As i've explained before you can't make a comparison between the two as one is a sport that includes so many different levels from Olympic Amateur Boxing right through to Professional Boxing and has many different promotional companies working within it wheras ufc is an entertainment company that is the sole promoter of its fightersAgain, who are you to tell people what they can and can't discuss?
The UFC is being discussed here in comparison to boxing - and the people here who are actually capable of having a discussion, are looking at what boxing can learn from a model which is undoubtedly successful and appealing to boxings main demographic.
If you are unwilling, or too naive, to see what boxing could learn from the UFC, that's fine - continue to bury your head in the sand and keep those fingers crossed that the fastest growing sport and promotion in the world goes bust next year.
A better argument would have been Golden Boy vs ufc but again a pointless debate as Golden Boy has already implemented most of what the ufc is doing now and even more so in 2009
ufc is taking away from wrestling not boxing whose core audience has always been the over 30's and your figures just don't add up as since 2000, boxing ppv's have only been beaten by ufc once, probably twice now if you include this year but this is more due to a reduction of overall boxing ppv's plus the attendence of boxing has also increased each year since 2000!
OH and btw i said the ufc would be bust in 2011, not next year so you've still got a few years yet to get your ufc nuthugging in
Reminds me of the type of people who say that smoking doesn't cause cancer because their granddad who smokes is still healthy at 82. Just because there are exceptions to the rule, doesn't mean that the valuation of Forbes is worth 'jack'. In percentage terms it's far more likely to be accurate than it is to be inaccurate.
