We Are Far Too Impatient-We Should Let Fights Build-It Makes Them More Significant

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by CST80, Jun 21, 2015.


  1. CST80

    CST80 De Omnibus Dubitandum Staff Member

    238,277
    228,927
    Nov 23, 2013
    We are a very impatient society now days, we want everything and we want it now, now, now. We have very short attention spans, we don't like waiting for anything we are incredibly ADD and we so want instant gratification, that the mere notion of a good match up is enough to send us into a frenzy, and we start demanding it automatically. Which is actually not very good for the sport in the long run. The moment a newer fighter arrives on the scene that any of us think have even a slight chance at toppling a stalwart of a division, we demand the match be made instantaneously and then when the guy loses as predicted by the more knowledgeable fans, because its too soon for the inexperienced fighter, everyone writes the young pup off as another tin can or just another bum someone is feasting on. So ultimately the win over them seems insignificant.


    For example how much more significant would Wladimir Klitschko's victory over Povetkin have been if everyone had waited a few more years for it to take place. Say after Povetkin's KO destructions of Charr, Takam and Perez. Povetkin going into the fight had a damn impressive resume, but he was hardly a household name in the US before the fight. But of course everyone wants Wlad to be destroyed so badly that any time someone seems to be a viable challenger and before they have a chance to build their resumes into something a little more impressive, get shoved in to be another sacrificial lamb because the fans wanted that fight right away, while most of them go on to lose every round of the fight and are usually stopped. Thankfully Povetkin hasn't been ushered out of the back door and forgotten, he's demanded attention and proved how good of a fighter he really is. Far more often than not that's not the case, because of the disappointment many fans feel at a fighter for losing, they are ignored and forgotten causing many of them to not get anymore big matches to prove their worth, because promoters don't want to waste their time and especially funds on making big time matches for damaged goods.

    Deontay has a win over Stiverne and Molina, a win over him means nothing, if he beats Thompson, Takam, Arreola, Pulev, Wach it may mean a little more. Fury his wins over Chisora and Hammer are utterly worthless, a win by Wlad over him means nothing as well, match Fury against Browne, Ustinov, Povetkin, Price and then it will be a worthwhile victory for Wlad.

    Everyone wanted Kovalev and Stevenson as do I, but had it happened 2 years ago, it wouldn't have meant as much for either fighter. Adonis has since squandered all of his good will after the one punch KO of Dawson by ducking all of the tough challenges and trying to hold onto his belt by any means necessary against 2nd and 3rd tier fighters like Sukhotsky, Bika, Bellew and Fonfara. Meanwhile Kovalev has soared getting the far more significant wins over ATG Hopkins and stopping Jean Pascal for the first time in his career. Had it happened 2 years ago and Kovalev lost, he would have become just another overrated hype job on Adonis' resume. And if Sergey had of won, everyone would have said, Dawson was just shot and Adonis got in a lucky punch, and Cloud was an overrated hypejob, Adonis must not have been very good to start with if some Russian fighter with a win over a few "bums" took his strap. Regardless of the realities of these statements, that's the perception a lot of fans develop after a fight that is rushed and not allowed to build.


    And now we find ourselves hyping the hell out of a GGG Vs. Lemieux fight. Lemieux is a total badass, one of the most entertaining in the sport, almost never has a bad fight. He's coming off of two decent wins over Rosado and N'Dam. So the fans want it, need it, crave it, RIGHT NOW as always. And what happens when they get it GGG most likely slaughters Lemieux who may luck out along the way and be the first person to drop Gennady. After the fight we'll all say who cares Lemieux was just another bum, what good opponents did he beat. This win over him means nothing. Like we always do. However if Golden Boy decides to build Lemieux and put him in the ring with a Cotto, or Canelo, or Jacobs, or Quillin, or Billy Joe Saunders, or Korobov, or Lee, or Eubank Jr, or Chudinov and let him get 3 or 4 more significant wins under his belt, GGG's victory over him will ultimately mean a hell of a lot more in the history books.

    The reason why Fighters from the past seems larger than life and have iconic resumes, is because their opponents were allowed to build up great records of their own so when they finally met in the ring the outcome of the match meant a hell of a lot more. And became far more historically significant.

    Not now days Guerrero beat Berto he gets a shot at Floyd and he loses and he's a "bum".
    Or Algieri beats Provo gets a shot a Pac loses and becomes a "bum" (disproved by his performance against Khan).
    Ortiz beats Berto..... Maidana beats Broner.... Bradley beats Alexander.... Canelo beats Trout.... Khan beats Collazo..... Walters beats Vic.... Crawford beats a Featherweight in Gamboa....

    If given time many of these fighters would have built up great resumes and go on to be special or lose like a lot of them have which only exposes their limitations in the first place, proving they were never at the level we wanted to place them at.

    We all need to be more patient let the sport unfold naturally, let these guys slowly build and become legends they were meant to be or falter and fade into obscurity like so many have before. Let things play out slowly and naturally, let it build in suspense, let all of the big event matches mean something other than an ADD need to have our obsession with instant gratification fulfilled. Otherwise no ones resumes will ever mean anything ever again, at least perceptually.

    We need to calm our asses down and enjoy all of the sport and not just the big matches. But the long journey to them as well.





    Remember the wise idiom, Good Things Come To Those Who Wait.:deal:





    This content is protected
     
  2. abuffy

    abuffy Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,653
    12
    Jan 10, 2015
    I can't disagree. I don't like it because I do want to see things as soon as possible, but you are ultimately right.
     
  3. Jeff M

    Jeff M Future ESB HOF Full Member

    27,003
    132
    Nov 22, 2008
    True, and delayed gratification can be a good thing. It's an important element to success in life, most of the time. People are so used to everyone being impatient I notice they apologize for making you wait only a few minutes.
     
  4. CST80

    CST80 De Omnibus Dubitandum Staff Member

    238,277
    228,927
    Nov 23, 2013
    I'm the same way as you, I want everything right now, I hate for things, but it is what's best in the log run for us and the sport.

    The slow burn is good, but in some cases its a little too slow like the fight we finally got last month.
     
  5. Money&Manny

    Money&Manny THE G.O.A.T. Full Member

    872
    1
    Apr 30, 2015
    blah blah blah

    didn't read
     
  6. pablinov

    pablinov Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,187
    647
    Jun 30, 2013
    and sometimes I don't want a fighter to lose.

    So for example I would rather see Golovkin destroy Lemiuex now than wait a couple of years where Lemiuex has a better chance. Or Mayweather fighting Canelo when he was 23? I believe, instead of later on.

    Then again I am new to the sport...
     
  7. MVC!

    MVC! The Best Ever Full Member

    60,097
    5,569
    Nov 5, 2013
    Wildstyle, why so disrespectful? :think
     
  8. CST80

    CST80 De Omnibus Dubitandum Staff Member

    238,277
    228,927
    Nov 23, 2013
    I have an idea he doesn't read very much of anything.:tired

    He didn't read my article, just like he didn't watch Makabu-Mchunu.:deal
     
  9. Jim Jeffries

    Jim Jeffries Ring General banned Full Member

    3,265
    571
    Feb 24, 2013
    Most fights should be built up but sometimes we wait a little too long and both fighters are far past prime, or one of them is past prime, nearly shot and is just showing up for a payday.


    And others fights might just not happen like Kovalev vs Stevenson or even Kovalev vs Beterbiev due to politics. Kovalev and Stevenson should fight next but that's not likely to happen.

    Hopefully Ward and Kovalev happens but that needs to be built up a bit and Ward needs to fully adapt professionally to 175 and hopefully they both fight in given time.


    We waited too long for Mayweather vs Pacquiao and i would have liked to see it in 2009 when both fighters were fresh. Either way the result may have been the same but i'd rather have seen it then. Pac was dangerous then and i believe at that point in time he would have given Mayweather a really tough time.


    I don't mind waiting awhile for both fighters to come together but not 5 years. It was brilliant from a financial aspect but not so good for the fans.
     
  10. Money&Manny

    Money&Manny THE G.O.A.T. Full Member

    872
    1
    Apr 30, 2015
    How's Broner's pride doing? You talk to him?:lol:
     
  11. Xelloss

    Xelloss Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,854
    8
    Oct 23, 2013
    I see your point, but often times fighters not fighting each other is a bigger problem. So when a match is hyped or built, everyone just calls the loser a bum who hasn't beat anyone and the winner a can krusher. Since no one has beaten "anyone" the names with a fanbase just duck the dangerous guys, because "they haven't beat anyone".

    Some matches can and should be built, like GGG-Ward. GGG-DL needs no additional building, its been on peoples minds for a while, and outside of the 2 155lb PPV kings, theres really no one he could beat that would really raise his stock much higher to build the fight.
     
  12. OvidsExile

    OvidsExile At a minimum, a huckleberry over your persimmon. Full Member

    34,234
    36,451
    Aug 28, 2012
    Oh, shut up. In the old days guys would fight four or five times. That's way better than "letting it build." The reason why most people are frustrated with boxing now is because the best don't fight the best on a regular basis and every division is full of phonies claiming to be champions.

    Take the Broner vs Porter fight the other day. Ten more matches like that and we could clean house in every division and expose all the hype jobs. It would be better for everyone's legacies, better for the fighters because they'd get great experience, better for fans, and better for promoters because they could make better matches more often.
     
  13. Money&Manny

    Money&Manny THE G.O.A.T. Full Member

    872
    1
    Apr 30, 2015
    Great come-from-behind win for Mak. Thoroughly enjoyed it.
     
  14. Imperial1

    Imperial1 VIP Member Full Member

    54,515
    121
    Jan 3, 2007

    There has to be a right time for every fight .. look at the **** of the century ..

    That Unfortunatly was 5 yrs to late ..Had it happened in 09 or 2010 it would have had more of a boxing significance not finacial ..

    Boxing always suffers when when matches don't get made when they should be look at the rematch between Jones and Hopkins , Same with Jones and Calzaghe ,Lennox Tyson sometimes they take yo long to materalize !
     
  15. CST80

    CST80 De Omnibus Dubitandum Staff Member

    238,277
    228,927
    Nov 23, 2013
    [YT]ErvgV4P6Fzc[/YT]