Is there any women’s sport on the planet more unwatchable than women’s boxing? You can watch women’s tennis or gymnastics and appreciate certain aspects. Women’s soccer maybe very low quality and lack physical intensity but atleast it is harmless. But women’s boxing is simply dire without any redeeming features. I see Sky sports is pushing it big time. But most men and women will admit among friends they don’t watch the women’s fights that get shoehorned onto men’s boxing cards. Opening the floor to a torrent of criticism and virtue signalling. Plus a few who are prepared to be honest.
Women’s team sports tend to be more obviously ‘worse’ because with a limited playing field the specialist positions tend to be harder to fill. Goalkeepers in women’s football are often still pretty shocking. And as for women’s spin bowlers in cricket or fly halves in rugby, forget it. I don’t really get the same issue with women’s boxing. Someone like Katie Taylor looks genuinely technically excellent, whilst some of the aforementioned football/cricket/rugby players seem no better than rank amateurs.
Like most commodities, it comes down to the quality of the product. I don't have any issue with women taking part in boxing or any other combat sport. For me though, it has rarely been great entertainment in the 25 years or so it has a legitimate sport. Ultimately it has come down to a multitude of things; a shallow talent pool, lack of interesting fighters and personalities, and the failure to produce compelling match-ups and rivalries. The talent pool issue is obvious, as there are fewer women than men participating in boxing, and then progressing to the pro ranks. According to boxrec (not always the most reliable) there are around 1,600 female boxers compared to over 20,000 males. If there were only 1,600 male fighters (and a corresponding reduction in people participating at all), the quality of the fighters and fights would suffer. I don't think there's any fundamental reason why female fighters can't be crossover stars. It just needs the stars to align in the right way like it did for say Ronda Rousey in MMA. Part of it is the marketing machine behind them, and knowing which demographic to aim at. A major factor though is that female boxers on the whole have been a bland and unappealing bunch. I find Taylor for example "meh" in and out of the ring, and Shields is just completely unlikable without any redeeming qualities. Too many of the top fighters are also relatively light punchers, and in boxing above all else it is big punchers who excite fans. The biggest own goal though is the structure of women's pro boxing. There are far too many weight classes and titles; this is bad enough in men's boxing with a much deeper talent pool and number of fighters, but it ridiculously dilutes the quality when you have sub .500 fighters and neo-pros in the world top 10 rankings. Belts have little intrinsic value, and rankings even less. Women's MMA is far more popular, and not co-incidentally does all of these areas better than women's boxing. A much deeper talent pool drawing on a wide range of entry points, more marketable and entertaining fighters, and a belt/reward structure that is clear to fans and actually means something. There is no novelty value anymore in women's boxing like there was when Christy Martin came on the scene, and for the sport to grow it will need to be a slow burn and getting the basics right. A Taylor-Persoon rematch is the obvious starting point, and could raise the sport on Ireland and the UK up a notch.
The only women’s sport which I find interesting is athletics. I can watch the women’s athletics all day long, maybe because it’s more of an even talent pool. The football and boxing etc I just find very poor.
Yeah, I think talent pool is the biggest factor. Most people with a natural affinity for athletics will be identified at some point; the opportunities and options for a talented male and female athlete are broadly the same. Relatively few women with talent for boxing will get as far as even walking into a boxing gym. The other big advantage athletics has is the history of the sport. Women were competing for Olympic gold medals at the same time that they were getting equal voting rights in the UK.
The talent pool will continue to increase, you've got to remember in boxing it's only recently started to see a boon. Within the next 10 years the talent pool depth should of considerably improved.
Good point. And as a young fella I had a thing for Irina Privalova and blimey she's 50 now. Just checked and she still holds the women's indoor 60m record. That's held for 26 years! Some woman is Irina.
I don't like watching woman's boxing. But each to their own -they can do what they want. As along as tea is ont table mind.
Elite women in sport are not even school boy level when you compare them to males. And we are not talking about the very best 16-18 year-olds, we are talking about mid tier 13-14 year-olds. This is just a fact.
Yeah, world indoor record in the short sprints and olympic champ at 400 hurdles outdoors. Hell of a talent.
Your right and as another poster mentioned the level of quality is diluted due to various weight classes, belts etc... Also added to the fact women's boxing and football is being shoved down our throats currently it heightens the lack of said quality. There are women boxers and footballers who are quality technically. But the level of opposition makes it boring.
Tennis and Athletics, I can enjoy. Rugby, Football, Boxing, so hit and miss because of the lack of overall quality. If something is s**t it shouldn't be forced on us, I get that people need to be made more aware of the sports but now that we are we are all seeing how tangibly s**t they are.
The football is a poor standard, as there are a handful of good sides and the rest are sub-par. England V Cameroon in the quarters (round of 16 maybe) was atrocious. Fan of women's boxing though, think some of the fighters are brilliant including Katie Taylor and whilst I agree it's a very small talent pool I think for the most it's entertaining and often some close well matched fights.
Boxing is about the unexpected. A guy trailing on the cards and getting a monster KO etc. You don't have that element in women's boxing, as they don't have the power. Only the useless ones tend to get stopped. That removes a massive element of what makes boxing such a great spectator sport. The top ranked female P4P boxers have an average KO percentage of 29%. The guys is 68%.
It's simple biology men will always be more entertaining due to be being stronger, faster, etc, etc Let's be honest most the casual female audience watching boxing, is watching Joshua's half naked body and hope his hampton falls out, while being sexual about Joshua on Twitter, "oh love a shower with big Josh" whereas if a bloke done it they would be a massive perve and on some sort of list
