More or less promotions?
-
Khaosai-Galaxy
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 2739
- Joined: 29 Apr 2007, 12:15
More or less promotions?
What do you think would be better for boxing in the UK?
A very small number of big, powerful promotions, with the ability to control the presentation of the product from end to end, dictate terms etc.
OR
Large number of smaller promotions, each with their own distribution channels and methods of presentations, who work together (or not) on an ad hoc basis.
Basically, Closed Platform vs Open Sourced, for you computer geeks.
A very small number of big, powerful promotions, with the ability to control the presentation of the product from end to end, dictate terms etc.
OR
Large number of smaller promotions, each with their own distribution channels and methods of presentations, who work together (or not) on an ad hoc basis.
Basically, Closed Platform vs Open Sourced, for you computer geeks.
-
Bronxbull666
- Light Heavyweight
- Posts: 384
- Joined: 16 Aug 2012, 17:00
Re: More or less promotions?
If you are forcing a decision between the two, then I'd go for the smaller promotions. Ideally they'd have an ad hoc mentality and work together. There'd be healthy rivalry, no monopolisation, probably better ranking systems to create equal opportunities for fighters. The best would have to fight more regularly and honesty would prevail.
I do like the current climate tbh. The best prospects all seem to get a bit of notoriety early doors. I know the smaller promotions are pretty much a feeder system to the larger promotions, but everyone gets a slice of the cake, just different sized slices. I think it's a healthy competitive business at the moment in Britain.
I do like the current climate tbh. The best prospects all seem to get a bit of notoriety early doors. I know the smaller promotions are pretty much a feeder system to the larger promotions, but everyone gets a slice of the cake, just different sized slices. I think it's a healthy competitive business at the moment in Britain.
Re: More or less promotions?
One Promoter, UFC style, ensuring we dont miss out on fights like Hatton Witter etc... never goingt o happen though, and I agree the way its working at the moment seems the best its been for a long while.
-
Khaosai-Galaxy
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 2739
- Joined: 29 Apr 2007, 12:15
Re: More or less promotions?
Wales wrote:One Promoter, UFC style, ensuring we dont miss out on fights like Hatton Witter etc... never goingt o happen though, and I agree the way its working at the moment seems the best its been for a long while.
I think there are probably more "B" level stars (Frotch, et al) in good fights then there has been for a long time, however there isn't really any "A" stars at the moment, no Hameds, Lewis, Eubanks, Benns etc.
-
Bronxbull666
- Light Heavyweight
- Posts: 384
- Joined: 16 Aug 2012, 17:00
Re: More or less promotions?
To be fair, Eubank, Benn, Hamed were not the best in their divisions. This is a typical, stuck in the past perception of boxing. Just because they were on ITV 15-20 years ago, the casual fan thinks they were the be all and end all.Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:Wales wrote:One Promoter, UFC style, ensuring we dont miss out on fights like Hatton Witter etc... never goingt o happen though, and I agree the way its working at the moment seems the best its been for a long while.
I think there are probably more "B" level stars (Frotch, et al) in good fights then there has been for a long time, however there isn't really any "A" stars at the moment, no Hameds, Lewis, Eubanks, Benns etc.
As for Lewis, yes he was good, but he wasn't the best! Bowe would have dethroned him, prime Tyson would have if he hadn't raped that naive woman, and Vitali beat him fair and square, Lewis had to lace him and butt him to win.
Calzaghe is the only A class fighter since Wilde! Price will be the next if Frampton doesn't beat him to it.
Re: More or less promotions?
I assume you are being ironic/provocative Bronx?
Last edited by Loynesy on 18 Sep 2012, 04:46, edited 1 time in total.
-
Khaosai-Galaxy
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 2739
- Joined: 29 Apr 2007, 12:15
Re: More or less promotions?
Bronxbull666 wrote:To be fair, Eubank, Benn, Hamed were not the best in their divisions. This is a typical, stuck in the past perception of boxing. Just because they were on ITV 15-20 years ago, the casual fan thinks they were the be all and end all.Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:Wales wrote:One Promoter, UFC style, ensuring we dont miss out on fights like Hatton Witter etc... never goingt o happen though, and I agree the way its working at the moment seems the best its been for a long while.
I think there are probably more "B" level stars (Frotch, et al) in good fights then there has been for a long time, however there isn't really any "A" stars at the moment, no Hameds, Lewis, Eubanks, Benns etc.
As for Lewis, yes he was good, but he wasn't the best! Bowe would have dethroned him, prime Tyson would have if he hadn't raped that naive woman, and Vitali beat him fair and square, Lewis had to lace him and butt him to win.
Calzaghe is the only A class fighter since Wilde! Price will be the next if Frampton doesn't beat him to it.
Yes i assume this is a joke.
Just in case it isnt, go and re-read what i wrote. I said 'stars' not 'fighters'
-
Bronxbull666
- Light Heavyweight
- Posts: 384
- Joined: 16 Aug 2012, 17:00
Re: More or less promotions?
Yeh sorry, few too many Vinos last night. Total mis-read!
-
Khaosai-Galaxy
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 2739
- Joined: 29 Apr 2007, 12:15
Re: More or less promotions?
Bronxbull666 wrote:Yeh sorry, few too many Vinos last night. Total mis-read!
Hang your head in shame, young man.
-
Bronxbull666
- Light Heavyweight
- Posts: 384
- Joined: 16 Aug 2012, 17:00
Re: More or less promotions?
I post more crap than normal when plonked.Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:Bronxbull666 wrote:Yeh sorry, few too many Vinos last night. Total mis-read!
Hang your head in shame, young man.