Time to end Prizefighter?

[rio]

4 a year would be fine with one of them heavyweights international. Dont think anyone would have a problem with 4 year.

[hurlock]

The concept is great. But it's time to change the format!
I don't know what was worse the pf or adam booths illuminous yellow jumper!

[spudder56]

I agree with you completely, but that's the reality.

Yep, can't understand how the BBBofC allow it when it clearly breaks their rules.

Which regulation does it clearly break ? I seem to recall that their regulations were changed a few years ago to accommadate the prizefighter concept/format

[Final round]

It goes against the very bedrock of boxing - Debutants are supposed to win and are typically matched easy.

As for the format, I don't like it and never have but then it's not marketed at me, it's marketed at casual fans who know nothing (or little) about boxing.

Freddie Flintoff never had it easy.

[earsjohn]

Yep bin it.

The last thing a sport on its knees struggling for viewers and attendees (how many were at the Keepmoat for a WORLD TITLE fight the previous week??) is a guarantee of both. It's not the greatest technically and it is of relatively low relevance in terms of boxers career progression, but surely the packed house at the York Hall and the viewership on Sky are good things for "boxing"?

The snobbery on this forum is alarming at times. Without Prizefighter on saturday, there would have been no boxing on TV in the evening. As it was, the PF show led up to the live show later that night, featuring two relatively unknown Brits in World title fights (one live, one repeated) and an absolute corker of a main event between 2 guys most casuals wouldn't have heard of. Any of the casuals hanging about to watch the late night show would have been treated to some great action and maybe, just maybe, some kind of wider boxing appreciation would have been sparked behind those previously dead eyes.

If you don't like it, don't watch it (I taped it and watched the semis and final to kill time between fights on the late night card).

[orbtastic]

I think the general consensus is that it's at the expense of "regular" boxing, which could be packing out the York Hall or another smallish arena, in addition to eating up six or more of the 20 allocated dates in SKY's schedule.

[ILikeBeer]

It's not going to end, because it makes money.

Sadly, boxing is as much a business as a sport these days. And has been for a long time. A person who draws fans will be given opportunities, regardless of whether they have earned them. Same thing with Prizefighter. Hearn isn't going to go; "Here's a format I have that earns me a lot of money, oh but there are some people on an internet forum that don't like it. Okay, it'll cost me a lot of money, but I'd better drop it."

I rarely watch Prizefighter, there's literally only been one or two that I've watched in full. There's been several I've watched half the night, got bored and turned off. It's a gimmick thing, and won't be popular with hardcore fans that watch a lot of boxing. But boxing for a long time has worked under the assumption that hardcore fans will probably watch boxing anyway, so should market itself at the more casual couple-of-times a year crowd. That's who Prizefighter is aimed at, and as long as it makes money doing so, sadly it's hear to say.

[ILikeBeer]

I think the general consensus is that it's at the expense of "regular" boxing, which could be packing out the York Hall or another smallish arena, in addition to eating up six or more of the 20 allocated dates in SKY's schedule.

I think most people on this site would rather watch one of the old Friday Night Fight Night style cards with two people fighting for a British or European title at York Hall, or the home fighter's local leisure centre. I know I would.

Without seeing the data, I'm pretty confident that Prizefighter is getting higher viewing figures than that sort of bill though, and probably sells more tickets. Didn't they have to move one of the heavyweight Prizefighters from Bethnal Green because the demand was far, far higher than the small venue could hold?

Prizefighter might be a bit guff, but sadly Sky Sports/Hearn stable don't care. What they care about is how many people are watching, and how many people are spending £££'s. That's just business.

[orbtastic]

Well yeah, like I said earlier, it's not marketed at boxing fans.

It's a business.

I don't like their model at the moment and it's why I've binned off my SKY sub for the first time since 1996. I resent paying my HD sports sub for their boxing output, it's just not worth it.

[earsjohn]

I think the general consensus is that it's at the expense of "regular" boxing, which could be packing out the York Hall or another smallish arena, in addition to eating up six or more of the 20 allocated dates in SKY's schedule.

But is that consensus view actually backed up by anything firm?

Is there less "regular" boxing on TV now than during the 2-3 years before the evil Prizefighter turned up?

And does "regular" boxing actually pack out York Hall and equivalents? I've been to shows featuring decent names and they're rarely full (and frequently no less dull than an average prizefighter).

I think most people on this site would rather watch one of the old Friday Night Fight Night style cards with two people fighting for a British or European title at York Hall, or the home fighter's local leisure centre. I know I would.

Really? I thought one of the main criticisms during the 4-promoter Sky era was of promoter protected fighters in dull mismatches for meaningless titles in half empty, municipal sports halls. For every McDonnell v Hall (good, interesting fight), there were at least four Gavin v Lomax's.

[MightyWarrior]

It's absolute crap, Hearn pushes it on to plank head Adam Smith as it's cheap as chips to produce.
Chuck a bunch of journeymen fighters a few hundred and you've got a supposed rip roaring show with "atmosphere". Sky serve up this garbage and turn a blind eye to the real world class boxing shows out there.

[doctorboxing]

There are too many of them and the standard sometimes is not great but it is an exciting format and should not be scrapped. If it was cut down to about 2 a year then it would last but if it carries on as it is, people will get bored quickly.

[Benelio]

It's good fun, but shouldn't take up the bulk of the show allocation on Sky. It's a shame Sky don't show many international shows anymore.

I'd rather watch novices and prospects fight in fairly competitive 3 round bouts than watch them get a decision against an overmatched journeyman on the undercard of show.

[ILikeBeer]

Really? I thought one of the main criticisms during the 4-promoter Sky era was of promoter protected fighters in dull mismatches for meaningless titles in half empty, municipal sports halls. For every McDonnell v Hall (good, interesting fight), there were at least four Gavin v Lomax's.

I didn't say I wanted mismatches. A decent domestic fight isn't the same thing as a mismatch.

Maybe I was speaking for others, when I said most people on this site would want to see something like that, I was kind of assuming. But why would you not want to see that, if both fighters are really going for it, and the title means something for them? Okay, sometimes you'd be seeing a 13-4 fighter going against a 19-5 opponent, so we weren't always seeing world class fighters or top prospects. (Though, we sometimes would.) But if they were two people who were decent at domestic level having a big tear-up, how can you possibly complain? There aren't going to be big super-fights on every week.

Obviously two British level boxers fighting in Orpington Town Hall isn't on the level of Carl Froch vs Mikkel Kessler at the 02. But if it's a decent domestic tear-up, from two boxers who think winning the British and Commonwealth title is a big deal, then I can't see what there is to complain about. They're both going to go for it, and we got a lot of decent fights at that level. What's the complaint? The venu doesn't hold 20,000 people, so the fight must be shit?

[earsjohn]

Really? I thought one of the main criticisms during the 4-promoter Sky era was of promoter protected fighters in dull mismatches for meaningless titles in half empty, municipal sports halls. For every McDonnell v Hall (good, interesting fight), there were at least four Gavin v Lomax's.

I didn't say I wanted mismatches. A decent domestic fight isn't the same thing as a mismatch.

Maybe I was speaking for others, when I said most people on this site would want to see something like that, I was kind of assuming. But why would you not want to see that, if both fighters are really going for it, and the title means something for them? Okay, sometimes you'd be seeing a 13-4 fighter going against a 19-5 opponent, so we weren't always seeing world class fighters or top prospects. (Though, we sometimes would.) But if they were two people who were decent at domestic level having a big tear-up, how can you possibly complain? There aren't going to be big super-fights on every week.

Obviously two British level boxers fighting in Orpington Town Hall isn't on the level of Carl Froch vs Mikkel Kessler at the 02. But if it's a decent domestic tear-up, from two boxers who think winning the British and Commonwealth title is a big deal, then I can't see what there is to complain about. They're both going to go for it, and we got a lot of decent fights at that level. What's the complaint? The venu doesn't hold 20,000 people, so the fight must be poo?

I don't generally complain about any boxing on TV, so I wouldn't complain about your 13-4 v 19-5 tear up. But others will. Especially when the tear-up is anything but and turns into an ugly 10 round hug fest. Those fights happen at all levels and piss people off regardless.

My issue was with mismatches masquerading as TV headliners, in essence. They are in front of half-empty sports halls because the fight doesn't capture the public imagination. If PF goes and is replaced by more domestic action, we will see a return to the days where these types of cards are the norm - just look at the list of sky fights in 2010-2011 - there were some shockers there.

Promoters will always plump for a mismatch over a decent domestic dust-up to protect their fighters, unless there is greater quality control operated by TV. Now we have a situation where Sky have said we don't want anymore of the turgid friday night shows that did nothing for anyone, so its a limited number of dates, focus on bigger cards, supplemented by the guaranteed success of a prizefighter.

[orbtastic]

Ten years ago (or so) SKY were fixated with having titles on the line all the time hence the WBU and all these other noddy titles, they moved away from that and seemed to be getting back having reasonable match-ups and "proper" domestic titles on the line.

I've been to the York Hall loads, I've never seen it empty? Even the Gavin/Lomax card you deride wasn't that bad, I enjoyed it and the two non boxing fans I went with seemed to too.

As to whether the consensus is anything "firm" - Well there seem to be enough threads about it on here and every other boxing forum I go on. I've seen plenty of people complaining about the Matchroom "monopoly" and the fact that PF takes up a hefty part of the SKY boxing schedule. Also seen plenty of people cancel their subs. Mind you, enough people moaning about b*xn*t**n too

Of course there's less regular boxing on SKY if 25% of their schedule is taken up with prizefighter, stands to reason.

[dammage7]

certain divisions are more glamorous

2ndly, i think it should only be international prizefighter now, as that way can get few better fighters.

if domestic. they should try sanction it for a title say English if not British title

[ILikeBeer]

I don't generally complain about any boxing on TV, so I wouldn't complain about your 13-4 v 19-5 tear up. But others will. Especially when the tear-up is anything but and turns into an ugly 10 round hug fest. Those fights happen at all levels and piss people off regardless.

My issue was with mismatches masquerading as TV headliners, in essence. They are in front of half-empty sports halls because the fight doesn't capture the public imagination. If PF goes and is replaced by more domestic action, we will see a return to the days where these types of cards are the norm - just look at the list of sky fights in 2010-2011 - there were some shockers there.

Promoters will always plump for a mismatch over a decent domestic dust-up to protect their fighters, unless there is greater quality control operated by TV. Now we have a situation where Sky have said we don't want anymore of the turgid friday night shows that did nothing for anyone, so its a limited number of dates, focus on bigger cards, supplemented by the guaranteed success of a prizefighter.

I'm still not seeing the complaint with small hall shows. There was some real quality fights. Okay, some were going to be a bit shit. But what's your point? You say; "My issue was with mismatches masquerading as TV headliners, in essence." But, is your suggestion that this doesn't happen now that we don't have Friday Fight Night?

Nobody is defending mismatches. Nobody is defending big names fighting tomato cans, but that is far from exclusive to domestic level fights. It happens when fighters have world titles as well.

Are people mistaking domestic level fights for mismatches? If both fighters are at the same level, it's not a mismatch. No matter what the level is. I'm not saying every British/Commonwealth title fight has been awesome. Some have been great to watch, others have been a bit duff.

Calling for small hall bills to be gotten rid of completely, just because you can name fights that have been crap mismatches is a nonsense. You can do that at any level. Should we scrap boxing completely?

We should complain about mismatches. Fine. But it seems odd to equate them with only one level of boxing. Do people legitimately think that any fight above European level is automatically a fight of the year candidate?

[Tykemania]

I like it with the heavyweights because you have that perception that, ey oop, anything could happen here. And the line ups seem to have better quality names.

Rest of it sucks ass...

[earsjohn]

I don't generally complain about any boxing on TV, so I wouldn't complain about your 13-4 v 19-5 tear up. But others will. Especially when the tear-up is anything but and turns into an ugly 10 round hug fest. Those fights happen at all levels and piss people off regardless.

My issue was with mismatches masquerading as TV headliners, in essence. They are in front of half-empty sports halls because the fight doesn't capture the public imagination. If PF goes and is replaced by more domestic action, we will see a return to the days where these types of cards are the norm - just look at the list of sky fights in 2010-2011 - there were some shockers there.

Promoters will always plump for a mismatch over a decent domestic dust-up to protect their fighters, unless there is greater quality control operated by TV. Now we have a situation where Sky have said we don't want anymore of the turgid friday night shows that did nothing for anyone, so its a limited number of dates, focus on bigger cards, supplemented by the guaranteed success of a prizefighter.

I'm still not seeing the complaint with small hall shows. There was some real quality fights. Okay, some were going to be a bit poo. But what's your point? You say; "My issue was with mismatches masquerading as TV headliners, in essence." But, is your suggestion that this doesn't happen now that we don't have Friday Fight Night?

Nobody is defending mismatches. Nobody is defending big names fighting tomato cans, but that is far from exclusive to domestic level fights. It happens when fighters have world titles as well.

Are people mistaking domestic level fights for mismatches? If both fighters are at the same level, it's not a mismatch. No matter what the level is. I'm not saying every British/Commonwealth title fight has been awesome. Some have been great to watch, others have been a bit duff.

Calling for small hall bills to be gotten rid of completely, just because you can name fights that have been crap mismatches is a nonsense. You can do that at any level. Should we scrap boxing completely?

We should complain about mismatches. Fine. But it seems odd to equate them with only one level of boxing. Do people legitimately think that any fight above European level is automatically a fight of the year candidate?

I think we are heading off in different paths as I'm not sure that we're talking about the same thing. This is about boxing on TV and the use of Prizefighter.

Did i really call for the end of small hall shows? It would surprise me if I did. I was simply trying to point out that replacing Prizefighter with the shows we are both talking about (a variety of balanced domestic scraps, mismatches for UK/CW/Euro titles and vice versa) will not improve the content provided by Sky - there will still be people complaining about nobodies fighting in leisure centres, dull match ups and mismatches.

Using your line "I'm not saying every British/Commonwealth title fight has been awesome. Some have been great to watch, others have been a bit duff. " but replacing British/Commonwealth title fight with Prizefighter and you have my point in a nutshell. It seems the argument to bin PF is based on the inherent snobbery of Boxing fans when it comes to attracting casuals, rather than anything tangible.

[keithmoonhangover]

It goes against the very bedrock of boxing - Debutants are supposed to win and are typically matched easy.

As for the format, I don't like it and never have but then it's not marketed at me, it's marketed at casual fans who know nothing (or little) about boxing.

Freddie Flintoff never had it easy.

My local bookmaker still doesn't understand how I knew he was going to win.

[ILikeBeer]

I think we are heading off in different paths as I'm not sure that we're talking about the same thing. This is about boxing on TV and the use of Prizefighter.

Did i really call for the end of small hall shows? It would surprise me if I did. I was simply trying to point out that replacing Prizefighter with the shows we are both talking about (a variety of balanced domestic scraps, mismatches for UK/CW/Euro titles and vice versa) will not improve the content provided by Sky - there will still be people complaining about nobodies fighting in leisure centres, dull match ups and mismatches.

Using your line "I'm not saying every British/Commonwealth title fight has been awesome. Some have been great to watch, others have been a bit duff. " but replacing British/Commonwealth title fight with Prizefighter and you have my point in a nutshell. It seems the argument to bin PF is based on the inherent snobbery of Boxing fans when it comes to attracting casuals, rather than anything tangible.

Fair enough. But in itself, I wasn't calling for the end of Prizefighter either. I merely said that I'd personally would prefer to watch Small Hall shows than PF. I did say I assumed most boxing fans would, but that's perhaps erroneous. I shouldn't assume what I would prefer is what everybody would prefer.

I've nothing against Prizefighter, but would like to see less of them if there is a limited Sky TV budget. I guess what you're saying is we shouldn't only see small hall shows, which is of course also true.

My real complaint is that Sky coverage has lessened, rather than what it's being used for. I'd have nothing against a Prizefighter being on Sky Sports every two months, if the other 7 weeks had boxing on as well. (If they were a mixture of British small town halls, American bills and mega-fights from the UK such as next week's Carl Froch fight.)

[Syntax Error]

It goes against the very bedrock of boxing - Debutants are supposed to win and are typically matched easy.

As for the format, I don't like it and never have but then it's not marketed at me, it's marketed at casual fans who know nothing (or little) about boxing.

Thats abit unfair, Audrey won it twice, the casual and the enthusiast both knew he was still shite !

If Audley Harrison can win it twice, then I believe that it proves the format is flawed, as Harrison couldn't win a raffle ordinarily

[Clint Magnum]

It's absolute crap, Hearn pushes it on to plank head Adam Smith as it's cheap as chips to produce.
Chuck a bunch of journeymen fighters a few hundred and you've got a supposed rip roaring show with "atmosphere". Sky serve up this garbage and turn a blind eye to the real world class boxing shows out there.

X2
The original idea was interesting but the actual standard of 90% of the boxing is bobbins.

[johnswan1]

End Prizefighter asap.

Initially fighters were going gung ho from the off because it was only three rounds. Now they know it's about preserving energy so every fight is a hold fest.