Martinez v Chavez Jnr on Primetime?

[Final round]

Rumours abound they've picked it up, apologies if false and I may well be moaning for no reason but I'll do it anyway...September is stacked BNation have picked up their fair share ,as a Sky boxing subscriber I 'expect' a fight of this size to be picked up. If they continue to show a lack of commitment to the sport I will drop my subscription , I like a bit of footie but these are hard times.

[Gazmac81]

ringside is slowly becoming the eddie hearn show

that said he puts on decent events with brook but i can see where your coming from

Chavez vs Martinez should be a good one , see what Chavez really is made off
he used to get slaughtered when he turned pro , i rate him highly

think Martinez on his game should win but Chavez is strong ( and probably come in @ 16st )

[Final round]

ringside is slowly becoming the eddie hearn show

that said he puts on decent events with brook but i can see where your coming from

Chavez vs Martinez should be a good one , see what Chavez really is made off
he used to get slaughtered when he turned pro , i rate him highly

think Martinez on his game should win but Chavez is strong ( and probably come in @ 16st )

Yeh Martinez v Chavez is an intriguing fight, Jnr has proven he's a force to be reckoned and comes in massive which will pose it's problems but I think Sergio is hungry to prove a point. He's begged for this fight and I think with his angles , power and speed he will begin to break down the strong Chavez late on but maybe Chavez can crowd him and use his size to bully and slow down Martinez enough to dig in some hard shots of his own.

[smoggy7188]

When i heard they were doing a ones to watch programme i thought they would be showcasing some young talent just starting out in the game and not a free promotion for matchroom boxing.

[mickey1975]

When i heard they were doing a ones to watch programme i thought they would be showcasing some young talent just starting out in the game and not a free promotion for matchroom boxing.

Tonights Ringside was pathetic. It could seriously have been called "Matchroom Boxing Update". It was almost all hype. I thought as it was on that there must be a Froch special on its way and, lo and behold, next week is the Froch special! They will gloss over his beating by Ward and concentrate heavily on the Bute fight. I am half expecting a "Barker's back" special the week after where they repeatedly show him landing a few shots on Martinez and ignore the fact he seemed to be knocked out with a glancing blow. I am seriously thinking of cancelling. Frampton is not going to get the Quigg or Munroe fights and Bellew is not getting the Clev fight. Froch-Kessler would be good but that could be a year away.
P.S and Barker is crap.

[Manchester Hitman]

I'm not expecting Sky to even consider putting this card on - its a joke. The only hope we have got is that Macklin's on the undercard - but in all honesty even that probably wouldnt be enough. If its primetime, so be it - better then not getting the action at all. I've used them for the last Mayweather and Pac fights and must admit they didnt let me down in terms of the quality of the feed etc (I watched online).

[fizzjambo]

Ringside tonight was slick, well put together and clearly designed to build a following for the guys their looking to headline their shows alongside Froch. That said it was also a hypefest of the highest order. I wish Bellew and Frampton all the best and like watching both but they are Commonwealth and British champions, you'd think they were two weight world champs with the hype tonight........

[mfc_se15]

I thought alongside the domestic Hearn shows Sky would still continue to pick up some of the big international fights - if this news is true really doesn't seem like it, which is disapointing

[leforge]

I thought alongside the domestic Hearn shows Sky would still continue to pick up some of the big international fights - if this news is true really doesn't seem like it, which is disapointing

They only interested in viewing figures how many would watch this live at 4 in morning? If boxing was more popular they show more.

[winkveron]

That's the problem with Sky. Same with the news channel. Basically the shows are glorified adverts. Don't get me wrong, I like them, but they are adverts. IFor example, if Tyson Fury or Khan (when he wasn't on Sky) fought they would neglect to mention it. So they're not a 'sport' channel, they are 'sky' sports. That's the difference. Frustrating as it is. That's what I loved about the ill-fated Setanta, and Bunce's hour. He talked about boxing, not just setanta boxing.

[mfc_se15]

That's the problem with Sky. Same with the news channel. Basically the shows are glorified adverts. Don't get me wrong, I like them, but they are adverts. IFor example, if Tyson Fury or Khan (when he wasn't on Sky) fought they would neglect to mention it. So they're not a 'sport' channel, they are 'sky' sports. That's the difference. Frustrating as it is. That's what I loved about the ill-fated Setanta, and Bunce's hour. He talked about boxing, not just setanta boxing.

I tend to agree (especially in relation to this weeks ringside). However I would say Ringside actually does talk a fair amount about the boxing they don't have, much more so than for example SSN and Soccer Am talk about the FA cup etc.

[Dan Dares]

I can take or leave ringside, and its obviously an advert for their boxing content (which makes sense) but it's better than nothing. For me, they should devote a lot more time to Ed Robinson's newsy type stuff, and let him do some quickfire 'stool' interviews.

Smith and Nelson should get a couch for when they do their bits. Everyone always seems to look really uncomfortable, almost as if they need to press one out.

I thoroughly enjoyed the 'how to box' programme. Good to see Dappa Napa on it.

[whiskey]

I'm glad we have ringside.

And if people think they hype their fighters - you should really check out the rival's version !

[winkveron]

I can take or leave ringside, and its obviously an advert for their boxing content (which makes sense) but it's better than nothing. For me, they should devote a lot more time to Ed Robinson's newsy type stuff, and let him do some quickfire 'stool' interviews.

Smith and Nelson should get a couch for when they do their bits. Everyone always seems to look really uncomfortable, almost as if they need to press one out.

I thoroughly enjoyed the 'how to box' programme. Good to see Dappa Napa on it.

You want him to ask the fighters about their 'stools'? Haha

[chad]

Someone uploaded this on another forum:



Interesting that no price is given as of yet.

Since allegedly arrived I'm surprised that Primetime has continued to function. £15 always was a bit of a rip-off however now it just seems greedy.

How many people are likely to buy this event? It goes up against a fairly solid night of action on allegedly. To be honest, only proper informed boxing fans will have a real desire to watch Martinez Vs. Chavez Jr. To me it seems a strange fight to offer on a PPV basis to the British market.

[whiskey]

Someone uploaded this on another forum:

[img]http://img832.%20.us/img832/5095/primetimef.jpg[/img]

Interesting that no price is given as of yet.

Since Allegedly channel arrived I'm surprised that Primetime has continued to function. £15 always was a bit of a rip-off however now it just seems greedy.

How many people are likely to buy this event? It goes up against a fairly solid night of action on Allegedly channel. To be honest, only proper informed boxing fans will have a real desire to watch Martinez Vs. Chavez Jr. To me it seems a strange fight to offer on a PPV basis to the British market.

Sorry dude to disagree, but the 456 sched pales in significance the same night as Martinez vs Chavez. They have Yoan Pablo in Germany, followed by the Saul Alvarez mismatch.

Martinez vs Chavez is a top marquee fight.

With regards Primetime - Maybe people are simply happy to buy the goods in a one-off PPV basis through their remote control , than fiddle around subscribing. Also their web stream version is smooth as silk.

456 has the odd interesting bout and have picked up nice overseas fights indeed. But their affinity with certain folk has been frowned upon, and sneaking into forums to bitch at fans has stirred the wasps nest further. Fighters left to rot, fighters trying to leave - and really poor opposition to fight.

Eggs from caged hens taste fine. It's about ethics in what you purchase and where that money goes to for a lot of people. Fair trade as they call it. Primetime simply offer a paid service, not an ethical conundrum , thus succeed.

They also treat all of the boxing websites very well with giveaways etc. They are cute because they know it's better business to create allies than enemies, especially with hardcore boxing fans.

[fizzjambo]

Skip the b******t but I'd suggest however we play it £10 for a months worth of boxing tends to beat £15 for four hours worth.

I'm not knocking Primetime, good luck to them if their model works, but it does't for me.

Plus let's not moralise this. Everyone has been an a******e at some point in their life and all good promoters, when you boil it down, are the same in that they are in this to make money. I always find it strange that people on forums defend promoter A and knock promoter B. I couldn't give a mutts nut who is promoting a show, in fact I often don't care if a certain fighter is on it or not. The bouts being decently matched and of reasonable quality is all I care about.

Finally I've never heard of any promoter who hasn't been slagged or praised by one fighter or another, usually either when they've just left or joined them. Their pretty much all as bad as each other eventually.........

[whiskey]

Plus let's not moralise this. Everyone has been an a******e at some point in their life and all good promoters, when you boil it down, are the same in that they are in this to make money. I always find it strange that people on forums defend promoter A and knock promoter B. I couldn't give a mutts nuts.

Well that's one way of examining the trend of thoughts on it all when you read topics on it.

But I bet 'supporters of Promoter A' would be quick to say something like: "In this to make money by making mismatches against opponents you have never heard of before. And there wouldn't be forum either, they have been shut down along with BBBoC." or something along those lines.

Would those critics have a point or not? No doubt £10 is good value for a months boxing (although the first couple of months they showed little)

I'm just replying to Chad, offering reasons why a lot haven't jumped all over the channel, that I've read on eastside etc.

I don't subscribe because the picture is totally shocking on a 65" television, like Vaseline has been smeared on the camera lens. If I stand 60ft away in the garden it's watchable, but not very practical when it's snowing and 3am.

[earsjohn]

Plus let's not moralise this. Everyone has been an a******e at some point in their life and all good promoters, when you boil it down, are the same in that they are in this to make money. I always find it strange that people on forums defend promoter A and knock promoter B. I couldn't give a mutts nuts.

Well that's one way of examining the trend of thoughts on it all when you read topics on it.

But I bet 'supporters of Promoter A' would be quick to say something like: "In this to make money by making mismatches against opponents you have never heard of before. And there wouldn't be forum either, they have been shut down along with BBBoC." or something along those lines.

Would those critics have a point or not? No doubt £10 is good value for a months boxing (although the first couple of months they showed little)

I'm just replying to Chad, offering reasons why a lot haven't jumped all over the channel, that I've read on eastside etc.

I don't subscribe because the picture is totally shocking on a 65" television, like Vaseline has been smeared on the camera lens. If I stand 60ft away in the garden it's watchable, but not very practical when it's snowing and 3am.

The problem with comparing £15 for one fight with £10 for one month is that it assumes that all the boxing on BN is content that subscribers would be happy to pay for under a non-subscription situation (remembering that only a tiny minority of boxing fans are crazed nuts who will base their weeks social diary around Bunce's Boxing Hour and Tony Conquest v Ian Tims).

The allegedly schedule for September is indeed deep, in terms of content, and arguably the best single months offering since encryption. But of the shows to be broadcast, how many would people be happy to pay for? I would argue that it is just the one - the Mitchell v Burns cracker. The rest of the bills are, to varying degrees, interesting but would largely be considered average to poor Sky Saturday Fight Night fodder (BJ Saunders v Jarrod Fletcher, Hernandez v Ross, etc). It seems (to me at least) that allegedly are running a PPV channel in all but name - they put up one PPV-worthy fight a month and you effectively get a whole load of "filler" for free. What this all assumes is that fights like Martinez v Chavez and Burns v Mitchell are PPV fights. They wouldn't have been 2-3 years ago, but that they are now accepted as pay-fights by the viewing public shows how effectively promoters have manipulated the changing TV environment.

[fizzjambo]

Plus let's not moralise this. Everyone has been an a******e at some point in their life and all good promoters, when you boil it down, are the same in that they are in this to make money. I always find it strange that people on forums defend promoter A and knock promoter B. I couldn't give a mutts nuts.

Well that's one way of examining the trend of thoughts on it all when you read topics on it.

But I bet 'supporters of Promoter A' would be quick to say something like: "In this to make money by making mismatches against opponents you have never heard of before. And there wouldn't be forum either, they have been shut down along with BBBoC." or something along those lines.

Would those critics have a point or not? No doubt £10 is good value for a months boxing (although the first couple of months they showed little)

I'm just replying to Chad, offering reasons why a lot haven't jumped all over the channel, that I've read on eastside etc.

I don't subscribe because the picture is totally shocking on a 65" television, like Vaseline has been smeared on the camera lens. If I stand 60ft away in the garden it's watchable, but not very practical when it's snowing and 3am.

I understand where your coming from and I think you've got good reason not to subscribe in your case. Things like the lack of HD availability, over-running schedule's, im-perfect picture quality and lack of activity of their British fighters are issues that they need to sort out. However they have been around less than a year and although it would be stretching the point to say that they make the required changes quickly they are improving. They've sorted the Virgin issue, improved their production, and sorted their website, etc. It's not much but they are getting there.

Trust me, I'm also no supporter of allegedly and the lack of activity of his fighters frustrates the hell out of me. I just feel that he has had 25 years to build up enemies whereas Eddie Hearn has had 2 or 3. I do feel that alot of people are blind to what one does wrong and the other does right. The Bellew bill is a case in point for me, if it's meant to be a sign of Sky's new, deep, quality bills then its simply not up to standard. If it was on 437 it would be catching a slagging.

I'm really only interested in the bill and not the promoter. It always surprises me the number of people who are more interested in the other way round

[whiskey]

Yeah true. A lot concentrate on politics, but that's the nature of the beast unfortunately.

Be nice in HD with more home-grown events.

Mitchell vs Burns is a big step in the right direction it must be said. Let's hope that trend continues.

[earsjohn]

Yeah true. A lot concentrate on politics, but that's the nature of the beast unfortunately.

Be nice in HD with more home-grown events.

Mitchell vs Burns is a big step in the right direction it must be said. Let's hope that trend continues.

Ultimately, Boxing will live or die by the fights that are made. Mitchell v Burns is at the top of the list when it comes to mouth-watering potential domestic fights and its happening, so that's good. But the politics need to be recognised even here, as this fight is only happening because both fighters are working with the same promoter, rather than it being a step in the right direction and a sign of things to come (IMO). The big heavyweight fight that everyone wants to see (Fury v Price) was scuppered by the TV landscape, while there seems no prospect of a Hearn v Warren fighter getting it on anytime soon.

[Kilburn]

£95 a month in suscription fees so I can watch Boxing and UFC fights, and I can't even get to see the Martinez v Chavez without forking out another £15.

I wish Primetime would quietly go away and die.

[Wales]

£95 a month in suscription fees so I can watch Boxing and UFC fights, and I can't even get to see the Martinez v Chavez without forking out another £15.

I wish Primetime would quietly go away and die.

110% with you - what do primetime bring to the party

[stujones]

Have to say, probably the fight I am most looking forward to all year. Chavez has been steadily improving and is massive for the weight - has he caught Martinez at the right time?

Well actually the fight I was most looking forward to this year was Alverez vs Williams - such as shame.