Got Fight Night for the PS3, one of the most addictive video game series ever (for me, at least), and it rekindled my interest in the sweet science.
Through my life, I've always been amazed at the sharp and deep decline in the sport of boxing for the mainstream US. As a kid, going into my teens during the late 90s, boxing always seemed like a big deal. I'd hear kids at school talking about Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield, Roy Jones JR, etc. Guys like Sugar Ray Leonard were household names in the 80s... and the heavyweight champion was always one of the most famous athletes in the world, known to people who didn't even like the sport.
Now, even the most famous boxers don't have that household name status -- my wife didn't know who Manny Pacquiao or Floyd Mayweather were. I bet I could mention one of the Klitschko brothers to my dad and he'd have no clue who I was talking about.
People always bring up the rise in popularity of the UFC, but if you look at the numbers, they're not really taking all that marketshare -- Jon Jones or Georges St. Pierre aren't anywhere near as famous as Mike Tyson or Joe Frazier in their hey-days (or even now). And for the biggest fights, boxing is still selling more PPVs than the UFC. I remember the first Tyson/Holyfield fight -- it was a happening, with a Superbowl type atmosphere at this huge fight party I went to.
So, what happened? Did you ever have a casual interest in boxing? If so, when did it die?
I have Fight Night Round 4 for the XBox 360 and it is the only game I really played a lot. I still watch boxing on HBO, TSN, Showcase and ESPN Canada, and probably will until I cancel cable tv in the next month or so.
I don't think UFC is killing boxing, but I think UFC is doing a hell of a number on pro wrestling. Boxing's troubles are mostly self-inflicted, IMO.
a k a LightningMan, lover of bountiful pulchritude
Joined:
16 Aug 2004
Posts:
23669
Location:
Wilmington, NC USA
Bannings:
1
Yes. Boxing to me brings back images of Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier, & George Foreman, and then later Ray Leonard and Mike Tyson. But somewhere along the way, right after Tyson, the fighters weren't appealing and the fix seemed to be in on a scale matching wrestling. I no longer know who anyone is in boxing. It's sort of the same arc that comic books are undergoing.
_________________ Affecting the universe...with my mind!
I think that I lost interest after the "No Más" fight between Sugar Ray Leonard and Roberto Duran.
I feel that the whole Duran-Leonard-Hagler-Hearns was the last time we had a truly intriguing era of boxing. While there have been talented fighters and big rivalries, there hasn't been a period of high-profile fighters that were household names, all vying for supremacy.
But yeah, the whole Ali/Frazier/Norton/Foreman era was probably the greatest period ever for the heavyweight division, if not all of boxing... all downhill from there.
So, what happened? Did you ever have a casual interest in boxing? If so, when did it die?
I used to love boxing. The different promoters and sanctioning bodies ruined it -- not enough marquee matchups, didn't happen fast enough, and three different championships that often wouldn't fight each other.
Basically, take everything that Dana White does in running the UFC, and that's what boxing needed to survive.
I used to enjoy playing Punch Out in the arcade in the early 1980s. I was quite good at it, but I looked silly while playing as I would bob and weave while punching the buttons. Worked up a good sweat, too.
I liked Muhammed Ali, growing up, and hated George Foreman because Ali was supposed to always win, to me. I remember Larry Holmes, Sugar Ray Leonard and Mike Tyson being household names in the 80s and early 90s. I think PPV sports sort of killed the popularity. The money is good for them doing PPV and HBO-only events, but you lose the mass audience. Similar to Baseball losing entire generations of fans because they put their games on too late at night for kids to get into it. It's always about the money.
My thoughts on the decline of boxing from "Teh Wrestling" thread --
Hanzo the Razor wrote:
Mike Howell wrote:
Yeah I'd agree. Certainly there are still some boxers and match ups that are huge attractions and make a ton of money. Overall though boxing is nothing compared to what it once was and MMA is more responsible than anything.
I think MMA is a factor but boxing's decline was well in place before the UFC's rise to prominence.
The factors as I see them --
The biggest issue is the multitude of weight classes and governing bodies. There are now four different championships for each weight class and 17 different weight classes -- that means there could be as many as 68 different world champions at any single time!
When Muhammad Ali or Joe Louis was champion, they were clearly the undisputed heavyweight champions of the world -- period. Nowadays, you have Vitali Klitschko as the WBC champ, Alexander Povetkin as the WBA champ, and Wladimir Klitschko as the IBF champ, WBO champ & WBA Super Champion (whatever the hell that is). There's no single athlete you can really point to and say "this is the top heavyweight boxer in the world".
Imagine if there was the NFL, AFL and XFL going today, with all three leagues being equal competitors and the best athletes spread out across three organizations -- football wouldn't be as strong as it is today.
The UFC being seen as the top governing body in the sport has been immensely helpful -- while there was a time when this wasn't as true (before the acquisitions of Pride and Strikeforce), you can now safely say the UFC Heavyweight Champion is likely the best heavyweight in the world at the time. Boxing just doesn't have that simplicity and unity that MMA has developed via the UFC. You've got 7 (soon to be 8) weight classes with as many champions. The sport's easy to follow.
And not only easier to follow, but you usually get to see the best match-ups possible. How long has boxing been dreaming of a Manny Pacquiao/Floyd Mayweather super-fight? In MMA, that just doesn't happen (unless fighters are in different weight classes, but that's to be expected) -- the champion always fights the best competition, period.
Yeah, boxing has a problem with guys doing the whole "jog and jab" routine for 12 rounds -- but MMA has the equivalent, with the same "job and jab" to a decision in some cases and the even more boring "lay and pray" grappling business in other cases. That aside, the UFC product is consistently better than boxing and a big part of that is a unified sanctioning body.
I think boxing could have held the interest of the public even with both MMA and pro-wrestling on the scene (and boxing remains very popular in Latin American countries anyway) if they had just one sanctioning body, matched champions against the best possible competition, and made more of an effort to get the sport in front of a non-PPV audience (like the UFC is doing with Fox).
Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot] and 0 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
I remember Larry Holmes, Sugar Ray Leonard and Mike Tyson being household names in the 80s and early 90s. I think PPV sports sort of killed the popularity. The money is good for them doing PPV and HBO-only events, but you lose the mass audience. Similar to Baseball losing entire generations of fans because they put their games on too late at night for kids to get into it. It's always about the money.