Why does boxing have to be on free TV?

[DavidPayne]

This.

Promoters are in the business of making money and use these micky mouse titles to sell tickets.

If these belts didnt draw fans, the promoters wouldnt bother using them.

Therefore these silly belts must draw more people so the public is basically voting with their feet and getting what it wants.

As with everything in life, the blame lies with the General Public.


Dreadful people.

Amen. Mind you its a bit like not liking supermarkets when all the corner shops are shut. How do you support boxing and yet avoid those with stupid titles. Even small halls have pissing Masters titles attached.

The last time i was in Sainsburys in Bolton they had opened a "regional foods" section (Hunts Pies, Eccles cakes, all that crap) in an attempt to appease Hugh Fernley Whiitingstall and his gang of thugs.

Maybe in a few years time, on a small hall show featuring 7 world title bouts, they will have as a special attraction, an "olde tyme" non-title 10 rounder between 2 pro's with winning records, fighting to establish who is the better fighter.


You can wear period dress, if you like.

Flat-cap, etc

[Bricks]

I dont live in the UK anymore, so my radar could be off a little.

I keep reading on here that boxing has to be on free TV to survive and or thrive.

I dont get it at all.

1) allegedly, Mick Hennessey and Hayemaker have all been on free TV in the UK and failed to deliver anything of note.

2) Football, Rugby, Cricket, UFC and wrestling are all broadcast on subscription TV and are absolutely thriving at the moment.

3) What hell is "free TV" anyway? As far as i know, UK is now 100% digital and everyone has access to subscription TV if they want it.

4) People are used to paying for content these days (see itunes) so why is boxing so special?

Last time i was home "Live on channel 5" was a punchline to a joke. Now its boxings way forward?

Absolutely spot on. This terrestrial debate is bollocks.
People who spout it are living in the 80s and 90s.
EVen if boxing was on live on a saturday night on ITV1 or BBC1, how many people would watch it outside those who already watch it, or nip down the pub?

These days there are so many distractions and forms of entertainment the 1980s are long gone

Carl Froch fought on primetime TV live in an absolute barnburner and than was also on free tv for his excitiing Rocky style comeback against the impossiby talented Jermaine Taylor.

Yet his next 2 fights are on prime tv and we were told for the next 2 years what a shame Froch is unknown he needs to be on SKY!!!

In this day and age people if they are really bothered will find a way to watch

[Bricks]

I dont remember Ricky (the biggest draw in the history of British Boxing) ever fighting on free TV.

A bigger draw than McGuigan, Bruno, Benn, Eubank, Naz who all boxed on terrestrial ???? .......................

Bruno and McGuigan fought at a time, when there wasnt a single fookin supermarket open past 5.30 on a weekday and all shops were closed on sundays. They fought at a time when there were only 4 tv channels unless u were in the extreme minority and had SKY (in its early days)...no internet in those days, no one had mobiles...u were considered exotic if you drank del monte pineapple juice...Hatton has had a bigger following than any of the 1990s terrestrial guys like benn, eubanks,naz, etc.

[stujones]

I dont live in the UK anymore, so my radar could be off a little.

I keep reading on here that boxing has to be on free TV to survive and or thrive.

I dont get it at all.

1) allegedly, Mick Hennessey and Hayemaker have all been on free TV in the UK and failed to deliver anything of note.

2) Football, Rugby, Cricket, UFC and wrestling are all broadcast on subscription TV and are absolutely thriving at the moment.

3) What hell is "free TV" anyway? As far as i know, UK is now 100% digital and everyone has access to subscription TV if they want it.

4) People are used to paying for content these days (see itunes) so why is boxing so special?

Last time i was home "Live on channel 5" was a punchline to a joke. Now its boxings way forward?

Absolutely spot on. This terrestrial debate is bollocks.
People who spout it are living in the 80s and 90s.
EVen if boxing was on live on a saturday night on ITV1 or BBC1, how many people would watch it outside those who already watch it, or nip down the pub?

These days there are so many distractions and forms of entertainment the 1980s are long gone

Carl Froch fought on primetime TV live in an absolute barnburner and than was also on free tv for his excitiing Rocky style comeback against the impossiby talented Jermaine Taylor.

Yet his next 2 fights are on prime tv and we were told for the next 2 years what a shame Froch is unknown he needs to be on SKY!!!

In this day and age people if they are really bothered will find a way to watch

Mugabi,

Think your wrong there somewhat..... look at the viewing figures for Williams vs Harrison... I believe it was something like 8 to 10 million. Is this fight part of the glory days of 4 TV channels etc.

8 to 10 million..... thats shit loads more than who would have watched it on Sky. It was also significantly more than Williams vs Skelton (also shown on ITV). Lots of pubs will not get PPV cause of its cost.

Yes, I live in the back of beyond and not London, Manchester etc - In the small town of Carmarthen (a relatively big town if your Welsh) ONE pub showed Haye vs Valuev, and I know many average boxing fans who wouldn't go to the pub to watch it there cause the pub is full of chavs. I didn't have Sky at the time so I shopped around, and braced myself for the experience in that particular pub.

Regarding Froch - lets not forget ITV signed a deal with Hennessy to showcase his fighters - but when Froch beat Pascal.... Hennessy tried to worm his way out of it and try to get ITV sign a new deal for Froch. Itv were pissed and didn't even renew his existing contract. Viewing figures were great in general (although not that for a world champion in ITV's eyes) ITV DIDN'T show Taylor fight live, they showed it on Delay as they did the Dirrel fight (which stank). Hennessy was to blame for it also though.

However, for every McGuigan, Bruno, Benn and Eubank - there was your Pat Clinton, Eamonn Loughran, Glenn McCory, Dennis Andries..... good good fighters - not as charismatic and not such a ratings winner. I opened my post discussion Williams vs Harrison and said Skelton vs Williams didn't do nearly as well...... Harrison captured the imagination, Froch hasn't.

[jamesmcdonnell]

PPV has killed boxing, it's increased the fighters purses dramatically,or rather increased the purses of the top boys, to the detriment of the fans.

Boxing will always be around, but it's never going to be as big as it was in the 1930's.

[dondada]

EVen if boxing was on live on a saturday night on ITV1 or BBC1, how many people would watch it outside those who already watch it, or nip down the pub?

In this day and age people if they are really bothered will find a way to watch

Couldn't disagree more. Loads of people would watch it who wouldn't if it was on a subscription channel. That's the point. Seeing as Sky would probably have got about 150k viewers for something like Galahad v Booth whereas C5 got over a million, I'd say over 80% of the audience wouldn't have watched it had it not been on a free to air channel.

[Bricks]

I see your point dondada and stu jones. Ive been convinced my argument was wrong.

[funso banjo baby]

I dont remember Ricky (the biggest draw in the history of British Boxing) ever fighting on free TV.

A bigger draw than McGuigan, Bruno, Benn, Eubank, Naz who all boxed on terrestrial ???? .......................

Bruno and McGuigan fought at a time, when there wasnt a single fookin supermarket open past 5.30 on a weekday and all shops were closed on sundays. They fought at a time when there were only 4 tv channels unless u were in the extreme minority and had SKY (in its early days)...no internet in those days, no one had mobiles...u were considered exotic if you drank del monte pineapple juice...Hatton has had a bigger following than any of the 1990s terrestrial guys like benn, eubanks,naz, etc.

now we have tesco turkey twizzlers.....constant war in the gulf...bankers ripping us off....centrist right politicians...no unionization of any sort.....workfare slavery.....tesco towns.... an epidemic of drugs and alchohol abuse in every small town across the country..... Tesco schools and police stations....24 hour dumbed down tv that gives us programmes like ''The TA and The Taliban'' and 'X-factor.'

dont worry Mugabi everything will be alright when the Sun on Sunday launches tomorrow.

i for one think the extremely professional and upstanding moral leaders at Newscorp will do a stirling job in leading this country into new sunlit uplands of peace propserity and fairness.

its a totally NEW paper !!!





you idiot

[Wales]

Hayemaker was on Setanta which you had to pay for on.

He was also on BBC

[JDC]

Surely we understand that fighting talent pools are predominantly made up by the poorer members of society. Restricting viewing (to people who can affording it) is obviously detrimental to the next generations talent pool.

Even without taking this into account:

More restrictions = Less viewers = Smaller market = Lower potential future earnings = Lower demand for participation from all classes.

Jesus, it's like the last 20 years of boxing being on Sky and not terrestrial TV hasn't happened. The above statements are already happening and we get a thread called ''Why does boxing have to be on free TV?''

It's all short-termism. Funny how the younger promoters seem try to get terrestrial deals (to build their own market), whilst the older guys look to cash-out.

[Bricks]

A bigger draw than McGuigan, Bruno, Benn, Eubank, Naz who all boxed on terrestrial ???? .......................

Bruno and McGuigan fought at a time, when there wasnt a single fookin supermarket open past 5.30 on a weekday and all shops were closed on sundays. They fought at a time when there were only 4 tv channels unless u were in the extreme minority and had SKY (in its early days)...no internet in those days, no one had mobiles...u were considered exotic if you drank del monte pineapple juice...Hatton has had a bigger following than any of the 1990s terrestrial guys like benn, eubanks,naz, etc.

now we have tesco turkey twizzlers.....constant war in the gulf...bankers ripping us off....centrist right politicians...no unionization of any sort.....workfare slavery.....tesco towns.... an epidemic of drugs and alchohol abuse in every small town across the country..... Tesco schools and police stations....24 hour dumbed down tv that gives us programmes like ''The TA and The Taliban'' and 'X-factor.'

dont worry Mugabi everything will be alright when the Sun on Sunday launches tomorrow.

i for one think the extremely professional and upstanding moral leaders at Newscorp will do a stirling job in leading this country into new sunlit uplands of peace propserity and fairness.

its a totally NEW paper !!!





you idiot

are you on drugs banjo or whatever your name is? What kind of life do you have that you actually took the time to write those illiterate retarded utterings which sound like they come from a baboon dying of AIDS?.....i dont care what you think .......idiot.

[Bard of Boxrec]

Surely we understand that fighting talent pools are predominantly made up by the poorer members of society. Restricting viewing (to people who can affording it) is obviously detrimental to the next generations talent pool.

Even without taking this into account:

More restrictions = Less viewers = Smaller market = Lower potential future earnings = Lower demand for participation from all classes.

Jesus, it's like the last 20 years of boxing being on Sky and not terrestrial TV hasn't happened. The above statements are already happening and we get a thread called ''Why does boxing have to be on free TV?''

It's all short-termism. Funny how the younger promoters seem try to get terrestrial deals (to build their own market), whilst the older guys look to cash-out.

This. it's pretty damn simple really.

Don't understand those who try to argue that boxing will somehow get the same amount if exposure on subscription as terrestrial TV.

[jaywillo1983]

I dont live in the UK anymore, so my radar could be off a little.

I keep reading on here that boxing has to be on free TV to survive and or thrive.

I dont get it at all.

1) allegedly, Mick Hennessey and Hayemaker have all been on free TV in the UK and failed to deliver anything of note.

2) Football, Rugby, Cricket, UFC and wrestling are all broadcast on subscription TV and are absolutely thriving at the moment.

3) What hell is "free TV" anyway? As far as i know, UK is now 100% digital and everyone has access to subscription TV if they want it.

4) People are used to paying for content these days (see itunes) so why is boxing so special?

Last time i was home "Live on channel 5" was a punchline to a joke. Now its boxings way forward?

I said exactly this on here when people were saying that David Price was at fault for the fury fight happening. People going on that he should of fought fury on Channel 5 to get more exposure. In my eyes what a load of bollocks. Firstly so many people have sky now so it is very accessible, secondly and more importantly is the fact that people like to no more about the boxer than just what happens in the ring, people want to see the build up, the press conference, the weigh in, the training camps and a general insight into the fighters life. That is what makes a fighter popular. Channel 5 and any other terrestrial tv channel show a 30 second ringwalk , the fight and then a piss poor so experts view after. Were as with Sky you get to see everything that is going on with the fight, So people take more interest. By the way, all my points were seen as bollocks by the other posters, but the stats will suggest im the one who is right, any sky or pay channel backed boxer generally goes on to bigger things.

[stujones]

jaywillo,

Sorry what you are saying you cannot back up.

Would Price vs Fury get 1.7 million viewers tuning into it if it was on Sky - would Booth vs Gallahad got 1.7 million tuning into it.... even with 6 weeks of hype on ringside????

Name me two Sky/Pay TV stars who have become big names. I'll grant you Hatton.... another? Haye, mmm maybe? Froch.... nope.

Calzaghe - spent 10 years in the wilderness..... got into people's P4P rankings and into the limelight following 1 fight on ITV.

Hamed - was described by then controller of Sky Boxing, Gary Norman, as the "Golden Egg" when he got the Warren fighters.... a big ratings winner with ITV and a household name before he joined Sky.... same with Eubank.

If you are so confident you are correct and we are talking bollocks then back it up with figures and examples.

[DavidPayne]

Surely we understand that fighting talent pools are predominantly made up by the poorer members of society. Restricting viewing (to people who can affording it) is obviously detrimental to the next generations talent pool.

Even without taking this into account:

More restrictions = Less viewers = Smaller market = Lower potential future earnings = Lower demand for participation from all classes.

Jesus, it's like the last 20 years of boxing being on Sky and not terrestrial TV hasn't happened. The above statements are already happening and we get a thread called ''Why does boxing have to be on free TV?''

It's all short-termism. Funny how the younger promoters seem try to get terrestrial deals (to build their own market), whilst the older guys look to cash-out.

This. it's pretty damn simple really.

Don't understand those who try to argue that boxing will somehow get the same amount if exposure on subscription as terrestrial TV.

Amen. But lest we forget there are those who never knew terrestrial, event television in the way we did.

[English Wizard]

I dont live in the UK anymore, so my radar could be off a little.

I keep reading on here that boxing has to be on free TV to survive and or thrive.

I dont get it at all.

1) allegedly, Mick Hennessey and Hayemaker have all been on free TV in the UK and failed to deliver anything of note.

2) Football, Rugby, Cricket, UFC and wrestling are all broadcast on subscription TV and are absolutely thriving at the moment.

3) What hell is "free TV" anyway? As far as i know, UK is now 100% digital and everyone has access to subscription TV if they want it.

4) People are used to paying for content these days (see itunes) so why is boxing so special?

Last time i was home "Live on channel 5" was a punchline to a joke. Now its boxings way forward?

Free Tv = more exposure for the fighters and the sport

[smcb80]

it's this simple - i've heard four women talking about tyson fury. i doubt they'd know ricky hatton if he rode into the room hanging out the back of david haye. even though most have sky, most don't watch sky sports

[stujones]

it's this simple - i've heard four women talking about tyson fury. i doubt they'd know ricky hatton if he rode into the room hanging out the back of david haye. even though most have sky, most don't watch sky sports

Oh in another way. This farmer neighbour of mine always names his "working" rams after sport stars..... He's had Bruno, The Prince, Cooper, Audley, Tyson and Hatton has his rams named after boxers. His next purchase he said is going to be "Gallahad". No mention of a Froch, Danny Williams, Calzaghe etc.

[scottyp]

I dont live in the UK anymore, so my radar could be off a little.

I keep reading on here that boxing has to be on free TV to survive and or thrive.

I dont get it at all.

1) allegedly, Mick Hennessey and Hayemaker have all been on free TV in the UK and failed to deliver anything of note.

2) Football, Rugby, Cricket, UFC and wrestling are all broadcast on subscription TV and are absolutely thriving at the moment.

3) What hell is "free TV" anyway? As far as i know, UK is now 100% digital and everyone has access to subscription TV if they want it.

4) People are used to paying for content these days (see itunes) so why is boxing so special?

Last time i was home "Live on channel 5" was a punchline to a joke. Now its boxings way forward?

I said exactly this on here when people were saying that David Price was at fault for the fury fight happening. People going on that he should of fought fury on Channel 5 to get more exposure. In my eyes what a load of bollocks. Firstly so many people have sky now so it is very accessible, secondly and more importantly is the fact that people like to no more about the boxer than just what happens in the ring, people want to see the build up, the press conference, the weigh in, the training camps and a general insight into the fighters life. That is what makes a fighter popular. Channel 5 and any other terrestrial tv channel show a 30 second ringwalk , the fight and then a piss poor so experts view after. Were as with Sky you get to see everything that is going on with the fight, So people take more interest. By the way, all my points were seen as bollocks by the other posters, but the stats will suggest im the one who is right, any sky or pay channel backed boxer generally goes on to bigger things.

jaywillo1983 don't take this the wrong but you haven't a clue. Price did made a big mistake on taking the fight, I'm for one thinks Price at the moment is a way better fighter than fury and would stop him, if fury sorted himself out it could be a differnet story. But just think how many viewers would of tuned in on channel 5, if fury vs chisora got 3 million then price vs fury could of got at least 4 million and its a fight he would of won, and not everyone wants to watch all of the build up, i certainly don't i hate it when sky starts there footy programs 1 hour before kick off and you get interviews, reactions from ex pros who think they no better etc, i would be happy just for them to go live seconds before kick off.

But going back to price, do you know how many viewers tuned into his last fight against big john, well if you look on barb.co.uk it doesn't even rate in the top 10 and the 10th place show got 159k viewers, you do the maths thats a hell a lot less then the 3 millions viewers who watch fury vs chisora. so at the end of the day it's a no brainer, being on terrestial tv is the way forward if you want to become a star and price has given up that opportunity.

And before you say it, even his fight against sexton isn't going to grab millions of viewers, wasn't the highest viewing figure on sky last year for boxing aroun the 250k mark, again not 3 million is it, so it just goes to prove all the pre fight bull doesn't help to hit the big time. I bet you kid galahad and jason booth are now more known than david price.

[Bomber 1]

If it was free then it wouldn't take long till it was mainstream again IMHO, imagine Khan Froch Burns and Brook on terrestrial tv!! I think the numbers would be huge! Imagine a series between Murray Barker and Macklin! It'd be like the old days!

Oh well there is my 10p worth on it

[IRLangmaid25]

If it was free then it wouldn't take long till it was mainstream again IMHO, imagine Khan Froch Burns and Brook on terrestrial tv!! I think the numbers would be huge! Imagine a series between Murray Barker and Macklin! It'd be like the old days!

Oh well there is my 10p worth on it

Oh and your goodself as well Bomber as you have the ability to serve entertaining fights aller Nathan Cleverly and your first fight with Ovall McKenzie. It would be utterly amazing there was more boxing on free to air television however BBC are probably avoiding like the plague despite having saved some money from the deal with Sky with Formula 1, not sure about ITV and Channel 5 so far getting good figures with Mick Hennessy's shows that they broadcasted so far, and they got amazing viewing figures. Calzaghe got about 8million on ITV1 when he dismantled Jeff Lacy and Froch was too far in his thriller with Jean Pascal when he won the WBC first time round.

[stujones]

If it was free then it wouldn't take long till it was mainstream again IMHO, imagine Khan Froch Burns and Brook on terrestrial tv!! I think the numbers would be huge! Imagine a series between Murray Barker and Macklin! It'd be like the old days!
Oh well there is my 10p worth on it

Duh, Doo, Duh, Duh, Duuuuuuuuuh, Duh, Duh, Duh.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXHPyLEJTHk

We can but dream.

Pacquiao vs Floyd - getting up in the middle of the night before Daybreak! We can but dream.

[Bard of Boxrec]

YES!

Is it me, or did the first couple of pro Amir Khan fights on ITV use the classic big fight theme above?

[funso banjo baby]

now we have tesco turkey twizzlers.....constant war in the gulf...bankers ripping us off....centrist right politicians...no unionization of any sort.....workfare slavery.....tesco towns.... an epidemic of drugs and alchohol abuse in every small town across the country..... Tesco schools and police stations....24 hour dumbed down tv that gives us programmes like ''The TA and The Taliban'' and 'X-factor.'

dont worry Mugabi everything will be alright when the Sun on Sunday launches tomorrow.

i for one think the extremely professional and upstanding moral leaders at Newscorp will do a stirling job in leading this country into new sunlit uplands of peace propserity and fairness.

its a totally NEW paper !!!





you idiot

are you on drugs banjo or whatever your name is? What kind of life do you have that you actually took the time to write those illiterate retarded utterings which sound like they come from a baboon dying of AIDS?.....i dont care what you think .......idiot.

not quite Swift you two

[dondada]

not quite Swift you two

Could you please repeat that in English?

Jonathan Swift, methinks.