State of boxing - is it really so bad?

It is widely postulated that we live in a barren time for boxing - with a large jump between the class of the elite - the Mayweathers, Pacquiaos and Martinez' and the rest. And that once these 3 aging supermen hang up their cloaks, there will be little left and the sport will subside into a cloaca of indifferent matchups, alphabelts and poorly conditioned, poorly skilled heavyweights winning the crown that Louis, Ali and Marciano once wore with pride.

Yet, are things all that bad?

If we just look at the number 1 in each division and their nearest challengers - how bad are things now?

HW - Wladimir Klitschko; with Vitali, Adamek, Helenius, Haye, Chambers around him.
CW - No champion; but Cunningham, Tarver, Huck, Lebedev, Palacios and Hernandez competing
LHW - Hoppo; with Pascal, Dawson, Cloud, Cleverly and Shumenov in the mix
SMW - No champion; but Ward, Froch, Kessler and Bute all competing
MW - Sergio Gabriel Martinez; Sturm, Geale and Pirog behind
LMW - No champion; Cotto, Alvarez, Bundrage, Williams all in the mix
WW - No champion; Floyd, Manny, Ortiz
LWW - No champion; Manny, Khan, Bradley, Maidana, Alexander, Judah
LW - JMM; but Guerrero, Rios, Vasquez and Katsidis
SFW - No champion; Burns, Broner, Fana, Uchiyama
FW - No champion; Gamboa, Salido, Juanma, John
SBW - No champion; Arce, Ramos, Montiel
BW - Donaire; Agbeko, Darchinyan and Moreno behind.

I'm not going to pretend my knowledge of divisional depth stretches much below bantamweight.

I have decided that "champion" is defined as a guy who would be a clear and definite favourite in >95% of minds to beat at least the top 4 contenders. And by favourite, I am referring to the extent that coxy would bet his house on the outcome.

I am arguable being generous in that Wlad wouldn't be the favourite in 95% of minds to beat Vitali - but given that Vitali has refused to fight Wlad - he has ruled himself out of "contender" status, ergo Wlad remains champion

Discussion

First thing that is easily visible from this table - is that MW and WW are astonishingly weak divisions. Setting aside the golden fighters at the top there's a lot of brass occupying the divisional ratings beneath.

Second thing is - there are a lot of reasonable and exciting fighters out there. This is also good.

Down to issues - there are so many divisions without a clear number 1. This, in my opinion, is the major issue affecting boxing today.

There is an attitude that once you win a fight once, there is no need for a rematch until the other guy proves the first result was an aberration. If that were the case - Burley would have beaten Holman Williams 1 or 2 nil in the record books. As it stands, the fights were exciting, they provided paydays and even though they weren't always particularly close - Williams was allowed the chance to close out the record books even with Burley. Because fighters aren't allowed to drop fights due to no guarantee of a rematch - we have far to many weak fights and not enough strong ones. Take Bundrage. He's just beaten Sechew Powell. He should be screaming for the Cottos, the Alvarez, Williams or the Margarito's of this world - if he is the LMW number 2. Cunningham should be calling out AND fighting Tarver, Afolabi, Palacios rather than just occasionally mentioning Huck.

Conclusions

Alphabelts are meaningless - but we all knew that anyway.
If the divisional leading fighters were to meet more often - boxing would be the number 1 spectator sport on the planet.
Someone really needs to teach some kids weighing at 160 and 147 to box.

Hearns, Duran, Curry, Galaxy, Chitalada, Mcguigan, Nelson, Chandler, Hagler, Spinks, Tyson, Holy...Pryor, Camacho, Pazienza, Mancini, Bramble, Mccallum, Starling, Arguello, Leonard, Honey,.....

Not as good as that is it..

But for those that can't remember those days then maybe it's ok....

Lacks real superfighters doesn't it which is the problem..

Today's list would be

Mayweather, Pacquiao, Martinez, Donaire, JMM, W Klit, V Klit, Hopkins, Cotto, Williams, Alvarez, Ortiz, Maidana, Guerrero, Broner...

And these are all works in progress. Its easy to look back at Camacho, Galaxy, Curry and admire their careers as a whole.

But looking at Curry just before Jones - he wouldn't look that different from say, Broner (except aesthetically more pleasing and quicker). If Broner were to beat Burns, Uchiyama, Ao, Fana, and maybe move up and make a splash at LW - that would be one hell of a resume.

I tend to think that Pacquiao, Mayweather, Hopkins, Martinez, Marquez and Donaire are the only fighters of real top quality and 5 of them wont be fighting for many more years, it's about time some of the younger start stepping up to the plate

Certainly one of the weakest era's quality wise in boxings history if you ask me. All the more compounded by pointless and devalued titles, too many weight classes, overprotected prospects, the worlds top fighters failing to agree terms and a heavyweight division that cannot be unified.

They were just a few names Oxy.........Gomez, sanchez, Pedroza, Starling, Benn, Eubank, Holmes, Nunn, Jackson, Taylor, Whittaker,

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:They were just a few names Oxy.........Gomez, sanchez, Pedroza, Starling, Benn, Eubank, Holmes, Nunn, Jackson, Taylor, Whittaker,

I think another problem with the modern list there is that a lot of the fighters will also retire with Pacman/Mayweather/Hopkins etc and there will be a mass exodus, a lot of their closest rivals are also well on with their careers.

It is a shame that the feeling that "it's just not as good as it used to be" is so prevalent, as people are not saying it from a position of knowledge. There are great fights month in month out, except the public assumes they are not happening, because they are not seeing it on tv.Of the names you mention above, I don't recognise nearly half of them ,and have only seen a handful of them fight.It's just not a public-friendly sport any more.I was somewhat lambasted the other week for saying ppv and Sky were balls, but having succumbed to the hype machine -again- with Haye, I must admit I am becoming the pipe and slippers "old" fight -fan cliche, it's more fun to put on an old dvd than sit through a Klit "superfight" .Good luck to the new guys, but I rely on you guys to educate me about them from now on!

Nice point Andy.

Free TV coverage would be a great help. The only true ppv fight out there is Pacquiao Mayweather anyway. The rest should be on free-to-air to build up a following.

Re: Klitschko superfight - it is interesting to notice that both brothers, in spite of having one of the highest knockout percentages in history for any heavyweight champion (and I think Vitali holds the highest KO percentage) they are both so deathly dull to watch.

i think its not that boxing isnt as good as it used to be, its more that boxing is not as good as it could be, with fights so hard to make, and access.

There's good fights happening but not great fights, Pacquiao/Mayweather is the kind of fight that happened fairly regularly in the 80's and further back but doesn't happen at all now.

on a more positive note, the domestic scene at the moment is brilliant, we're getting some great fights (degale/groves, murray mitchell, price/dallas, chisora/fury, sykes/buckland). also there is a decent amount of talent, rees, prince arron, towers, crolla, perez and a fair few others.

look at the list of champions or world title challenges we've had recently

haye
khan
froch
burns
cleverly
barker
macklin
rhodes
chisora (scheduled)
mccloskey
munroe

and ive probably missed a few

Forget all this "there's too many belts", and all the "there's no fights on terrestial TV" moaning we here too much of on here. All the fans should care about is being able to watch good fights. Over the last couple months the number of good fights we've had has been ridiculous, and they're still coming. Much better than I can ever remember before, and by a long way. Boxing is in good health.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:They were just a few names Oxy.........Gomez, sanchez, Pedroza, Starling, Benn, Eubank, Holmes, Nunn, Jackson, Taylor, Whittaker,

Benn, Eubank!

No offence but I wish the rose tinted specs would come off with these guys. They were domestic world champs never world beaters. Eubank in particular. Was thinking of Cwis just now and realied this guy was only in it for the money, he had no intention of taking on the likes of Toney or Nunn and even said so himself and can't help but remember his total robbery of the South African journeyman Dan Schomer. Also drawing a fight with Ray Close is nothing to be proud of.

Colonial Lion wrote:Certainly one of the weakest era's quality wise in boxings history if you ask me. All the more compounded by pointless and devalued titles, too many weight classes, overprotected prospects, the worlds top fighters failing to agree terms and a heavyweight division that cannot be unified.

That's exactly how I feel.

HumanWindmill wrote:

Colonial Lion wrote:Certainly one of the weakest era's quality wise in boxings history if you ask me. All the more compounded by pointless and devalued titles, too many weight classes, overprotected prospects, the worlds top fighters failing to agree terms and a heavyweight division that cannot be unified.

That's exactly how I feel.

Seconded...

I don't feel this era is particularly strong but that will come as a shock to pretty much nobody. However do feel that if the era is indeed weak the structure of the sport currently only serves to compound to this. If you have a decent fighter with promoter rivalries, multiple belts it is too easy for lesser fighters to milk and too many weight classes spreading the talent too thin any weakness is magnified. Couple that with the fact that on the back of PPV those that do reach a decent level have no real need or motivation to enter the ring more than a couple of times a year and it does lead to things looking perhaps a little more grim than they are.

Thing is the fighters might be better than they look but the fact they so rarely fight the best opponents it's hard to really judge them

The problem is worsened by the Germans and the Japanese. These clowns hold onto their titles for years and years fighting whatever tosh is ranked within the organisation of the belt they fight for. No unifiction can happen with these paper champions because they refuse to fight away from home and no-one decent wants to go out to those countries for they are likely to be robbed.

Until the governing bodies stand up to these frauds the sitation will never improve.

It's not as simple as that, different countries recognise different titles which makes unification fights more difficult

Ghosty as far as I'm aware, the only country that recognises different titles are the Japanese who for whatever reason do not recognise the IBF or WBO. I'm sure evryone else reciognises there are 4 major belts. Even the WBO gets recognised more in America thanks to ODLH.

I know it's not that simple but when you have paper champs like Chris John who never ever leaves Japan and only fights mandatories and Zsolt Erdei fighting Nathan Cleverly leftovers then the situation can't improve.

I do think the fear of being robbed element is very prevalent though. The reason why RJJ/Michalczewski never happened. Probably why Calzaghe/Ottke never happened. Far safer to stay away from these guys and milk what you've got at home.

A big part of RJJ/Michalcsewski not happening was the WBO belt which at the time wasn't recognised by the other governing bodies, one of them would have had to vacate to make the fight happen.

You say the japanese are bad for the sport but as far as i'm concerned they've got it spot on in not recognising the IBF or WBO titles, means their champions can be bonafide world champions by their definition

Chris John is not a paper champion, anyone who can beat Marquez deserves a bit more respect than that

HumanWindmill wrote:

Colonial Lion wrote:Certainly one of the weakest era's quality wise in boxings history if you ask me. All the more compounded by pointless and devalued titles, too many weight classes, overprotected prospects, the worlds top fighters failing to agree terms and a heavyweight division that cannot be unified.

That's exactly how I feel.

i agree totally, added to that catchweight fights giving unfair advantages, manatory challenges been made to weight years at a time before there shot, champions that keep winning effectivley been stripped and there titles which are given away in the same divison, the difficulty accessing fights and the greed and selfishness of promotors, managers, trainers, boxers ($50 for some ppv in the US) and the incredible inactivity of some of the sports elite level boxers. boxing is a great sport, the best sport in fact, but if a group of dedicated boxing fans who spend a large amount of their free time on boxing forums discussing all matters related think the sport has major problems, then the average general sports fan who has a choice between free world class football every weekend on his TV, or forking out £15 extra ontop of what his sky package already costs is never in a million years going to convert to boxing, which is what the sport needs.

The actual fights that have been made have been good this year.

A large number of fights featuring the best two in the division, or other interesting matchups people wanted to see. This has happened on the domestic scene too.

RJJ always said he wanted Michalczewski but would refuse point blank to fight over there whilst Michalczewski would never leave Germany.

As for the Japanese I'd still say they were bad given that the WBO/IBF is recognised eveywhere else now and to say the WBA with their numerous champions per weight is more "recognised" is a joke. If they can't recognise these belts then they also fail to recognise some very good fighters holding the belts so that's potential big fights out the window.

Despite John's victory over Marquez he's never been regarded the man in the division, never won the Ring Magazine belt, never unified and whether he's good enough or not is never likely to. These are some of the reasons why boxing is in the doldrums.

RJJ at no point ever even mentioned DM let alone say he'd fight, banned HBO from talking about it while he was on air

The problem isn't the japanese it's everywhere else, we don't need the WBO or IBF and we never have so they're doing the right thing, if a fighter wants a fight with a japanese champion then do what Montiel did its not that difficult

The age old problem of who gives in and fights away from home, John is the longest reigning and most established champion at featherweight so it's only natural he's not the one to make allowances

why not fight in a neutral venue?

RJJ at no point ever even mentioned DM let alone say he'd fight, banned HBO from talking about it while he was on air

----------

RJJ spoke about it prior to beating Clinton Woods. He was always asked about it, and always stated he would fight him but not in Germany. He banned HBO because they never shut up about it labelling him "reluctant Roy" I believe. Given that RJJ had guys like Hopkins and Toney as victims it was Dariusz who needed the defining fight and he should have traveled to America.

------------

The problem isn't the japanese it's everywhere else.

-----------

Don't agree with this. In this day and age of champs fighting twice a year and many countries in the eastern bloc and Cuba turing pro (loads more boxers) you need a spread of belts to accomodate everyone. Two belts would mean good boxers would never get a shot at a title. In the good ol' days the champs never had to worry about Russian giants and great Cubans as they'd stay amateur.

------------

why not fight in a neutral venue?

---------------

It wouldn't sell very well.

Sorry you don't need a spread of titles nor is there more profressional boxers overall, a wider range of nationalities yes but not more, having 2 titles devalued it but at least then it was usually unified but having 4 is just plain ludicrous. Does anyone really consider anyone outside of Martinez, Marquez or Hopkins to be a genuine champion at their weights? Good boxers don't necessarily deserve title shots they should have to earn one so as not to dilute the sport with rubbish.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Does anyone really consider anyone outside of Martinez, Marquez or Hopkins to be a genuine champion at their weights?

Wonjongkam

Wonjongkam too, would include Wlad but Vitali makes that one a bit more complicated

The main problem with the sport is the governing bodies. Having four of them is bad enough but each has overly cosy relationships with certain promoters and have no interest in lining their own pockets. Have said it before but how anyone with either a modicum of interest or knowledge in the sport can honestley believe the answers to the sports ill are either more belts or more divisions is beyond belief.

If someone like me who is pretty obsessive about the sport and is of reasonable intelligence cannot keep track with what each belt means who who are the champions at any one time what chance has the casual fan, or perhaps more importantly what is the motivation for them to put forth the effort it would need to keep track.

I don't get how such a terrible era can produce so many quality fights.

I'll take this era over the dire stuff we had to suffer 10+ years ago. God, remember how bad the 80's and 90's were.

Scottrf wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Does anyone really consider anyone outside of Martinez, Marquez or Hopkins to be a genuine champion at their weights?

Wonjongkam

Wlad K
Pacquiao
Bradley

I think Wlad probably has a good enough claim, but Mayweather's is pretty strong at Welter.

We can consider Wlad, Pacquiao and Bradley as potential number ones in the division but its not that cut and dry

There were more quality fights in the 80's and 90's than there are now

Pacquiao's beaten Mosley, Margarito, Clottey and Cotto. With Mayweather's inactivity, that's good enough for me.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Pacquiao's beaten Mosley, Margarito, Clottey and Cotto. With Mayweather's inactivity, that's good enough for me.

Mayweather took the linear belt from Baldomir as well as having good lineage in Cotto-Margarito-Mosley-Mayweather. Also been at the weight longer and is a better boxer.

The Margarito fight wasn't at Welterweight

Cotto was a catch weight fight and Marg was at 151 so for me both of these count nothing towards his welterweight ledger, for me neither can be considered champion at welter. That leaves Clottey and Dorian, hardly clearing the division out.

if you say that the top 7 fighters p4p at the moment are:-

manny P
mayweather
Bhop
the k bros
JMM
and martinez

and add up the total amount of time they have been in the ring this year (from 1st jan to now, 9 days shy of 6 months) it comes to 2 hours 15 mins and 45 seconds. whatever your view on boxing for the top 7 elilte, to come up with the length of a decent film between then for 6 months is shocking, and obviously needs changing in some way.

eddyfightfan wrote:if you say that the top 7 fighters p4p at the moment are:-

manny P
mayweather
Bhop
the k bros
JMM
and martinez

and add up the total amount of time they have been in the ring this year (from 1st jan to now, 9 days shy of 6 months) it comes to 2 hours 15 mins and 45 seconds. whatever your view on boxing for the top 7 elilte, to come up with the length of a decent film between then for 6 months is shocking, and obviously needs changing in some way.

9 days shy of 7 months

thats even worse, and well done scott- you were the first one to pass eddys hidden mistake test

Imperial Ghosty wrote:We can consider Wlad, Pacquiao and Bradley as potential number ones in the division but its not that cut and dry

There were more quality fights in the 80's and 90's than there are now

It's not cut and dry because there are plenty other quality fighters in the divisions. I don't see how this is a negative.

I would prefer to have two all time greats fight for the top spot in a division than have a clear champ amongst ordinary challengers.

There were not spells in the 80's and 90's with the volume of good fights we've had over the last few months. Try find them.

A lot of you are caught up in the detail.

Who cares about catch-weights, who cares about alphabet belts, who cares about lineal champions.

As boxing fans all you should care about is being able to see quality fights.

If you can't see that we've had/are having an excepionally good run of fights then you need to take a step back and think about it.

boxing needs change and innovation, look at the prizefighter tornements- admittedly there not the top level guys, but the attension and quality is growning and growing.

i think the super 6 has giving us some on the best action from the best division in the sport- you wouldnt get the consistent good quality fights any other way

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:A lot of you are caught up in the detail.

Who cares about catch-weights, who cares about alphabet belts, who cares about lineal champions.

As boxing fans all you should care about is being able to see quality fights.

If you can't see that we've had/are having an excepionally good run of fights then you need to take a step back and think about it.

Scottrf wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:A lot of you are caught up in the detail.

Who cares about catch-weights, who cares about alphabet belts, who cares about lineal champions.

As boxing fans all you should care about is being able to see quality fights.

If you can't see that we've had/are having an excepionally good run of fights then you need to take a step back and think about it.

i'd love to be able to see the quality fights but dont live in virgin media area and sky wont fit at our flats till enough people say they want it. i have a laptop but its a note pad, and only has a tiny screen and i am not paying full price to watch that kinda quality- so without including streaming (which i would never (admit to) do) i cant get access to a large amount of fights- these are my kinda gripes with boxing, not knocking any of the actual fight that we get as the quality is good. to much politics in boxing.

JT agree to a degree but if the sport is to flourish and grow it has to hook in new fans or get casual fans more engaged and a system where even the hardcore fans can barely keep track is never going to do that. Is all very well saying there have been some cracking fights but one of the first things I get asked by people not into the sport when I mention such a fight is "is it for the wolrd title?"

To then have to explain it is not for a world title because someone else is champion in that division because one of the fighters has been upgraded to champion emeritus status and anyway because this fight has been made two pounds below the divisional limit it is actually for the diamond belt which will never be defended and has been created specially for this fight only it hardly inclines them to watch the fight does it?

rowley wrote:JT agree to a degree but if the sport is to flourish and grow it has to hook in new fans or get casual fans more engaged and a system where even the hardcore fans can barely keep track is never going to do that. Is all very well saying there have been some cracking fights but one of the first things I get asked by people not into the sport when I mention such a fight is "is it for the wolrd title?"

To then have to explain it is not for a world title because someone else is champion in that division because one of the fighters has been upgraded to champion emeritus status and anyway because this fight has been made two pounds below the divisional limit it is actually for the diamond belt which will never be defended and has been created specially for this fight only it hardly inclines them to watch the fight does it?

You really think it needs more fans? There's enough money in the big fights anyway for them to happen, I'm not sure mainstream coverage is the be all and end all.