How to save boxing

Where did I say every week? My point was to establish a schedule that would make it easier for the public to start getting interest. Small fights on a Friday. Bigger fights on a Saturday at a World or European level. This doesn't mean World or European title but fighters of that calibre.

Hopefully you would get a situation where people would get into a habit of knowing that Saturday boxing on a particular channel was significant and you start to develop stars.

 

i read an intresting article about Friday Fight Night in the US in the 50s

they say the TV killed boxing as less people went to shows, therefore less money for promoters, couldnt make as much interesting matches, less intrest in boxing, less viewers on TV, less people growing up around boxing, Tv show cancelles, Potential fans gone, boxing shows suffer poor attendances and no TV money.

We can never go back to hardly any TV shows again. But if you study boxing history every boom period in boxing has come during and after a recession.

The 20s, 40s and 50s whos saying the 2010s cant be a huge era of boxing.

 

1. One champ at each division. That way nobody ducks nobody and everybody knows whos king.

2. The 2 fighters that want to challenge next for the belt of the weight class on show fight the main undercard fight. We might get some good views then after the fight with the 2 men next to each other knowing they fight next.

Any more ideas?

 

dont spend money so you fuel the recession, pray for people to go into poverty. Ten boxing should pick up

 

I have no idea what that means....

 

i say we start it tonight

 

How to save boxing......
1. Have one champion - Will never happen so we should just accept it now and just hope that the reccession brings one or two down with it namely WBU,IBO
2. Start having decent undercards and sell tickets for cheaper. It ****s me off that in order to go a and watch a **** card still cost £35. (I wanted to go and watch Crolla fight Sykes but ****ed it off coz I refused to pay £35 to sit in a shitty hall in Stoke and watch **** fights, the bill was pathetic.
3. Fighters and promoters should sell tickets themselves instead of giveing them to merchant companies like 'SellTickets' or 'TicketMaster' - For my Khan ticket I had to pay £40 for the ticket, £5.40 for a handling fee and £2 for postage - Thats nearly £8 on top of what they 'charge' for the ticket. The promoters/fighters dont get to see this money so it in no way helps the sport. Why can't they be sold on the doors like events used to be?
4. Hows about in the UK instead of having some friday nights which are topped by a **** fight i.e commonwealth fight vs some afrobum, hows about having a FFN every fortnight and have maybe 1 or 2 British title fights with a commonwealth one on too.

Man I should rule the boxing world

 

One of the roots of the main problem - too much emphasis on that "O" in the losses column!

Promoters try and keep a fighter unbeaten, or as little losses as possible, thinking it makes them more popular/marketable, therefore they over protect them and constantly match them v S/O. This leads to **** undercards and crappy main events.

Simple way to save boxing? MATCH the boxers! That's right match them - put them in contests that they are matched, fights where there's a good chance they'll lose if they don't perform very well.

This will have two positive effects:

#1 It will make for more entertaining fights, which people will enjoy rather than watching some faceless unknown go through the motions against some foreign import in a tedious affair.
People aren't interested because it's mostly one sided exhibitions at the moment. If most fights weren't such forgone conclusions, more people would be interested in watching, attending shows, etc.

#2. Tougher/better match-ups on the way up will develop the boxer better. He will gradually gain more experience and ring craft by stepping up his competition along the way, rather than knocking over 20-30 sub-par opponents then stepping in with a true world class opponent and being out of his depth.
A lot of fighters will learn more from even a loss or two rather than just knocking over unrated imports.

It's that simple. Fights don't have to be for world titles, or they don't all have to be for British, Euro, Commonwealth, etc. They just simply have to be better quality match ups.
Even if you have a fighter who isn't going to set the world alight it doesn't matter, just match him accordingly (as Steve Holdsworth once told me - "Two donkeys make a derby").

If Sky's Friday Fight Night (which has lacked some serious pizzazz this season) showed two or three fights per broadcast, it doesn't matter who was fighting as long as they were quality match-ups. The casual viewer won't get so bored and change the channel, but his interest will be maintained.
He will then remember the names of certain boxers and look out for them next time they're on tv, simply because he remembered them being in a good fight a month or two before. People will start to emotionally invest in certain boxers, if they're in entertaining contests (look at the following Gatti had in the States) regardless if they win/lose/draw.

So that's one simple answer. Better quality match-making right across the board. Nobody's saying throw a young novice or prospect straight to the wolves, but at least test him and put him in trying fights.
The left hand side of the bill Vs S/O is 95% of the time a shitty boring, bill where there's no excitement. Just routine showcases over and over (and over) again. This is what is killing interest in our sport.

 

you can rule the world with Vodaphones new offer.

all great points Dan but we really nearly have 1 champ at each weight in the eyes of historians

 

Greg, what ? Speak English I dont understand jockanese ??

thanks, they are good points if I may say so myself

 

what you on about Jockanese i sisnt think my post was that hard to read.

if its the vodaphone bit i saw a poster with taht slogan on it

 

:good

 

Boxing does not need saving, but if you want one champ per division this is the only practical way I see it happening.

You need a SUPER Alphabet group (SAG) like Football has FIFA or like the IOC.

Everything about Boxing remains the same, but for a few things.

All fighters who are rated in the top ten of any world organization, and/or are National Champions, must sign up as a member of the SAG.

The SAG would have the same powers as say FIFA and could mandate a fighter to fight another fighter irrespective of any other commitments that fighter has.

SAG every month would meet to discuss potential fights and every SAG Champion would have to abide by decisions made in such meetings.

When a SAG title fight is agreed, every promoter whether they are connected to the fighters or not would be able to bid for the fight.

After all bids are taken, the SAG would discuss them and give a decision as to whom promotes the fight.

SAG would also make it mandatory (like FIFA and the World Cup) that all their title fights are free to air, for a fee that SAG would discuss with the TV networks. Only if the National TV companies do not choose to show the fight, then the fight can been shown by other TV Organizations for as minimal cost as possible.

There is an awful lot of good faith needed to get the group going to start, and of course all title fights will have hellacious small print details to my very basic plan, but that plan is the only way I can see boxing going foward if you only want one champ per division.

 

Gregory it was this bit I didn't understand pal "really nearly have 1 champ"

In your latest post it was the words 'sisnt' and 'taht' that I didn't understand

 

isnt and that is what i meant to write

in most weights we have a linear champion for example Klitschko was recently crowned and that is the 1 champ per weight