Bit of an observation and then a question that I shall throw out to you all... Boxing is probably my second favourite sport, and I will confess that compared to many on here my knowledge is relatively limited (shoot me down as a 'noob' if you wish). The major difference I see between boxing fans and followers of other sports is the major emphasis placed upon history. I can't really think of another sport, where history is so prominent in discussions. I've learnt as much after lurking on here for several years... It has raised a question for me this afternoon though, in a discussion elsewhere. It was one that I know my answer to, but was wondering how others would respond. Why do you think that the past is so prominent in the present when discussing boxing? Is it something ingrained that we must have some sense of order (in terms of rankings) when it comes down to fighting? (In terms of fighting, i'm not just referring to boxing, but life in general, especially kids fighting each other at school, trying to better each other). For the record, I find the historical aspect adds alot to the sport and enjoy reading the debates on here about ATG lists etc. It was just a question that came up today and the person I was discussing it with, didn't have a great deal of knowledge of boxing, and it was strange trying to get across to them how important the historical aspect is. Is there any other sport out there where history is so prominent in discussions? Sorry for waffling, and I hope this makes a little sense. Not too sure if it does though atsch
It is approaching. Football (Soccer) is my favourite sport. Unfortnately, I am beginning to lose interest in it. Mainly due to the extortionate ticket prices, decline of atmosphere etc. Boxing is always a sport I have followed, but not to the extent of probably the vast majority on here.
Boxing matches are few and far between, decent ones at least, so it's hard to discuss current stats. In the major sports teams play between 16 and 162 games per year so there are alot of current games to talk about, we have to talk about history because top guys only fight 2 or 3 times a year and prospects depending on what level between 4 and 8 fights a year. Also boxing matches have more of a historical impact, big fights are giant events that we'll remember forever in great detail, also because they are so rare.
Cricket as well. Both sports where you can look back on the stats (bowling/batting figures) for very nearly every player for last 100 years. Cricket is my favourite sport btw. Even my crappy stats for some village team i played for last year are recorded on some database online!
Does history not have the same relevance in football? Unless you're a Chelsea fan then I would suggest it does. Best ever player discussions? Pele, Maradona, Cruyff. Best ever team discussions? Real Madrid from the fifties, Brazil from the seventies, Liverpool from the eighties. Best ever manager discussions? Alf Ramsay, Nigel Clough, Matt Busby. Same old names always come up. I dont think boxing is unique in this respect.
Boxing is alot like Tennis. Other sports are different because its the team that wins, not the individual. In boxing and tennis, the individual athlete wins or loses. And its not like golf or swimming or some of these other individual sports because in boxing and tennis, how you perform directly affects how your opponent can perform. Also, in both these sports you need strength, endurance, stamina, strategy, agility, perseverance, adaptability, hard training, natural talent. However in boxing you need more. Boxing is more raw. Boxing is sport at its rawest form while still being under control. in tennis history is also brought up all the time. Greats are compared constantly as well as their achievements other combat sports are obviously more similar to boxing than tennis. But of non-combat sports, I think tennis is the closest.
. . NOOB??? I dont think so. Boxing is just a sport, where a particular champ may exist for 3 months or 11 years. Any world champ is going to be compared to the last dozen, or next 20 champs. Times change, people do not. Styles change, courage does not. That 'courage' mat not be exposed as often, yet, its there in the heat of battle. Whatever the sport.
I don't think it is as relevant in football. The reasons for it were probably covered earlier by the member who rightly stated that the bigger boxing events occur less often etc. The discussions that you have pointed out do occur, but the frequency of them is much smaller. P.S. You were stretching it with Nigel Clough, his Dad wasn't too bad though
You have a pretty good point here, with it being the individual rather than the team. I suppose it is much easier to compare an indivudal over time, than it is to compare a team. In addition, with boxing and the example you have used such as tennis, I suppose there is plenty of scope for discussion (unlike in say, athletics where people are measured by time, height and length).