Improve boxing

Which one change would you most like to see in boxing to make it better for the fans?

I'll nominate changing the judging system. In the past year we have seen Abraham 119-109, Beltran being screwed over against Burns, the Alvarez Mayweather draw scorecards etc. Changes to improve it could be going to 5 judges for title fights to make it less likely one rogue card will affect the outcome, and also a system to make judges accountable with fines or removal of licenses.

What else would make boxing better?

If I can only have one it would be to have one governing body only. If I can be greedy and have two get rid of any division that contains the word super or junior.

I'd have champions fighting only top 3 contenders or other champions. This would make all the big fights happen and those looking to fight a champion earn a spot in the top 3 by fighting the top 3 contenders.

I'd prefer regular run-of-the-mill dust ups, "trade" fights etc, be contested without the need for it to be for a meaningless title with a stupid belt for the winner.

"David Price is fighting Anthony Joshua"
"Brilliant, what's it for?"
"Er,...to see who is the best fighter?"
"Sounds sh!t, I'm not going!"

Rowley wrote:If I can only have one it would be to have one governing body only. If I can be greedy and have two get rid of any division that contains the word super or junior.  

Froch and Hatton pretty much screwed then, in terms of being Number one in their division and their weight class.

Using the above as examples, totally agree that they were never the best in their respective weight classes and should never be labelled as 'champion of the world'.
But they are/were both quality and within the top 3 in their divisions (or once was), if Hatton had to compete at 147 I don't think he would have made it top 10, never mind headlining Vegas for a title fight, same as Froch he would be nowhere as effective at light-heavy.
Agree with the first, not the second.

One governing body or the belts being contested only by the top 5 in each of the governing bodies divisions.

One body to oversee the governing bodies and make sure there's nowt fishy going on with rankings etc.

Does anyone know if there's a lot of ex boxers that are judges? and if not, then why not?

Don't think that there are a lot of ex-boxers that are judges, but its positive to see that the tv companies are using a lot of current boxers or boxers whom have just retired as either commentators or giving analysis after the fights.
Honestly, listening to tv personalities whom have zero experience of boxing is like listening to some bloke down the pub giving generic comments about football (not playing wide enough, playing too deep, vulnerable on the counter etc).

Looking at the 175lb division I don't think Froch would have struggled that much except for Hopkins, if Pascal could be a major player then he could to.

Harsh assessment of Hatton, he'd always have been a big attraction so the big fights would always be there for him, he'd have easily been top ten.

Aside from the obvious id go for smaller gloves, would add much needed excitement and as the bare knuckle era showed risk of long term injury is no greater.

I'd have plaster hand wraps as they'd lead to quicker knockouts and fighters wouldn't sustain as many serious injuries that they might do if they were hit repeatedly with less hard gloves....This is a great idea and I don't know why no-one has suggested this before.

Also, I'd reduced the ten count to maybe seven to stop fighters p!ssing about when they could be up and getting on with it.

I'd also have the ropes electrified at certain periods during the fight to stop fighters being too defensive minded (no-one wants to see that).

I'd scrap the ring card girls and simply have a bad person beaten to death during the minute's interval.

aja424 wrote:
Froch and Hatton pretty much screwed then, in terms of being Number one in their division and their weight class.

What concern is that of mine, if you’re good enough you’ll manage with the extra weight, if you’re not you won’t. Plenty of fighters who never won a world title who drew crowds, if you’re likeable and good to watch you can draw, Henry Cooper’s popularity never suffered too greatly from a lack of a world title. Just think too many divisions, like too many belts makes it too easy to be a world champion nowadays. It used to really mean something to be a multiweight champions. For many a year only Armstrong and Fitzsimmons could claim to be three division champions, now Duke Mckenzie can match them and Miguel Cotto has them bettered apparently.

I'd do away with Adrien Broner.

Qoxiivi wrote:I'd do away with Adrien Broner.

You're only being asked to improve boxing, not the planet as a whole

Sorry. Do away with Adrien Broner but bring back East 17. That should balance things out.

Qoxiivi wrote:Sorry. Do away with Adrien Broner but bring back East 17. That should balance things out.

Would S Club 7 reforming for "Children in Need" suffice?

Yeah, alright. It'd have to be all of 'em though. Any less and the world would still be up on the deal which, if I understand the rules correctly, would invalidate Broner's wholesale eradication as a legitimate proposal for improving boxing, and boxing only.

As an aside... if, and I'm just spit-balling here, but if we bring back both S Club 7 and East 17, can we then lump Fury in the mix as well? He combines idiocy with also being rubbish, plus he's kind of 'representing', which is very embarrassing for our nation as a whole. Anyway, that would be my preferred option. Especially as I don't listen to the radio. Please advise.

I'd follow what I used to see in WWF/E

1 governing body but 3 belts. 1 Full blooded champion (the best) 1 intercontinental (belt the top 5 fight for, the winner instantly getting to #2 and a shot at the champion while the other 3 go for the intercontinental) and a regional champion so not dissimilar to the European belt (not sure if they still have that) in wrestling.

That was the 1 governing body control the rankings, the drug testing, the matches, the judges - everything.

Theres a distinctive #1 in the division. There's the ability to get to #2 while being recognised as such but it's not based on #6 beats #9 and becomes #2 as #2 would have to have earned that shot by beating the previous #2 or someone in the top 5 if you get me.

WWF drug test?

You know what I mean - one governing body would use one drug testing organisation, not different ones using different yardsticks like WADA and VADA etc.

Just one universal drug testing organisation.

Well aware all the guys in WWE are on Steroids.

It has to be one organising body so only one guy can be the real champ at every weight and thus forcing bigger fights more regularly.

I would make boxing a standerd on terrestrial tv.

Preferance would be on ITV because of the Eubanks v Benn v Watson v Collins fights.

And Elton John's ''Saturday night's alright for fighting'' for the opening credits.

Oh yeah and bring back Gary Newbon.

aja424 wrote:

Rowley wrote:If I can only have one it would be to have one governing body only. If I can be greedy and have two get rid of any division that contains the word super or junior.  

Froch and Hatton pretty much screwed then, in terms of being Number one in their division and their weight class.

Using the above as examples,  totally agree that they were never the best in their respective weight classes and should never be labelled as 'champion of the world'.

Who was top at LWW when Hatton beat Kosta, then?

Jeez, 175 would be a cracker under the old banner.
Froch
Ward
Groves
Bike
Dirrel
Pascal
Hoppo
Stevenson
Kova
Beterbiev

Missing one or two as well, I think

TopHat24/7 wrote:

aja424 wrote:

Rowley wrote:If I can only have one it would be to have one governing body only. If I can be greedy and have two get rid of any division that contains the word super or junior.  

Froch and Hatton pretty much screwed then, in terms of being Number one in their division and their weight class.

Using the above as examples,  totally agree that they were never the best in their respective weight classes and should never be labelled as 'champion of the world'.  

Who was top at LWW when Hatton beat Kosta, then?

Harris? Cotto? A few weeks after hatton beat Tszyu, mayweather butchered gatti. I'm not his greatest fan but hatton did go on to prove himself top man at 140, although you could argue he was helped by the better fighters moving up.

milkyboy wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

aja424 wrote:

Rowley wrote:If I can only have one it would be to have one governing body only. If I can be greedy and have two get rid of any division that contains the word super or junior.  

Froch and Hatton pretty much screwed then, in terms of being Number one in their division and their weight class.

Using the above as examples,  totally agree that they were never the best in their respective weight classes and should never be labelled as 'champion of the world'.  

Who was top at LWW when Hatton beat Kosta, then?

Harris? Cotto? A few weeks after hatton beat Tszyu, mayweather butchered gatti. I'm not his greatest fan but hatton did go on to prove himself top man at 140, although you could argue he was helped by the better fighters moving up.

Wasn't Sharmba Mitchell up there as well?

Poor old sharmba had been battered by Tszyu (for the second time) a few months earlier Dave

Couldn't remember the chronology of that one Milky, two or three round mauling wasn't it?

Actually Mitchell looked quite slick for a round! He was sheet scared of Tszyu though. One big right hand started it and it was pretty much all over. Stopped in the third I think. It was tszyu's comeback fight and some thought it proved he hadn't lost it... All it really proved was he could still punch.

The Tszyu fight remains frank's best bit of matchmaking in my opinion. Perfect time to get an ageing champion who's star is still bright, but ring rusty and getting on. If you lose, you lose to a 'legend' and can come again.

One major top promotion in control similar to UFC. Or at least promoters and fighters being less greedy and wanting to fight the best.

Apart from those mentioned, I'd like to see champions and contenders would fight 6 times per year, for 4 reasons:

1) More entertainment
2) Shorter careers and younger retirements
3) More chance the big fights will be made
4) Boxing would occur at their more natural weight (impossible to aggressively diet all year round for your whole career)

milkyboy wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

aja424 wrote:

Rowley wrote:If I can only have one it would be to have one governing body only. If I can be greedy and have two get rid of any division that contains the word super or junior.  

Froch and Hatton pretty much screwed then, in terms of being Number one in their division and their weight class.

Using the above as examples,  totally agree that they were never the best in their respective weight classes and should never be labelled as 'champion of the world'.  

Who was top at LWW when Hatton beat Kosta, then?

Harris? Cotto? A few weeks after hatton beat Tszyu, mayweather butchered gatti. I'm not his greatest fan but hatton did go on to prove himself top man at 140, although you could argue he was helped by the better fighters moving up.

Cotto was at 147, wasn't he?

And as great as PBF's win over Gatti was, think that was his first or second at the weight and Kosta was still regarded #1.

Yes, great matchmaking, but Hatton still beat the established #1.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

milkyboy wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

aja424 wrote:

Rowley wrote:If I can only have one it would be to have one governing body only. If I can be greedy and have two get rid of any division that contains the word super or junior.  

Froch and Hatton pretty much screwed then, in terms of being Number one in their division and their weight class.

Using the above as examples,  totally agree that they were never the best in their respective weight classes and should never be labelled as 'champion of the world'.  

Who was top at LWW when Hatton beat Kosta, then?

Harris? Cotto? A few weeks after hatton beat Tszyu, mayweather butchered gatti. I'm not his greatest fan but hatton did go on to prove himself top man at 140, although you could argue he was helped by the better fighters moving up.

Cotto was at 147, wasn't he?

And as great as PBF's win over Gatti was, think that was his first or second at the weight and Kosta was still regarded #1.

Yes, great matchmaking, but Hatton still beat the established #1.

Please....Floyd beat a guy he himself called a "C-list fighter" How can anyone give him credit for beating a guy he himself didn't rate and, god rest his soul, no-one ever saw Gatti as anything other than a crowd pleasing war-machine with all the defensive nous of a man with masochistic tendencies

It's about as punch perfect a performance you could ask for Dave and whilst Gatti was by no means from the top draw he was still a more than useful fighter, painful fight to watch though as it was so one sided.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's about as punch perfect a performance you could ask for Dave and whilst Gatti was by no means from the top draw he was still a more than useful fighter, painful fight to watch though as it was so one sided.

No way man, Gatti was notorious for piling weight one on the day of the fight and he did the same hear thinking he was going to bully the smaller man. He ended up being sluggish and fighting face first all night long. Mayweather should take no satisfaction from that fight in much the same way he shouldn't be applauded for beating the plodding Baldomir or the always average Philip N'Dou...it's like bigging up David Haye for beating Audley!!!

It's not even comparable to beating Audley, these aren't fighters who capitulate at the sight of a puncher, none of the three mentioned are elite but are still credible wins.

Back on topic. The five judges idea does sound great, especially for championship fights (so every fight on a Hearn card, then?), but I think we all know that only means two judges scoring razor tight Canelo fights 120-100 instead of one.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's not even comparable to beating Audley, these aren't fighters who capitulate at the sight of a puncher, none of the three mentioned are elite but are still credible wins.

Gatti practically filled his shorts and Floyd's certainly no puncher. Arturo was damn near begging Floyd to develop KO power and put him out of his misery.

kingraf wrote:Back on topic. The five judges idea does sound great, especially for championship fights (so every fight on a Hearn card, then?), but I think we all know that only means two judges scoring razor tight Canelo fights 120-100 instead of one.

My suggestion is judges scoring the fight in a sealed room away from the fight watching it via multi angle CCTV to accurately gauge who has done what and their cards would then honestly reflect the action as opposed to trying to score a round based on what they saw across the other side of the ring from an unfavourable angle with the home crowd screaming for every punch thrown

DAVE667 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's not even comparable to beating Audley, these aren't fighters who capitulate at the sight of a puncher, none of the three mentioned are elite but are still credible wins.

Gatti practically filled his shorts and Floyd's certainly no puncher. Arturo was damn near begging Floyd to develop KO power and put him out of his misery.

That didn't actually happen though did it Dave, as he always did Gatti kept plodding forward and at no stage looked like quitting, he was saved by a thankfully compassionate trainer in McGirt.

DAVE667 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's about as punch perfect a performance you could ask for Dave and whilst Gatti was by no means from the top draw he was still a more than useful fighter, painful fight to watch though as it was so one sided.

No way man, Gatti was notorious for piling weight one on the day of the fight and he did the same hear thinking he was going to bully the smaller man. He ended up being sluggish and fighting face first all night long. Mayweather should take no satisfaction from that fight in much the same way he shouldn't be applauded for beating the plodding Baldomir or the always average Philip N'Dou...it's like bigging up David Haye for beating Audley!!!

Oscar beat a better version in much the same manner in a win that has been all but forgotten.

Said it before I don't want one champion per division............Because politics may mean like Liston and Hagler a guy is frozen out and loses his best years before he gets a shot...

Teddy Kennedy got involved in a bid to get Marv a title shot..

Also It means you can be waiting forever for a meaningful world title fight to come around...

I'd prefer two champions per division and at least that way we have meaningful boxing more regularly and the cream should be served sooner rather than later..

BUT............I can see where those that want one belt are coming from and hell wouldn't that be a much preferred option than the chaos we have now..

TopHat24/7 wrote:

milkyboy wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

aja424 wrote:

Rowley wrote:If I can only have one it would be to have one governing body only. If I can be greedy and have two get rid of any division that contains the word super or junior.  

Froch and Hatton pretty much screwed then, in terms of being Number one in their division and their weight class.

Using the above as examples,  totally agree that they were never the best in their respective weight classes and should never be labelled as 'champion of the world'.  

Who was top at LWW when Hatton beat Kosta, then?

Harris? Cotto? A few weeks after hatton beat Tszyu, mayweather butchered gatti. I'm not his greatest fan but hatton did go on to prove himself top man at 140, although you could argue he was helped by the better fighters moving up.

Cotto was at 147, wasn't he?

And as great as PBF's win over Gatti was, think that was his first or second at the weight and Kosta was still regarded #1.

Yes, great matchmaking, but Hatton still beat the established #1.

Not knocking the win toppy. Tszyu was the top name but 3,rounds in 3 years and nudging 36 left it open to debate who the current top dog really was. Cotto was wbo champion at 140 at the time and considered the new kid on the block. Whichever, if the Tszyu win didn't clearly make hatton the man at 140, he pretty much had established himself there (albeit in a much weaker looking division) within a year or so.