The Decline of Boxing

will we ever see big fights on network?

 

***

 

To many titles,to many robbery's spells a decline in the sport

 

Yes, let's go back to the days of the color line, battle royales and the mob running everything...

 

Burt I have said before i wish you would write a book about the boxing scene you grew up with!

 

Like most problems in the world, boxing's start with those at the top - sanctioning bodies, promoters and television.

They're the reason why there are:

- 17 weight classes
- Multiple champions in each weight class
- Far too many mismatches/cherry-picks
- Far too many must-happen fights that never materialise

Get rid of the circus that presides over the whole thing and the sport would immediately be in a much better place.

 

Good post.

This thread seems like it should really be named "The Decline of Boxing in the US". And even then...

I mean, many find Wlad boring, sure (I'm one of them), but you'd rather have him do a Dempsey and sit on his ass for three years instead of taking on the outstanding challenger? Like Johnson did before him?

The ducking of the Row going on during the early 40's was just obscene. Even a white fighter had to take a dive to ge a title shot from the Mob, which continued to control the sport during the 50's and early 60's.

And, as stated before, even the 70's super fights wasn't available to most TV viewers.

 

Thanks to the internet, I can watch damn near any fight I wish either live or next day off youtube. Just 20 years ago I would have to wait for the little weekly newspaper rag to show up in my mailbox so that I could find the latest results from SoCal or Mexico or Africa or Europe. Hell, there would be fights reported in the RING or KO (usually 6 weeks later) that I never knew happened. In many ways, this is the greatest time ever to be a fight fan… at least for those who didn't live in NYC from 1947-1958.

 

Two of these three disappeared before WWII,

so I don't see much of a point except if we're comparing today to the 1920's or earlier.

As for the mob, there is a bit of naivety in seeing modern promoters and officials as being more honest than the old gangsters. I, at least, wouldn't be so certain.

 

"do a Dempsey and sit on his ass for three years instead of taking on the outstanding challenger?"

Good point,

but do the outstanding fighters necessarily fight each other today?

The underlying reasons have changed, but the result seems to be about the same.

Also, this criticism is far less pointed concerning the Louis through Ali and beyond eras.

 

Nothing in recent memory is as bad as the HW division up until the 1930's (especially not as during Johnson's and Dempsey's reigns). Not even close to being close to being close to that bad. And even in the 1930's there was a Mob controlled champion.

In the 40's you had guys like Cocoa Kid, Burley, Holman Williams, Moore and Charles being denied shots at WW, MW and LHW. Robinson was the number one contender for like half a decade before he got his shot and even LaMotta had to take a dive for the Mob to give him a long overdue shot at the title. Just imagine the uproar if **** like that happened today.

During the decades after that you couldn't shut out the best contenders as easily anymore, but boxing was still Mob infested and had very low credibility among the general public. The 70's might have been the golden decade in that the big fights happened in most cases and the Mob had lost it's influence, but even then it was very hard to get to see the fights in most places in the world. Here in Sweden it was nigh impossible for example.

In the last month I've seen the top guys at LHW and HW face off, as well as Golovkin, Pac, Lomachenko and Donaire fight. I can't really see how that is so extremely bad.

 

Yet Kovalev and Stevenson won't fight.

 

I'm not saying boxing today is perfect. It certainly isn't. I just don't buy that it's much worse than any previous era. It's worse than some eras in some aspects and better in others.

 

Fair comment.