Death of the "TV Friendly" fighter :)

I was gonna post this exact thread, but you saved me the trouble. :good

 

Why is this the death of Michael Katsidis? Because he lost to a veteran fighter in his first real test?

Don't be so harsh.

Enjoy Katsidis for what he is ... because with his style, he won't be around long at all.

And just because some people made him out to be other-worldly, form your own opinions.

Me? I wasnt surprised at all. I predicted Casamayor on my show and I said that I wouldnt be shocked if he knocked him out.

Katsidis was down hard early and then came back and, I felt, he won every round after the first.

Man, he is fun to watch. I won't miss it if and when he gets back in there.

Mike

This content is protected

 

tnx:good one of my thoughts exactly. agree with you 100%

 

What a load of bollocks that post is.

Are you actually serious in saying Hagler wouldn't be considered TV friendly? What? Watch his wars with Hearns or Mugabi. These were the definition of TV friendly. All "TV friendly" mean is that the fighter has an appealing style. Hagler certainly did. Ali had some tremendous fights too.

You may be right in what you're actually saying, but the points you used to priove it are off-base by a mile.

Just let it be. So some fight fans like guys who take 2 to land 1. Who gives a ****?

 

Oh Yea You Forgot About Cotto, Pacman,and Pavlik

 

Re: "TV-Friendly"

John Ruiz is like U.S. analog TV in 2009... the screen goes black.

 

The media and the avearge Joe want to see the power game..they are not into the beautiful intrinsic complication of the sweet science...but it also clear the contendeers from the pretenders...

A true skillfull fighter is almost a lost art, with the excpetion of the new Mexican, Eastern Europeans and Puerto Rican fighters were the understanding of the sweet science is teach in the early development of the young fighters...

Once again we see the importnace of the amateurs stage in professional boxing...the likes of the Nacho Berestain, Evangeslista Cotto, Enzo Calazaghe, the Mayweathers, are one of the few trainers that hisptoricall y have define the sweet science

 

Hatton was never TV friendly his hold and hit style is one of the worst in the sport today.:deal

 

Maybe it's my love of the sport, but do you really have to be technically unsound to be "TV Friendly"?

You are arguing that today's casual fan wouldn't be able to recognize the greatness of a fighter as polished (and gritty) as Ali or as gritty (and polished) as Hagler. I've got to disagree with that. The simple fact is, we don't have fighters of that caliber in the sport right now, and obviously not at heavyweight. Hopefully, we will again in the future.

The bigger issue in any case is that the only time the casual fan tunes in these days is for vastly over-promoted "superfights" that WE all know ahead of time aren't going to be compellingly, heart-poundingly, viscerally dramatic. Then the fact that this casual viewer has wasted fifty dollars (or whatever he chipped in) turns him off of the sport, and he misses the bouts that ARE "TV Friendly", both in terms of skill and passion. The fights this spring have been a reminder that bouts like this do, in fact, still exist, and at a very high level too, not just on ESPN.

The idea of the "TV fighter" isn't what sets the sport back. It's the inability and unwillingness of the powers that be to get the sport's best product into a cheap, easily found package, i.e. network or cable TV. Truth be told, Katsidis, who at this point in his career fits your definition of a TV fighter (he bleeds, is hittable, throws with abandon) made for a damned dramatic fight last night. Do you think the people at that casino won't want to ever go back to a fight? Do you think they wouldn't want to tune in their cable every Friday to watch a fight THAT interesting? Do you think they left with no appreciation for Casa's triumph of science over crudeness? Give them some credit man!

The face first brawler is a crude, but necessary part of the game. If he didn't exist, who would there be for the sweet scientist to pick apart? The key is to do it in an exciting manner. I think people can still appreciate that when they see it. The trouble is, they don't see it very often. Part of this comes back to the fact that too many young fighters don't know how, and too many old fighters would rather get paid for risking less.

 

This is a good post. You do not see the depth of well-schooled fighters that you saw even in the 80's and 90's.

Look at undercard bouts on ESPN 2. Most of these guys are club fighters or tomato cans.

Even into the 90's ESPN and USA Network were putting on cards every single week with guys who actually learned their trade. You could have guys like Santos Cardona or Tony Martin, solid pros on undercard bouts.

They weren't all championship level fighters, but the matches were of a much higher level than the fare we get televised now.

 

The most important part in being TV friendly is having heart.

People love a true warrior. Something Wlad should take note of.

 

Muhammad Ali wouldn't be considered "TV Friendly" WTF?