Sweepy
Part-time Grapeviner
Boxing
It is a sport with a huge and proud history and WWE/UFC/MMA will never ever replace it.
WWE would not make any claims to replace it.
It is a sport with a huge and proud history and WWE/UFC/MMA will never ever replace it.
I remember similar debates in the mid eighties, then Tyson comes along and its ker-ching time!
Building up fighters records is as old as the hills, even Joe Louis had a "bum of the month" club (or whatever it was called)
I think the nineties in particular saw a golden era in boxing, particularly in this country. It is only to be expected that there will be dips as well as peaks.
The De La Hoya/Mayweather fight (and the money earned) shows there is still huge interest in boxing.
It is a sport with a huge and proud history and WWE/UFC/MMA will never ever replace it.
Back in the 80's although the Heavyweight division was dire, the belts were still in the Hands of americans, (Holmes, Witherspoon e.t.c.). People in the US are turning off Heavyweight, (and for heavyweights, read boxing) as they have no real desire to watch a bunch of Uzbek's, Kazakh's and Ukranians fighting for the multitude of titles that there are.
The problem is that Boxing personalities and commentators are taking shots at MMA when their problems are nothing to do with their competitors. It is their own fault that the sport is (percieved to be) in such bad shape.
We have WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO, WBU, WBF, IBO, IBA, IBC, IBU and no doubt any other combination of three letters you can think about putting together, all with their own "world champions" who throw up excuse, after excuse, after excuse as to why they can't fight any of the other champions when it comes down to the fact that they and their promoter do not want to risk losing and thus suffering a reduction in their pay packet.
After seing a whole series of hometown and dodgy decisions and title challengers who can barely breath, let alone box, fighters refusing to fight most dangerous opponent for one reason or another, people began to look elsewhere.
MMA may enjoy a bit of success although I cant see it getting close to boxing in any way long term, it is a fad in my opinion.
However, if it does grow in popularity and does start taking away PPV revenue from boxing it may encourage the promoters and the governing bodies in the "noble art" to get their house in order along the lines you have suggested - so good luck to them.
I think it would be great for boxing to have some decent competition, as it may encourage them to buck up their ideas.
I just dont think MMA/UFC will provide that long term.
Boxing has been here before with WWE etc during the Eighties (as mentioned in the original article about Marc Ratner).
Also, that article suggested that the appeal of UFC/MMA may be that it doesnt have the "baggage" of boxing, deaths and horrible injuries in the ring were mentioned. Apparently UFC is safer and will appeal more to the "soccer moms".
However, on this thread, the only fights that have been mentioned are ones where fighters have been allowed to fight on with horrific injuries.
IMO It is making money based on it being ultra violent and a bit of a freak show.
Wrestling v Boxing is neither here nor there. Wrestling is a entertainment show, Boxing is a sport. It''s like saying that People are going to stop watching football and start watching Dream Team on Sky One instead.
Another thing I forgot to complain/whinge about with boxing is the influence of the US TV networks. HBO and Showtime are dictating to the world organizations who can and can't fight for world titles. Can you imagine if the BBC told UEFA Greece were not suitable for the Euro 2004 final and UEFA changed the opponent?
The thing is with MMA (I don't call Boxing WBC so won't call Mixed Martial Arts, UFC) the attacks are spread over the entire body, except for obvious maiming points (eyes, spine, happy sacks e.t.c.). As a result there are less concussive injuries in the sport.
However, it is asthetically unpleasing to the eye, for non-fight fans. People will go on about the "cage" which as absolutely no baring on injuries to fighters, other than being more efficient at keeping the contest within the confines of the designated area, than a ring is. Punches to downed opponents are for the purpose of getting a stoppage, rather than rendering your opponent unconscious, as you cannot generate the same K.O. power leaning forwand and punching downwards that you can when you are upright on an even footing.
As for "horrific injuries" I remember Jess Harding winning Denns Andries WBC Light Heavyweight belt after fighting 3 rounds with a broken nose and who can forget Danny Williams fighting Mark Potter with his arm hanging out of the socket. "Horrific injuries" are not unique to either sport.
For some reason, people want to create a schism between the two sports. Dana White is issuing challenges to boxers. Kermit Cintron is issuing challenges to Sean Sherk. It's all a load of b***ocks really. A boxer will win a boxing fight against a Mixed Martial Artist and a Mixed Martial Artist will win a MMA bout against a boxer. Simple as that.
The advantage that MMA has is that there is one recognised organization at the top of a pyramid of organizations meaning they dont have the problem boxing has of 14 different promters and TV networks all pulling in different directions.
The wrestling versus boxing point I was making isnt directed to them being similar professions. The point is that they were in competition for audience share and PPV revenue. This is mentioned in Paragraph Six of the article you put up.
I am sure many purists on both sides would argue that MMA and boxing are as far removed as boxing and wrestling, to be honest it is unimportant. What matters is that they are in direct competition for audience share and that vital PPV money.
Horrific injuries occur in both sports and that is understandable and unavoidable. The difference between the two sports (in my opinion) is that MMA is being marketed in a very cynical and quite nasty way.
It is publicised as the most dangerous most violent of sports and although it will attract genuine fight fans that know their stuff the majority of casual viewers will be intrigued and encouraged to watch the shows by that promise of pornographic violence.
The reality proves to be less exciting or explosive than boxing (usually) and viewers will get bored with the technical battles that take place on the canvas.
Boxing has definitely got its problems and always has done but remember that the wba/wbc/ibf/wbo etc etc mess is a relatively new problem in the sport and the result of fall outs between the top brass of what was (at one point) one organisation over seeing the sport.
The promoters of MMA have already shown what a dody old lot they can be so dont be surprised if the sport also begins to see rival organisations crop up if the money starts coming in.
Totally agree with what you say about boxing - it stinks of corruption from top to bottom but its still a great sport!
![]()
If you are curious about the sport, I'd suggest that the best show to watch would be The Ultimate Fighter on Bravo. That will give you a good look at certain aspects of the training, the fights themselves, without the crappy blood and guts promotion.
I miss ARD.Shocking knockout.
![]()
Calzaghe V Jones tonight.
Both fighters have seen better days, but could be an interesting fight. Will Jones' power and superior skills win? Will Cazaghe's speed, fitness and work rate win the day?
Probably is the time for him to retire and keep that impeccable record intact.
However, they mentioned on 5 Live yesterday morning that there is a re-match clause in the contract with Roy Jones Jr so that if Calzaghe has another fight it has to be against Jones Jr.
Whether Jones Jr would want to put himself through that again reamins to be seen, but have a feeling Calzaghe might be tempted just to have the chance to bow out at the Millenium Stadium in front of his own fans.
He is too close to 50 fights to retire![]()
