pre 1980's...if americans had to travel more,how different would history be????

this always has interested me
well it is clear that in the 30's,40's and 50 etc

america was clearly the best at boxing and after lets not talk even talk about about countries that could not turn pro

but only about those that could,
like england or germany etc

had joe louis had fought tommy farr in england?
or ray robinson had to rematch turpin in england
what if billy conn had to go to england to fight len harvey
maricano going to cuba to fight vidoz etc

what if european-asian etc fights didnt "have to prove themselves by coming to usa"
what if it was more fair and americans didnt always home court advantage...

were the americans just that much better
or them always playing on home turf have to do with it

 

Fighters and fights happen in the USA because that is where the money was and is still at. Still, I cannot see it making that much difference in the fights you mentioned (unless they got good ole Calzaghe type decisions).

 

You can't deny that a fight here and there would've ended differently, rightfully or wrongfully. The influence of the crowd on fighters and judges is not a new subject.

Also, it is not an easy task to go to another country and prepare the right way. You've got to be there long enough for the jet lag to disappear, while maintaining a top condition. That's not for everyone.

By the way, while the USA isn't the center of the boxing universe as much as it was. You've got many champions in Mexico, Germany, Canada, Japan, England, etc making more money and filling more seats in their countries nowadays.

 

the big money for the big fights is still in america no matter how strong or weak u gauge there talent pool of fighters or where the current champions orginate from.

 

As a proud Canadian I know that, on a fight by fight basis it may make sense to fight in another country, but 9 times out of 10 it is in a fighters best interest to fight in the US for the long term $. If you look at the SMW division for example . . . it is and always has been bigger in Europe but if you move to LHW the money is in the USA. I am not saying things are not shifting but that is still the economic reality in boxing. If you want to make the most money make a name in the US, fighting on US networks, in the US, in US timezones. Bute and Pascal are having trouble crossing over into the US market because the major networks want to broadcast from the US

 

I can't see much difference in the great scheme of things.

 

For the most part, I dont think much will change, I pretty sure Louis can ko Johnny Paycheck in England, as he did in America, Or what ever the fight took place.

I dont think Cockell would have fair better in England vs Marciano either if we go by were they were born. As far as Farr? I think Louis still beats him on Tommy's home turf.

 

If the champion is from the U.S. -- or Argentina or Panama or Japan -- he's likely to do most of his fighting in that country because that's likely where his promoter resides and also likely where he's the biggest draw.

If you want the champ to fight you in your country, get your promoter to pony up enough money to make it happen.

 

excellent answer and you can add places like
thailand and poland etc

 

you dont think a guy like billy conn who never fought outside of america
might get affected fight len harvey in front of a huge british arena

 

so home turf means nothing?

and same goes for jet lag
hostile arena
different environment etc

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

You have to asked the people in Wales,they still think that Farr won the bout against Joe Louis.

 

why