British attitudes

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by avidlemon, Jan 3, 2011.


  1. Pale Destroyer

    Pale Destroyer Member Full Member

    308
    0
    Aug 13, 2010
    I think you are looking for a negative in a positive situation I mean comparing us to the US is a push because of the population of the place. I think considering the size of our country, we produce more than our fair share of good fighters, I mean contrast that to germany or australia who have the population and the intrerest in boxing but have no where near the crop of fighters or the rich history we do and our forced to claim fighter from other nationalites to enjoy top level boxing (Katsidis, Draicinian, Huck, Klitchkos, etc) what ever we are doing in the promoting/matchmaking/training department seems to be working fine.
     
  2. Bajingo

    Bajingo Boxing Junkie banned

    14,050
    0
    Nov 15, 2009
    I see what you're saying, and I wasn't suggesting that they should relocate completely, but that in some cases it would be better to fight mainly in Britain but also be prepared to take fights overseas that would further their career. Look at how Jamie McDonell's career has taken of after taking a fight in France for the European title which he wasn't favoured to win.
     
  3. portside

    portside Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,013
    0
    Feb 25, 2010
    cleverly has been fetched on well because he can fight and compete well at a high level, brook is simply avoided, so he's to be carefull of hitting the highs a bit to soon, some need carefull matching or its over strait away for them and their fans, as they loose intrest when they realise how limited their idol is.
     
  4. GazOC

    GazOC Guest Star for Team Taff Full Member

    61,460
    42
    Jan 7, 2005
    I here you mate, I just don't see it happening on a consistent basis. We tend to have fans who go to shows so our guys are going to be the "home" fighter most of the time.
     
  5. rocky1

    rocky1 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,564
    1
    Oct 26, 2010
    One of the things that annoy's me about the attitude of the general british public towards boxing is that people always seem to want to put people down if they lose or even if they dont the amount of people who were saying that khan was crap after he got ko'd same thing with hatton after the pac man fight which is of course complete bollocks as im sure the 2 of them would destroy 99.9% of the people saying that stuff.
     
  6. DarkDestroyer83

    DarkDestroyer83 Lunatic biker Full Member

    554
    1
    Jan 4, 2009
    I agree with the attitudes towards the "0" IMO you'll learn far more about what level you are at as well as test your own mentality by suffering setbacks rather than knocking over tomato cans.

    I also agree with the lack of time in the ring these days, in the old days a defeat was simply put down to a bad day at the office, maybe a bit under the weather, lack of experience etc. Fighters in the past would have have as many if not more fights in their first 2 or 3 years than most pros today have in their entire careers, nowadays a prospect will fight just barely more times in a year than a reigning world champion would 60/70 years ago.

    Also I know what people mean with the "love a good loser rather than a winner" thing as well, but I generally think people are negative towards our sportsmen/women no matter if they win or lose these days. If they win they're arrogant, people want them to fail and if they lose it's "I told you so, never that good" yadda yadda yadda.
     
  7. avidlemon

    avidlemon Boxing Addict banned

    6,832
    0
    Feb 3, 2009
    Someone made the point of us producing our fair share of good fighters - agreed. But are they getting tested?? No because of our attitude of protecting the zero
     
  8. Decy

    Decy Barely Coherent Full Member

    3,893
    182
    Oct 23, 2006
    Makes you think Fwankie knows Brook will be a bust at world level.
     
  9. mcguirpa

    mcguirpa Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,959
    109
    Feb 15, 2009
    This.

    Young prospects and new pros rarely fight more than 3-4 times a year these days. If you lose you've just given yourself a mountain to climb. However, if you're fighting 8-10 times a year you can work yourself back into contention in a short period of time.
     
  10. willmc83

    willmc83 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,198
    0
    May 20, 2010
    it's not something that is unique to Britain but it is still a problem. A lot of it can be attributed to the casual boxing fan. The fair weather supporters tune in to watch a fight because they see an explosive add on sky sports that shows one fighter with a record of 19 wins, zero defeats and 17 KO's against a guy with 21 wins, zero defeats and 12 KO's. It's fantastic marketing and that's what sells. To the uninformed a fight between two decent undefeated prospects looks better than a fight involvinga world class Brit with a a couple of losses against a world class foreign opponent that the general public have never heard up.

    If you take into consideration that the fight between the two undefeated prospects might involve a British or Commonwealth title and the bigger fight doesn't involve any titles you can see how the casual fan and the public is duped.

    As we all know you can make okay money in boxing by getting a small core support basis and taking the fights that come but if you want to make mega bucks you need to attract the general public on board and for that you need to sell out pay per view tv and big arenas and unfortunatley to do that you need to be protected and your risks have to be calculated very carefully.