Has Boxing Ever Been So Broken?

Apparently, 2013 was a fantastic year for boxing. Consider this:
 
1. No-one cares who the heavyweight champion of the world is.
2. Championships across all weight divisions no longer exist.
3. The only impartial ranking systems (that make any sense at all) are compiled by internet writers or specialist publications (such as Boxing News). None of these have been appropriated by TV Networks. In fact some, like Sky, use their own ratings that appear biased towards fighters broadcast on Sky rather than a rival station such as BoxNation.
4. In terms of landing a big fight, the number of Twitter followers a fighter has is more important than his ring record.
5. Weight divisions have become meaningless, due to the expansion of the original eight divisions, day before weigh-ins and access to substances that can help a boxer's weight fluctuate dramatically in order to help them gain an unfair advantage.
6. PED use appears to be rife. Star fighters can pick and choose which testing body they prefer in an attempt to appear legit. True reform is unlikely due to the detrimental affect banning orders would have on fighters, promoters, managers, TV executives and alphabet governing bodies.
7. Fans refer to "pound-for-pound lists" regularly in an attempt to make sense of things in the absence of an adequate ratings system -- and Ring Magazine's in particular. That list is compiled by one man -- ex-judge Chuck Giampa -- and appears biased towards Golden Boy fighters (who coincidentally own Ring Magazine). Fighters who appear on the list are then promoted as "pound for pound on of the best fighters in the world". Fighter A could be a natural welterweight and fighter B a natural featherweight, however, should fighter A beat a bulked up fighter B, they are credited with a "pound for pound" win. This makes it incredible difficult to measure the value of a win and indeed a fighter. Fans complain that modern boxers’ records are unfairly nitpicked as a result.
8. Fighters pay to carry around world title belts. If they refuse to pay sanctioning fees -- or don't manage to fight often enough to generate said fees -- then they will be stripped of their title (which will be given to someone who can generate sufficient fees). The alphabet organisations are ludicrous, nonsensical and beyond contempt yet fighters, fans, TV networks and promoters continue to acknowledge them, when not doing so would seem the more logical course of action.
9. Promoters allow personal differences to obstruct contests that would help elevate the sport.
10. The majority of domestic-level fighters earn less than a living wage.
12. The best fighters in the world are boring to watch.
13. Once a fighter reaches "elite status" -- another bilious term -- they are under no obligation to fight anyone they'd prefer not to.

Spot on, it's a messy shambles.

Cheers Rodders

Can't argue. Another point I'd add is the meaningless paper championships we see popping up and boxers holding. Its rare I watch a fight now where at least one of them doesn't hold some form of belt, be it WBA Interim, WBC Intercontinental, WBO Silver intercontinental, IBF "won his last fight and might fight for a belt one day"

Its just nonsensical to me.

All true. But Mayweather is pound for pound number 1 and earns 30 million for fighting the 3rd or 4th best boxer in the division below him so apparently the sport is thriving.

catchweight wrote:All true. But Mayweather is pound for pound number 1 and earns 30 million for fighting the 3rd or 4th best boxer in the division below him so apparently the sport is thriving.

And there's me moaning...

The sport is in a state it is pretty undeniable, however pretty much since Jack Broughton laced up a pair (or didn’t all you pedants out there) folk have been arguing the sport is in decline or is having the last rites read to it for one reason or another but stumbles on.

Am reading a book about Jack Jeannette at the minute and when you read about that era you do have to ask do we really have things so bad at the minute. Yes they had one world champion back then, but the colour line frequently ensured that fighter was not the best in the world at his weight, many states outlawed fights between black and white fighters and when Johnson was replaced as champion his replacement was Willard who promptly did not defend the title for three years.

None of this makes any of the nonsense we have to endure today any less tolerable or any more forgivable but just wanted to offer some perspective on things.

Surely the people years ago claiming the sport has been declining have been right.

I think its subjective of course Rowley - I think given how spoiled we've been over the past 40 - 50 years its somewhat taken the gloss off given that recently we're seeing nothing like we have previously.

To be honest the really frustrating thing is there is not a lot needed to cure the sport but the chances of any of it happening are beyond remote. All the sport needs is one honest and fair governing body. If said body was beyond corruption and had a sensible and clear policy around drugs, rankings and inactivity so many of the other problems that blight the sport would just fall into place.

However more chance of me making the pole vault team for the Rio Olympics than any of that happening.

An easy bit of progress would be to scrap 36 hour weigh ins. If they are going to have so many weight classes then there is no need to have it. Either scrap some divisions or scrap the 36 hour weigh ins. Having both is a joke.

One of the main problems are the weak governing bodies,who IMO are in the promoters back pockets.
It seems very easy for a promoter to protect his cash cow by making sure his fighter avoids the most dangerous challengers in the division and the governing bodies seem happy to string along with it.

The difference in years gone by, is the best fighters in the division wanted to fight each other to prove who the man was, now its a case of avoid each other like the plague regardless of ranking.

As for the Heavyweight division it says it all when a fighter like Vitali Klitschko can hold a belt for as long he did without defending it and the governing body does nothing about it,makes me wonder why nothing was done, just my cynical mind though.

If we’re doing wish list things I would dearly love to return to eight divisions, or perhaps nine, because in the age of the mega heavyweight there is an argument for there being a cruiserweight division.

Go back long enough and winning a belt in more than one weight class was a real achievement as it meant you putting on over half a stone minimum in most cases, so to carry this you really had to be able to fight. To win belts in three divisions was the reserve of absolute legends of the sport, hell it even evaded Robinson. Nowadays Duke Mckenzie manages it.

Stop moaning girls, boxing is in rude health. We have been getting good fights consistently. Who cares about how many belts there are, if it means we get loads of quality fights then the more the merrier.

I've been watching boxing for 20+ years and I can honestly say it is easily better now than I can ever remember.

The doping is what gets me. It is so blatant.

seanmichaels wrote:The doping is what gets me. It is so blatant.

What, on here? I agree Sean.

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:Stop moaning girls, boxing is in rude health. We have been getting good fights consistently. Who cares about how many belts there are, if it means we get loads of quality fights then the more the merrier.

I've been watching boxing for 20+ years and I can honestly say it is easily better now than I can ever remember.

Thats just nuts

hazharrison wrote:Apparently, 2013 was a fantastic year for boxing. Consider this:
 7. Fans refer to "pound-for-pound lists" regularly in an attempt to make sense of things in the absence of an adequate ratings system -- and Ring Magazine's in particular. That list is compiled by one man -- ex-judge Chuck Giampa -- and appears biased towards Golden Boy fighters (who coincidentally own Ring Magazine). Fighters who appear on the list are then promoted as "pound for pound on of the best fighters in the world". Fighter A could be a natural welterweight and fighter B a natural featherweight, however, should fighter A beat a bulked up fighter B, they are credited with a "pound for pound" win. This makes it incredible difficult to measure the value of a win and indeed a fighter. Fans complain that modern boxers’ records are unfairly nitpicked as a result.

Otherwise known as the 'Floyd-Guerrero' story.....

TopHat24/7 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:Apparently, 2013 was a fantastic year for boxing. Consider this:
 7. Fans refer to "pound-for-pound lists" regularly in an attempt to make sense of things in the absence of an adequate ratings system -- and Ring Magazine's in particular. That list is compiled by one man -- ex-judge Chuck Giampa -- and appears biased towards Golden Boy fighters (who coincidentally own Ring Magazine). Fighters who appear on the list are then promoted as "pound for pound on of the best fighters in the world". Fighter A could be a natural welterweight and fighter B a natural featherweight, however, should fighter A beat a bulked up fighter B, they are credited with a "pound for pound" win. This makes it incredible difficult to measure the value of a win and indeed a fighter. Fans complain that modern boxers’ records are unfairly nitpicked as a result.

Otherwise known as the 'Floyd-Guerrero' story.....

I think think that was the third installment. The Hatton and Marquez stories were part 1 and 2.

There are people on here that think Hatton was a tougher welterweight fight than Margarito or Williams and that Mayweather picking Marquez up from lightweight at a catchweight fight was a sign of him being ambitious.

Weight jumping certainly seems to have been greatly aided by drugs. Evan Fields is basically a pumper up cruiser. I would question how any fighter puts on 20lbs of muscle very quickly to go from cruiser to heavy. Going from SFW to LMW is also questionable.

Think it's harsh re Hatton, but I've said his JMM win is massively over-rated by many on here for some time.

Hatton would be pancaked by Margarito or Williams. He wasnt a top welterweight.

I thought I read recently that the Ring lists are put together by a.committee

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:I've been watching boxing for 20+ years and I can honestly say it is easily better now than I can ever remember.

As have I and I've never seen it in a worse state. The fights I used to wait up until 3am with my dad for like Tyson and Holyfield and the fights between Eubank and Benn having me and my dad at loggerheads just don't happen any more. He's lost his interest and as mine has grown, the more disillusioned I am becoming as he did. He used to have a few books on boxing, a few old tapes of the greats - talks about Ali, Liston etc with fond memory but ask him who is currently the Middleweight champion and he'll look at you blankly. There are too many weight classes. As has been alluded to, put on 3/4lbs and you're suddenly in a different weight class. Although people will scoff - theres not much difference between when I box the light heavies, but put me in with a heavy (as I mentioned on another topic) I end up with head trauma that almost killed me. Puts the true weight classes in perspective.

Strongback wrote:Weight jumping certainly seems to have been greatly aided by drugs. Evan Fields is basically a pumper up cruiser.  I would question how any fighter puts on 20lbs of muscle very quickly to go from cruiser to heavy. Going from SFW to LMW is also questionable.

Well, questionable for one, not for another, depending where your allegiances lie.....

Strongback wrote:I thought I read recently that the Ring lists are put together by a.committee

Think they used to be, a committee of 3 at least, but it's been just that one guy for a couple of years now I think.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:I thought I read recently that the Ring lists are put together by a.committee

Think they used to be, a committee of 3 at least, but it's been just that one guy for a couple of years now I think.

Not even Doug Fischer or the other guy, Rosenthal or whatever he's called gets a vote.

I still hold the opinion that it wouldn't take a great deal to fix a large proportion of boxings problems, it just needs one of the sanctioning bodies to be very very brave. We constantly hear about fans being screwed so that Sanctioning bodies and promoters can make big money but I think that if one of the sanctioning bodies did decide to clean up it's act that would be the one the fans recognise as the legitimate world championship and off the back of that they would end up making more than the several corrupt ones all looking for quick easy money and have no interest in the health of the sport.

How hard would it be for the WBC or the WBA to say any fighter who is ranked in our top 20 must sign up to all year round random drug testing like Donaire does? You'd soon see which fighters refuse that and opt out of the rankings because of the testing and I'm sure that would hurt their income.

Can I ask Haz where you got the theory that the ring ratings are produced solely by Giampa because a quick check of the site suggests it's done by an editorial Board.

http://ringtv.craveonline.com/news/178795-the-editors-top-10-fischer-and-rosenthals-pound-for-pound-lists

Giampa does the P4P list - the panel do the normal ratings. Unless that's changed recently (although I haven't seen an update indicating it has).

http://ringtv.craveonline.com/news/176459-dougies-friday-mailbag-97

In any case, the panel all work for GBP.