There are many things that frustrate me about the sport as a fan. Too many weight divisions, way too many championship belts, shady promoters, seemingly corrupt or inept judges ect. All of these things are things that certainly pose a problem to the sport in their own respective ways. However, if I could change one thing about the sport, it would not be any of the afforementioned. Rather, there is one thing about the sport that is unique to boxing and imo its most major detriment: That if they dont want to, the best fighters and the champions dont ever actually have to face each other, ever To me, this is ridiculous. It would be like the Celtics calling themselves champs without playing the Lakers in the NBA playoffs. Like the winners of the AFC division in the NFL calling themselves champions without having played in the super bowl. Like a hockey team holding the stanley cup without having beaten the best. This problem is pretty much unique to boxing. Obviously, it doesn't help the situation when you have in this day and age a near infinite ammount of belts that allows oneself to proclaim themselves "champion". Nor does it help that you have top promoters looking out for the own best interests rather then the good of the sport. In short, if I could change one thing about the sport it would be getting the best, forcing them even, to fight the best. That is why in many ways one champ per division was better, because the best had to fight the best, there was no other option in order for a fighter to be deemed champion Make the best fight the best, no sport is perfect but if i somehow had the ability to make one change to the sport that is the change that i would make. Sage
I wish all the alphabet organizations would be abolished, except one universally recognized one that forms a coalition with each of the fifty states and countries, so that every boxing match around the world would feature the same regulations and responsable officiating. Of course, this is impossible. Furthrmore, more network television and mainstream news coverage of boxing, as well as some young talent (particularly from the U.S.). Again, none of this is probably going to happen in my life time.
Something that prevent these fighters from getting the money that they do, these guys get paid like crazy to fight nobodies but back in the day you can only get a real payday by fighting the most demanded fight and because of that all the good match-ups have been made. You can even see it in the lower weight classes (126 and below), they all get paid like crap and fight the most popular fight they can and they have to stay active too to have a decent living. You can also see it in MMA.
I would like for it to be ILLEGAL for Promoters to come in any kind of contact with judges and refferees, unless in an open forum with both parties in attendance.
All valid points you guys have made but again I ask this: Can someone name another sport where the best in the world can voluntarily choose to avoid one another?:huh I can't think of one:huh And that is the fundamental flaw of boxing imo. The only way that could be changed is to bring back one champion per division, that way the best would have to fight each other because that is the sole avenue to the title Chances of that ever happening: Sage
I think the scoring system is flawed after watching Hatton vs Collazo i scored the fight on the ten point system and had Hatton winning by a point, yet if you watch the fight without scoring and ask who won, well Collazo clearly hit and troubled Hatton with bigger more damaging shot's and a lot of people inlcuding Hatton's trainer thought Collazo won so the system doesn't work in my eye's.
So you would propose what, exactly? Watching a fight as a whole and then just sort of picking a winner by your overall feel of who won? The purpose of round-by-round scoring is to make every second of the fight matter and takes into account the ebb and flow of fights. Perfect? No, but I think it's better to segmentally judge than to just give an overarching impression like I've seen some European countries do, as in the ref just raises the guy's hand at the end of who he thinks won.
I agree about scoring it by round's but collazo was winning round's with better boxing and getting the same point's as Hatton who scraped a lot of the round's. 10-9 is unfair to a boxer who has dominated a round some judge's would score a 10-8 round without a knockdown but not many. what i would propse is a change to the actual point's given per round.
I would like less weight margins. But more simply i would like boxing where a champion is the man who beats anyone who is a top contender and not just spending there whole career defending an "0". Id rather see a fighter with a few losses but who fought everyone.
