Now there is of course no way any of us can claim to know, how the average fan looks at the sport. Suffice it to say, that I would be very surprised, if there are too many fans around the world, who are giving up on boxing - because Crawford and Spence can't get it on! Or because the sport is plagued with corruption, poor judging, etc. Hasn't boxing always faced these problems? The only difference is, that back in the day there was no internet, no boxing forums, where fans could blow off steam like today. No place where all the wannabe historians could proudly agree, that they no longer cared to follow contemporary boxing - because it had devolved into a sad caricature of what was once a great sport. You know, back when REAL men were duking it out for honour and glory!
My big bugbear is: Fighters…at the highest level anyway…don’t fight often enough for my liking. Unfortunately the days of seeing the top, top boxers fight monthly or even every two months is gone it seems. I’d be happy with every 3 months at this stage tbh, but I fear even that won’t be happening on a regular basis in my lifetime.
To be fair, boxing was so much more popular back then that if you wanted to discuss it with some fans, you probably didn't need to go farther than the local speakeasy.
Back in the 1920's, there was no need for a forum like this to find someone to talk boxing with, because boxing was hugely popular & all one needed to do was talk to their friends/family/acquaintances if they wanted to discuss it. Newspapers had full, in-depth articles about boxing all the time, on the front page too! When was the last time a boxing match made the top story in today's news? Also, you're focusing on the HWs like lots of casuals, but ignoring the fact that the best fought each other waaaaay more back then, and one KNEW (not guessed) who was who and where they ranked. A natural by-product of the day; one champ, 8 divisions = more clarity. Wouldn't you much rather that be the case, instead of the disorganized chaos that we have now?
If I was been born 100 years earlier, and had been a young man in the 1920s, I would never have been able to discuss boxing with anyone - as not a single one of my friends, would have known anything about the sport.
Is this a statement about your own personal circumstance (as in, where you live) or just a statement that listening to a bunch of half drunk casuals at a bar discussing boxing would drive you nuts so you just wouldn't do it?
It's the former! I'm from Denmark - and as such would have been completely in the dark back in the 1920s. As would most people outside the US at the time. For me, and most people around the world, this is the best time to be a boxing fan!
Was the boxing scene out there really that dead back then? I mean, Denmark is cold, you'd think an indoor sport would be popular.
Now there may have been a few people, who had heard about a heavyweight champion named Jack Dempsey - but other prominent boxers, like for example Greb and Leonard, were likely completely unknown. Different worlds, with little exchange of information between the two - unlike today, were everybody here in Denmark can easily follow, what is going on in the US.
You're right, the best fought each other waaaaay more back in the 20's. But "waaaaay" is just what was wrong with the boxing scene back in the day! Greb fought 30+ different opponents 3 times or more - with more than half of his almost 300 pro bouts tied up in these more or less meaningless series. Is that something to wish for today? And what about boxers carrying each other in the many other long series, that was the order of the day back then - where they did just enough to avoid being thrown out for engaging in a sham fight? Is this really something we would like to see repeated today? I don't think so! Wouldn't I prefer, that we had just one champ per division, instead of this mess with 4 in each of 18 different weight classes? Of course I would, which I have already said (#25). But unfortunately that's not the case, and there seems to be very little you and I can do about it. But unlike a lot of people, I just enjoy what we have, without thinking about whether someone is unified or lineal or whatever - as those terms mean very little. To me, anyway.
Of course people can claim to know how average fans feel. It is debatable, but not at all a reach to learn things that simple surveys can reveal. Which if done decently is even better than anecdotal evidence. But some here have spoken about having given up boxing, or they are going to... Some more casual fans do get turned off to the sport due to that-& demonstrably turn to other sports, sometimes it has been pro wrestling (where at least you know it is all a show), often for many years UFC & ultimate fighting. Sure you have a good point that folks often complained & were nostalgic for a supposedly Golden Past, but social media has amplified everything. But some of the decline in integrity, competitiveness & appeal is new & real. Like endless & trivial belts. Like contenders fighting so seldomly. Like not facing the best competition to remain unbeaten. Like too many divisions further rendering belts meaningless. Made worse when you have day before weigh ins to obscure who is really deserving of what, making weight bullies a problem. These & whatever else did not come to mind immediately ARE real, modern problems. And corruption in judging & PEDs, or some not found guilty of them due to corruption etc...May be older, but are real things that turn people off & are valid complaints that need to be reformed.
No one can disagree with all the points you list here. There are lots and lots of things wrong with boxing today. Things true fans would change, if only we could. But, sadly, we can't! Now the question is: all this crazyness that goes on in boxing today - is that something that make ordinary fans turn away from the sport? I see no evidence of that being the case, no matter how many times wannabe experts declare boxing to be dying... if not already dead! That's just nonsense, imo.