Time to end Prizefighter?

Has Prizefighter run its course?

Yes
77
65%
No
42
35%
 
Total votes: 119

pyenest77
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1491
Joined: 29 Sep 2009, 15:14

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by pyenest77 »

keithmoonhangover wrote:
housesecond wrote:How many other bills do you go to where 8 fighters want to win?
One of the reasons I don't go to many shows is the cards are filled with 6-0 fighters against 7-37 fighters. I don't enjoy that kind of fight.
I have always maintained this myself. My hand would be in my pocket a lot more even if the matches were 60/40 instead of the usual 90/10.
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27520
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by stujones »

jessi wrote:
orbtastic wrote: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 !
Jessi, bit of a short memory there? Following Prizefighter and a fight that Michael Sprott, a fighter never beyond domestic level, threw away in the final seconds.... many many boxing pundits (e.g. Jamie Moore) actually couldn't call Haye vs Harrison!!!!!

Boxing enthusiasts were no longer call him shite, indeed some gave him a shout at winning the world title.

Look at how many people tipped him to beat Wilder at 41 years of age following his second prizefighter win. Just read the prediction thread here, these are not casual fans.
ILikeBeer
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 10947
Joined: 25 Dec 2004, 07:23

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by ILikeBeer »

pyenest77 wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:
housesecond wrote:How many other bills do you go to where 8 fighters want to win?
One of the reasons I don't go to many shows is the cards are filled with 6-0 fighters against 7-37 fighters. I don't enjoy that kind of fight.
I have always maintained this myself. My hand would be in my pocket a lot more even if the matches were 60/40 instead of the usual 90/10.
I don't mind watching fights like that.

Obviously, if you watch a card were there are 10 undercard fights, and 8 of them are like that it gets tedious. But two or three and evening I could handle.

You can't tell whether a boxer is going to be world-class watching him beat a journeyman, but you can tell if he isn't. It's sometimes interesting to concentrate on a boxer's early fights, and try to judge exactly what their strengths and weaknesses are.

You want better things at the top end of the card though, obviously.
Final round
Cruiserweight
Posts: 4911
Joined: 20 Oct 2010, 17:02

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by Final round »

keithmoonhangover wrote:
Final round wrote:
orbtastic wrote: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.
:lol: :TU:

My local bookmaker still doesn't understand how I knew he was going to win.
:TU: :DDD
jessi
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3008
Joined: 11 Jul 2010, 11:59

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by jessi »

Stujones, the reason many pundits and forum users couldn't pick a winner for the haye fight was we all got sucked into Audrey's talking, he nearly convinced himself he was going to win !
Dan Dares
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1584
Joined: 29 Nov 2010, 16:33

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by Dan Dares »

ILikeBeer wrote:You can't tell whether a boxer is going to be world-class watching him beat a journeyman, but you can tell if he isn't. It's sometimes interesting to concentrate on a boxer's early fights, and try to judge exactly what their strengths and weaknesses are.
Spot on.
oliverfennell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5564
Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by oliverfennell »

MightyWarrior wrote: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.
Did they turn a blind eye to the real world class boxing show that followed the same night?

Was there something else in the evening, UK time, that would have made for better viewing?

Last year there was too much Prizefighter; it was almost every month. Scaling back to six a year is fine, especially if it's providing a lead-in to a bigger event, as it was on Saturday, or if it's staged on a weeknight.
oliverfennell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5564
Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by oliverfennell »

johnswan1 wrote: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.
"Every fight"?

Lots of PF shows have featured bell-to-bell action. Just because the latest one was a bit disappointing doesn't tarnish every event under the PF banner.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by palooka »

oliverfennell wrote:
johnswan1 wrote: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.
"Every fight"?

Lots of PF shows have featured bell-to-bell action. Just because the latest one was a bit disappointing doesn't tarnish every event under the PF banner.
No it doesn't; there have been some excellent bouts and some good lads have got a lot of recognition and their careers have done well off the back of it. The number of dates the PF is taking up though, especially when Matchroom have the strong hand at SKY means that some very good pros are not getting significant bouts/kept busy. It is one thing to watch a night of willing boxers going for the PF trophy and another to see a well matched 10 or 12 round but that may really progress a fighter.
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27520
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by stujones »

jessi wrote:Stujones, the reason many pundits and forum users couldn't pick a winner for the haye fight was we all got sucked into Audrey's talking, he nearly convinced himself he was going to win !
But he wouldn't have got that platform - twice if it wasn't for Prizefighter.

To be fair to Audley, he didn't talk much (for him) ahead of the Wilder fight. He was relatively quiet. Okay, he apparently made some comments about a Unification with Haye.... but I don't think he was televised saying it - it was John Rawling who said "this is what Audley told me".

But still even when the fight was announced, and before the trash talking began, people gave Audley a shout against Wilder.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by palooka »

stujones wrote:
jessi wrote:Stujones, the reason many pundits and forum users couldn't pick a winner for the haye fight was we all got sucked into Audrey's talking, he nearly convinced himself he was going to win !
But he wouldn't have got that platform - twice if it wasn't for Prizefighter.

To be fair to Audley, he didn't talk much (for him) ahead of the Wilder fight. He was relatively quiet. Okay, he apparently made some comments about a Unification with Haye.... but I don't think he was televised saying it - it was John Rawling who said "this is what Audley told me".

But still even when the fight was announced, and before the trash talking began, people gave Audley a shout against Wilder.[/quote]

Not this person or any of the people I know.
warriorbox
Super Middleweight
Posts: 155
Joined: 22 Apr 2013, 19:13

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by warriorbox »

Yes Eddie should bin Prizefighter, the best known boxing brand in the country, the only small hall show watched by the average punter, and probably the one cert to always make them money. I have no idea why they keep doing them.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by palooka »

warriorbox wrote:Yes Eddie should bin Prizefighter, the best known boxing brand in the country, the only small hall show watched by the average punter, and probably the one cert to always make them money. I have no idea why they keep doing them.
what may be good for Eddies pocket may not be good for british boxing.
warriorbox
Super Middleweight
Posts: 155
Joined: 22 Apr 2013, 19:13

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by warriorbox »

palooka wrote:
warriorbox wrote:Yes Eddie should bin Prizefighter, the best known boxing brand in the country, the only small hall show watched by the average punter, and probably the one cert to always make them money. I have no idea why they keep doing them.
what may be good for Eddies pocket may not be good for british boxing.
How could it be bad for British boxing? Makes no sense. The boxers do well out of it.
You think the average punter is saying, "I'm not watching boxing again, those fights were only 3 rounds and there wasn't much skill"?
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by palooka »

warriorbox wrote:
palooka wrote:
warriorbox wrote:Yes Eddie should bin Prizefighter, the best known boxing brand in the country, the only small hall show watched by the average punter, and probably the one cert to always make them money. I have no idea why they keep doing them.
what may be good for Eddies pocket may not be good for british boxing.
How could it be bad for British boxing? Makes no sense. The boxers do well out of it.
You think the average punter is saying, "I'm not watching boxing again, those fights were only 3 rounds and there wasn't much skill"?
Though the boxers are well paid for their participation and the returns are good for the promoter a good level boxer ought to be boxing 6 or 8 rounds and learning/progressing away from the cameras. Novices shouldn't really be on the television - it is difficult to explain to someone that boxing is a skilled sport requiring timing, distance and defence if what is on the telly is a bunch of 3 round sprints with eager novices trying their level best. The PF is taking up boxing slots that could be taken by cards throughout the country, british shows are rare as hens teeth on SKY at the min - I'd say there are as many Ringside shows and PF shows as genuine cards. If british boxing and in particular televised british boxing was in a better state then boxers wouldn't be so eager to be on PF and if there were a sensible amount of genuine cards shown then I wager most would prefer to watch those than the PF.
warriorbox
Super Middleweight
Posts: 155
Joined: 22 Apr 2013, 19:13

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by warriorbox »

palooka wrote:and if there were a sensible amount of genuine cards shown then I wager most would prefer to watch those than the PF.
No, Sky TV have tried that, didn't work, ratings were falling and Prizefighter showed that dressed up in the right way the average punter will still watch a boxing show, even with no marquee names attached / fighting.

Loaded TV got how many viewers for boxing? Add every Loaded card together and you still won't get the viewing figures that one Prizefighter gets, and Loaded is free to view!

I don't like Prizefighter, but it's not meant for me. There will always be boxers wanting to fast track up the rankings using this type of format and it can work, ask Rogan.

I think you don't like it so you are finding reasons it should be cancelled. Cancelling it won't make Friday fight nights come back - they'll just replace it with another sport.
warriorbox
Super Middleweight
Posts: 155
Joined: 22 Apr 2013, 19:13

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by warriorbox »

chad wrote:I can't believe the amount of money they throw at it. The Matchroom website confirms each show has a total prize fund of £80,000. That means over 6 shows Matchroom are offering a total prize fund of £480,000. I just think there are better shows that Matchroom could be putting on for that type of money.
How much of that money is being fronted by the sponsor? Would the same sponsor be interested in a standard boxing show?
Benelio
Cruiserweight
Posts: 601
Joined: 02 May 2011, 05:57

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by Benelio »

Bloody hell, Audley's just announced another comeback!
bripez
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4877
Joined: 11 Feb 2010, 18:07

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by bripez »

I haven't seen most of the recent Prizefighters so it isn't really fair for me to comment on them, but for me the first ever Prizefighter was one of the most exciting nights of boxing I have ever watched.

Whether it was the new concept or the boxers or whatever, but that was 3 hours of pure excitement and I loved every second of the whole bill.

I also agree with the other comments where this is an occassion where ALL boxers are looking for a win, which can only be good for the sport, and has provided some really good exposure and opportunities for many boxers who would otherwise struggle to get a break.

Maybe the format needs to have a re-vamp, or don't have so many or whatever, but it would be a great shame if this was to disappear completely.
warriorbox
Super Middleweight
Posts: 155
Joined: 22 Apr 2013, 19:13

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by warriorbox »

Benelio wrote:Bloody hell, Audley's just announced another comeback!
Thought that was a wind up, then checked his site. Bloody hell.
Presume he has had a decent offer turn up - Chisora?
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27520
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by stujones »

palooka wrote:
Not this person or any of the people I know.
Nor me, I got the round correct also.... but check out the prediction thread - big time boxing enthusiasts giving him a chance (and not being sarcastic)
hurlock
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5687
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 04:23

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by hurlock »

He should do somthing along the contender lines or ultimate fighter with rival coaches like Steve Collins & Roy jones ha!
It was a quick fix pf & provided healthy competition in what the business lacked heavily. But now most people are seeing the beauty of professional boxing ruined by short fights & fighters fighting several times in one night.
Prizefighter the series. Eddy Hearn can step it up & should
funso banjo baby
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4417
Joined: 23 Sep 2005, 11:05

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by funso banjo baby »

ive said all along it should be only a lt heavy, cruiser and heavyweight tournament.
feb lt heavy
apr cruiser
june heavy
aug lt heavy
oct cruiser
dec heavy

international tourneys with four decent brits and whoever in the world wants to earn £32k although i think if you increase the pot a bit it can only be a good thing
magnus
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1178
Joined: 13 Dec 2004, 08:59

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by magnus »

As Warrior suggests above I also get the feeling that PF isn't replacing "normal" bills. If it wasn't PF it would be no boxing that particular evening I suspect.

As others have pointed out, some PFs have been thrilling, some a bit shite. Just like normal cards.

4 a year would be fine for me, I still quite enjoy them.
JimJim2009
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3131
Joined: 10 Nov 2008, 09:48

Re: Time to end Prizefighter?

Post by JimJim2009 »

:bow:
warriorbox wrote:Yes Eddie should bin Prizefighter, the best known boxing brand in the country, the only small hall show watched by the average punter, and probably the one cert to always make them money. I have no idea why they keep doing them.
Post Reply