HBO vs SHOWTIME

Whichever network has the better fight at the moment. I could otherwise care less.

 

So - other than the poll, it seems to be pretty much a draw. Neither can separate themselves. I suppose I could see which network the wife would rather have for shows. I see that Showtime is cheaper by $5/ month on my cable provider, Brighthouse.

I've never had either so I really wouldn't know what to expect.

 

Definitely HBO, far more informative and entertaining as well. The SHOWTIME crew is terrible.

 

"Other than the poll..."

That is exactly what a poll is for, to determine the one with the most votes as the winner. And per the poll, HBO doubles the votes of Showtime. We just have a bunch of wannabe hipsters in here trying to vote against the grain.

HBO has and will always be better than Showtime. HBO got into the boxing game in 1975, and Showtime came on around 1986. HBO pioneered the premiere cable network boxing program and always present a quality product.

 

Build up to the fight, probably HBO, during the fight, Showtime. Showtime have probably had better boxing events of late too.

 

Yeah, I get what the poll is for however my question was not exactly the same as the OP's question. I'm not that concerned about the broadcast as i am the quality of the fights.

 

Hbo was the best back in the day with ledermen, foreman, Lewis, listening to those guys was comedy gold. Lamprey to me is the best play by play guy, who can forget "power shot, power shot". "He keeps moving fArward". Guys the greatest. But now sho has way better fights and the teams are similar, hbo seems more depressing nowadays.

 

I guess this could be a problem that most fans have if they don't have both networks. I would really like to see the Froch/Groves rematch Saturday but am leaning towards getting Sho.

Thing is - I would just be getting it for boxing. I really wouldn't watch anything else as I'm not a TV watcher (except for sports). That's hard to justify getting BOTH networks.

 

lampley sucks.

 

HBO.

On a production level, I miss the 1990's and 2000's theme music that made an event sound prestigious.

Commentators:

Lampley over Ranallo. Jim may cheerlead for his preferred fighter at times, but he is the voice of boxing in my lifetime. Ranallo way overhypes fights, and is clearly a company man. His fight prep tends to consist of how many times a fighter has fought on Showtime, and how many times he's been knocked down. He about shot his wad over Stevenson/Fonfara, which had drama late but with the early knockdowns was essentially over unless Fonfara scored the KO. I'd prefer they put Brian Kenny as PBP, who is more of a straight shooter and less prone to hyperbole.

Analysts. This is where I prefer Showtime. Malignaggi, while being annnoying and a hypocrite, really knows the sport. As the result of his having no power, he's learned all the technical aspects of the sport. Al Bernstein is a bit reserved and prone to sugercoat things, is a good professional analyst. My problem with HBO is Kellerman and Ward. RJJ is okay, but the others are dreadful. Kellerman knows a ton about boxing history, but is more of a cheerleader than an analyst. His incessant promotion of Ward and Rigo are out of control. And his cohort, Ward, is no better. Always roots for guys he knows and is totally biased about anybody around his weight class.

HBO is better at pointing out when a fight sucks, like when Crawford fought on the Cotto fight last year. SHO won't admit that the Charlo brothers and others are boring. They are at a hindrance because they essentially work for Haymon, and if they stray the company line they can bring in someone new at any time.

SHO has an edge with quantity of fights. I like the idea of SHO Extreme, however I don't think there has been one upset over the course of that series. It's the opposite of ShoBox, which puts on competitive fights. It's a platform to hype Haymon's fighters before they get put on Championship Boxing. Three fight cards are better than HBO's 2 or sometimes one.

Overall, I see why fighters are leaving HBO for SHO. HBO refuses to pay $2 million for a Stevenson tune-up, whereas Showtime has no problem doing so. HBO also puts higher demand on caliber of opposition. They are a lot more strict on saying you either fight someone we like or you don't fight at all. We see that with Mikey Garcia; if you want $1.5 million fight Gamboa, if not sit out or fight on ESPN2 or Unimas.

HBO also will work with multiple promoters. They have relationships with Top Rank, Main Events, K2, Banner Promotions, Gary Shaw, Lou DiBella, and Dan Goosen. Showtime works entirely in-house with the recent exception of Yvon Michel but that's because of Haymon and not Michel. While it's true Arum is the top dog at HBO, they will work with other promoters to produce quality fights.

HBO has basically determined that fans want action fighters and do have a bias towards a certain type of fighter. It does seem like they've cut their budget, so they have to rid themselves of the likes of Rigo who have zero appeal to most fans.

One negative about HBO is their reliance on punchstat numbers. I don't think they do enough to communicate that Compubox is not the way to score a professional match. We've started seeing SHO do this as well, but Bernstein explains how the numbers can be misleading when the numbers are distributed over 10 or 12 rounds.

 

Also, 24/7 is better than All-Access. Liev Schrieber as a great asset to HBO. Their face-off and 2 Day programs are well done. Overall, I think 24/7 and those types of shows have run their course. They are bought and paid for by the promoters as an infomercial disguised as documentary. SHO is the worst at this. At the end of their Mayweather episodes, notice who the executive producer is - none other than Mayweather himself. SHO damages their credibility when it becomes clear they aren't actually covering a fighter, but rather working in a business partnership. Nothing gets on All-Access without Mayweather giving his approval. I think it's backfired on SHO this time. With Mayweather controlling all the content, so much of the material was based on his enormous personal wealth. While that appeals to his fanbase who live vicariously through him, casual fans who don't necessarily have $75 to spend on 4 hrs of entertainment are off-put. They were ready to go through the same route with Broner, and still might if they are able to put humpty dumpty back together again.

Finally, I don't know why. but Jim Gray is just annoying. Sometimes he asks some hard questions and I applaud him. Still, his appearance is smarmy and just unlikable. Why not use Steve Farhood in a bigger role? I think he's SHO's best commentator, and would love to see him on some Championship Boxing events. My guess is that he loves ShoBox, as he and Nick Charles were the pioneers of the program. He appears to enjoy watching and critiquing young prospects.

 

the same.

 

Thanks guys. This is all great info. '80's/'90's HBO is all I've known really. I can't remember ever watching a match on Sho. Someone at work today told me that he got a deal when he got both for 3 months. I guess I'll call my provider and see what they can do.

Let me ask this - I mentioned that I don't really watch anything but sports....but would one get the nod over the other if boxing was out of the equation? Did that make sense? When I asked wifey if she preferred one over the other, she said that there was one series on each network that she'd like to watch.
I said you're not helping....

 

HBO has superior content outside of boxing. Their documentaries, while decreasing in frequency, are outstanding. Lombardi, Namath, and Jim McKay documentaries were fantastic. SHO does some sports stuff, including a revamped inside the NFL and 60 Minutes Sports (which is a lesser version of HBO's Real Sports).

HBO movies are better. They have a new movie which airs every Saturday around 8:00. Also they make original films, like Behind the Candelabra, which are top-notch.

Personally, I'd subscribe to HBO without sports. They have political comics like Bill Maher and John Oliver, and comedies like Veep and Eastbound and Down, along with the iconic Game of Thrones and True Blood.

The only show I like on SHO is Homeland, which is a 24-like show starring Claire Danes.

 

Narration and production quality on HBO is much better. You can tell they are the more veteran company. Their production crew is really amazing, and I've seen them work in person one day. It is intense and not for someone who isn't used to being yeleld at etc. some of the angles and shots on Sho, having made highlights myself, are so poor and don't allow you to see the action on the inside. Too many 'safe' uncoordinated panned shots from center on the long side of the ring.

But the fights, commentary and 'points' to victory are much better on Sho. Better for the technical minded. Wonder where they will be a few years. Could do better hiring of middle management. Seems to be very rigid in their hiring process. More based on nepotism.