxingscene.com/golovkins-coach-andre-ward-go-164-no-fight--93850
loeffler admitting he was offered a fight by ward
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-3242537/Andre-Ward-slams-Gennady-Golovkin-rejecting-fight-offer.html


Now there are plenty of reasons why a ward fight wouldn't be right for golovkin right now... but then there are lots of reasons why fighting golovkin isn;t right for other fighters. The noises about ward not being a draw etc sound familiar to the reasons others have given for avoiding golovkin.

The liklihood is, that if Alvarez or Cotto did ever decide to fight him, then it will be at a catchweight. I think hes perfectly entitled to complain about that, even if he has to end up agreeing to it.

When Ward flirts with the idea of leaving California and starts chasing some big fights and decides to stop targetting sparring partners and warm ups then I will listen to him. He hasnt been available to fight for about two years (yet put his name out there for a whole host of fights) and since he has come back hes has made it pretty clear he is in no rush to fight a top name. He probably wont be while he gets paid a few million to fight nobodies.

You are right, lara and trout do earn less... because they lost. Too much 'if my aunty had balls' speculation for me, catchy.

No they earn less because they dont enjoy the same fanbase as a major reason. Alvarez makes about ten times as much as Lara per fight. He is not ten times better. Alvarez could have lost to both of them and still expected to earn more in his next fight. If Alvarez wasnt Mexican, he wouldnt be earning half of what he makes now. This direct link between earnings as ability doesnt really hold true. Two fighters of the equal ability can expect quite large differences in their earnings and opportunity from something as simple as style, weight and nationality.

Catchy's right on the above. 

He's Ignoring the inconvenient facts when they don't suit his argument re double standards from team glolovkin though.

Sanchez has said recently that their short to mid term view is cleaning up middleweight. So let's hope he shuts up and sticks to it... And that they manage to get the fights to clean up.

milkyboy wrote:Catchy's right on the above. 

He's Ignoring the inconvenient facts when they don't suit his argument re double standards from team glolovkin though.

Sanchez has said recently that their short to mid term view is cleaning up middleweight. So let's hope he shuts up and sticks to it... And that they manage to get the fights to clean up.

What are the facts being ignored and what are the double standards being applied?

When has Golovkins team issued a blanket "we will fight anyone, anywhere, any weight" statement that he gets labelled with?

For the most part, they have said their ambition has been that they want dominte middleweight, win all the tites and get the biggest middleweight fights but that if a particularly lucrative fight was availabe at another weight then they would take it. At middleweight they have tried to get the biggest fights from Martinez to Chavez to Cotto and now potentially Alvarez. The opportunity to move down in weight for a big fight has not presented itself yet. Did they say they would move down in weight to take on the Trouts and Laras? Why would they? Would they be willing to agree to a catchweight fight for Alvarez or Cotto, they will probably have to in order to make the fight happen but you would expect that they will try their best to fight for the best deal they can get, especially as the winner will be holding a "middleweight" title.

They sounded out a fight with Froch at 168 biggest it was the biggest avaliable there. He ended up retiring. For most of the last two years Ward hasnt even been available as an opponent. Yet from his position of inactivity, he has managed to sound off about virtually any fighter that has got a bit of publicity. He claimed he offered fights to Golovkin, Froch, Groves, Kovalev anytime they get some attention and acts surprised when a fighter that isnt willing to travel and is wrapped up legal problems doesnt magically get these fights. Cynically, you might be tempted think these offers from the sidelines were attempts at self promotion rather than serious offers while he was in the business of suing his own promoter. Since he has come back, nothing he has done has suggested he was ever willing to go straight back into a big fight. He is targetting sparring partners and signed a deal that allows him three easy fights before he might have to face Kovalev (who he is on record as saying he is in no rush to fight). Would Ward be top of Golovkins team list - no and I dont think they would ever claim he was. It was put to Golovkins team about Degale recently and they were pretty candid in saying that its a good fight but right now takes second priority between trying to land the winner of Cotto and Alvarez who they are no mandatory for and finally have some leverage with.

Ok, you don't think they've been selling him as this fearsome monster that will take on anyone at or remotely near his weight, because no-one at his weight of any substance will fight him. Fine, I can't be bothered to trawl through and find the quotes. I give you an example of them changing their tune and declining a fight with the world's best super middle and you don't think that's relevant. The ward offer was made after the smith fight, so the two year out stuff contractual stuff you talk about is irrelevant. As I said earlier, the suggestion was they took a warm up each, so he wasn't proposing diving straight in.

I don't like ward, he's smug and he's chucked away the prime of his career. I do like golovkin, I think he'd fight all these guys, but his team have said some stuff and then been called on it. He'd go to 168 for froch and Chavez, we believe but only 164 for ward, and he wouldn't pay enough, wants too much money etc. Sure Chavez and froch would be more money for probably easier nights. We all get its a business. The same business that stops others from wanting a spanking from golovkin without more money on the table.

He's a middle he's entitled to stay there and fight the middles who'll fight him. But his team have mouthed off to the contrary to get publicity or, if we're being generous, maybe as fall back fights should he not get the golden goose of cotto/Alvarez.

Not really no. Most of the labelling has been done by fans on the back of the what is has been going on in the middleweight division. Hes been avoided by the biggest names there because he is the best middleweight. I think its a bit of a myth that his team have been circumventing standard business in boxing in an effort to push him as a fighter that will fight "anyone, anywhere". They have been much more candid than that about what their priorities are. I have read plenty of interviews with his promoter and its nothing to do with "we will fight anyone, anywhere and nobody wants to fight us". Its far more pragmatic than that and its constantly adapting to the whats happening in front of them.

Ward : "I went over to Golovkin's manager and said what's this crap about me ducking....He put his head down and started to look at his feet"..

I think anybody who fights GGG should insist on testing every week..

Athletics scandal is shocking....We've all seen Rocky 4.

I think we should be holding fighters up to the same standard. Ward gets a mauling for refusing to move weights and asking opponents to do the travelling, still gets a mauling when he reveals he offered GGG the bout but GGG turned it down after claiming h'ed take on anyone anywhere.

Was on the GGG bandwagon but it's things like this that turn me off certain boxers

It's not about being 10 x better than Lara. Bolt isn't 10 x faster than his rival's either. It's about winning first and foremost. I've already agreed other factors count and add to fanbase but if Canelo had lost to trout and Lara the tables would have turned. We all wanted Lara in some big fights a while back. The thing that holds fighters earnings back unfairly is not having a right to certain fights as they can be avoided.

Don't agree with me fine. But don't say he earns 10 x more but isn't 10 x better as an example of being due to nationality.

DuransHorse wrote:It's not about being 10 x better than Lara. Bolt isn't 10 x faster than his rival's either. It's about winning first and foremost. I've already agreed other factors count and add to fanbase but if Canelo had lost to trout and Lara the tables would have turned. We all wanted Lara in some big fights a while back. The thing that holds fighters earnings back unfairly is not having a right to certain fights as they can be avoided.

Don't agree with me fine.  But don't say he earns 10 x more but isn't 10 x better as an example of being due to nationality.

He could have lost to Lara or Trout and would still earn more. He earns more than them because of his fanbase and where he is from first and foremost. He always has and always will.

Hypothetically speaking, are we saying your better being a pretty good Mexican boxer than a brilliant one from an obscure country? I'd take the latter personally but each to their own.

The point about being better, at elite even only marginally, means that 'could've lost to Lara or Trout' is irrelevant because he didn't. He's now ranked higher. I openly acknowledge being Mexican sells, but you still need to get the fundamentals right first and win or your stock falls. I can't work out why that's debatable?

Your original point was not you need to win or your stock falls. It was there is direct relationship between popularity/earnings and being good at what ever it is you do or sell.

Its not really the case for boxing. Because there is are several other major factors which have significant implications on earnings.

If your point was you can expect to earn more from winning than from losing I wouldnt argue it. But that wasnt the point being argued.

If Lara had beaten Alvarez and they had both go on to fight the same fighter in their next fight, Alvarez would still expect to make more than Lara. You dont think this is relevant because its hypothetical, even though its undeniebly true.

An actual example might be Rigondeaux beating Donaire and going on to earn less per fight. Or Chavez losing to Fonfara. Who do you think can expect to earn more?

Catchy, there is a relationship. In boxing the aim is to win and it's the clearest measure of how good you are and the overall product you sell. Keep winning and the fans and earning rise, lose and your stock falls. Yes, other factors come into play but that's what you build around. If forces recognition, bigger fights and bigger paydays. It's not a set rule but it's the rule at the Base of any boxers earnings. Canelo loses to Floyd, Trout and Lara and his signifance and ability to demand big fights and pay is significantly reduced.

I'm not really arguing with you, catchy. Just stressing that even in boxing, as a general rule ( not necessarily a strict rule ) big PPVs do reflect the quality of the boxers on show.

I wouldnt argue that losing will hurt a fighters earnings. Im arguing that when you look at top level boxing as a whole, there is not neccessarily a direct link between how good a fighter is and what they can stand to make. Sometimes there is, in many cases there isnt.

If Alvarez had lost Lara, he could go on to fight a perenial contender like Ishe Smith and would still get paid more than Lara would for taking on Ishe Smith. Even if he lost to Mayweather, Trout and Lara he would still generally earn more than Lara as long as he was able to bag routine wins in between.

Chavez lost to Fonfara and can still expect to make more than him per fight.

Rigondeaux is probably the quintessential example of a a top boxer who keeps on winning but earns less than inferior fighters on grounds of lack of marketability.

Big ppvs (what counts as big?) might normally expect to involve premier fighters. But that doesnt mean there arent a number of similarly quality fighters that cant carry a ppv despite being as talented as guys that can. In the case of Cotto v Alvarez, I would say the overwhelming factor driving this as a big ppv is the respective partisan fanbases. They could have identical records and talent but from be Poland and Ukraine and the fight probably wouldnt make ppv at all. Off the top of my head, I can think of Ward v Dawson which at the time was a bout between the recognised Super Middleweight and Light heavyweight champion. It didnt even make ppv as far as I can remember.

I think we arguing different points at this stage. I took your original point of direct link between being good and earnings to mean the better the fighter, the more he will earn. I dont think this holds true as a general rule in boxing as there are too many other factors that come into consideration.

catchweight wrote:I wouldnt argue that losing will hurt a fighters earnings. Im arguing that when you look at top level boxing as a whole, there is not neccessarily a direct link between how good a fighter is and what they can stand to make. Sometimes there is, in many cases there isnt.

If Alvarez had lost Lara, he could go on to fight a perenial contender like Ishe Smith and would still get paid more than Lara would for taking on Ishe Smith. Even if he lost to Mayweather, Trout and Lara he would still generally earn more than Lara as long as he was able to bag routine wins in between.

Chavez lost to Fonfara and can still expect to make more than him per fight.

Rigondeaux is probably the quintessential example of a a top boxer who keeps on winning but earns less than inferior fighters on grounds of lack of marketability.

Big ppvs (what counts as big?) might normally expect to involve premier fighters. But that doesnt mean there arent a number of similarly quality fighters that cant carry a ppv despite being as talented as guys that can. In the case of Cotto v Alvarez, I would say the overwhelming factor driving this as a big ppv is the respective partisan fanbases. They could have identical records and talent but from be Poland and Ukraine and the fight probably wouldnt make ppv at all. Off the top of my head, I can think of Ward v Dawson which at the time was a bout between the recognised Super Middleweight and Light heavyweight champion. It didnt even make ppv as far as I can remember.

I think we arguing different points at this stage. I took your original point of direct link between being good and earnings to mean the better the fighter, the more he will earn. I dont think this holds true as a general rule in boxing as there are too many other factors that come into consideration.

Great points. Chavez is a great example.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Ward : "I went over to Golovkin's manager and said what's this crap about me ducking....He put his head down and started to look at his feet"..

I think anybody who fights GGG should insist on testing every week..

Athletics scandal is shocking....We've all seen Rocky 4.

I was shocked watching Rocky 4. How one fighter could be filmed injecting (after killing a former great) is beyond me. A stark lesson for us all Rocky 4.

catchweight wrote:I wouldnt argue that losing will hurt a fighters earnings. Im arguing that when you look at top level boxing as a whole, there is not neccessarily a direct link between how good a fighter is and what they can stand to make. Sometimes there is, in many cases there isnt.

If Alvarez had lost Lara, he could go on to fight a perenial contender like Ishe Smith and would still get paid more than Lara would for taking on Ishe Smith. Even if he lost to Mayweather, Trout and Lara he would still generally earn more than Lara as long as he was able to bag routine wins in between.

Chavez lost to Fonfara and can still expect to make more than him per fight.

Rigondeaux is probably the quintessential example of a a top boxer who keeps on winning but earns less than inferior fighters on grounds of lack of marketability.

Big ppvs (what counts as big?) might normally expect to involve premier fighters. But that doesnt mean there arent a number of similarly quality fighters that cant carry a ppv despite being as talented as guys that can. In the case of Cotto v Alvarez, I would say the overwhelming factor driving this as a big ppv is the respective partisan fanbases. They could have identical records and talent but from be Poland and Ukraine and the fight probably wouldnt make ppv at all. Off the top of my head, I can think of Ward v Dawson which at the time was a bout between the recognised Super Middleweight and Light heavyweight champion. It didnt even make ppv as far as I can remember.

I think we arguing different points at this stage. I took your original point of direct link between being good and earnings to mean the better the fighter, the more he will earn. I dont think this holds true as a general rule in boxing as there are too many other factors that come into consideration.

I would agree with you on Rigo as an example of the case you are making, Catchy. However, Rigo is an anomaly as he strated his career late, got serious public interest and excitemnt at first and is now recognised as a fighter that can't get the fights/is avoided, which is the point I was making that is most unfair on PPV and earning potential. A boxer has a responsibility to market their product and I class this as part of their overall package. Floyd made his whole career about being the very very best and unbeatable, but people mistake his appeal as a flashy 'money team' figure of hate. This is wrong, that was part of it but it was the whole 'X number have tried and failed, there is no way to crack the code' unbeatable angle that lay at the heart of his success. He sold himself brilliantly... but off the back of win, win, win, win, win.... even though many people say he's boring. Add even a couple of loses and his fan base and earnings shrink massively. OK, you will always find good fighters that don't sell and lesser fighters that do, but more often than not if you're that good AND can get the fights the public demand you will be a success and your PPV figures will reflect that.

I think the waters are getting muddied on this one. My only argument was against the point there is a direct relationship between being good and earnings in boxing. I took that to mean simply that the better the fighter, the more he will make. I dont really think it always works out this way as a general rule (countless exceptions out there).

I think a more accurate genral rule is that the is a direct relationship between a fighters marketability and their earnings. Marketability is made up of many factors. Being good is obviously one, but simply having a big fan base can more than make up for that.

Anyhow, it look like from you replies that you are including various other factors in there, which is all I was really getting at.

catchweight wrote:I think the waters are getting muddied on this one. My only argument was against the point there is a direct relationship between being good and earnings in boxing. I took that to mean simply that the better the fighter, the more he will make. I dont really think it always works out this way as a general rule (countless exceptions out there).

I think a more accurate genral rule is that the is a direct relationship between a fighters marketability and their earnings. Marketability is made up of many factors. Being good is obviously one, but simply having a big fan base can more than make up for that.

Anyhow, it look like from you replies that you are including various other factors in there, which is all I was really getting at.

Definitely. I think at one point my original reply was to a comment to Haz querying why PPV was relevant. I wrote 'although it's not an exact science there does tend to be a direct relationship between popularity/earnings and being good at whatever it is you do or sell’. It was meant to mean you don't tend to get particularly big PPV's in boxing unless you have caught attention from winning/being good. I had no idea that was a controversial comment but I've now written more posts/replies on this topic than any other.

Rigo and Chavez are two very prominent examples of how you can be special and earn far less than a guy of way inferior ability trading of his name.