The best would fight the best if there were 8 weightclasses and 1 belt per weightclass. Spence vs Crawford would be history by now.brilo33 wrote: ↑31 Dec 2020, 22:27weight clases aint the real problem though is its, it is getting the best to fight the best in the divisions , this is what really holds boxing back in respect these daysgilgamesh wrote: ↑31 Dec 2020, 22:22Doesn't look that way to me. The competition would be better if you'd eliminate the bullsh*t weight classes for one thing.brilo33 wrote: ↑31 Dec 2020, 21:57
fighters are fighters gil, that dont change especially champions , if anything i would say champions in the bygone era were better as there was 1 belt which means 1 real big paycheque. but i think the overall standard of fighters has got better , there is a lot of competition in every division now
For those who say Boxing has "evolved"
Re: For those who say Boxing has "evolved"
Re: For those who say Boxing has "evolved"
Really I think Floyd is to blame for that.brilo33 wrote: ↑31 Dec 2020, 22:47to be honest i wouldnt care if there was 2 titles in a division as long as they had to face of say every September, that rubbish about the losing zeros dont help , as fighters wont risk fights because of it ,Rocky Marciano to blamegilgamesh wrote: ↑31 Dec 2020, 22:30Yeah I'd agree with that.
But the divisions would all be a lot more stacked if all the Jr. divisions were gone. Because then everybody at 140 would be at 147 and 147 would be that much more loaded for it.
You'd still have promotional issues.
If you only had 1 Champion you'd have a lot less bullsh*t of the best not fighting the best too. Because there'd only be 1 Champion and EVERYBODY would want their shot. They'd do business with the Champion whether they promoted him or not because it'd be the only way to get their boy to the top.
Nowadays they can just grab one of the trinkets and pretend their guy is the true Champ, and the other guy is ducking.
It would also force contenders to fight each other more frequently because if there's only 1 Champion then getting a shot is a lot more difficult and you gotta go the extra mile to prove your worth.
Re: For those who say Boxing has "evolved"
Boxing is the only sport I can think of where the best are not required to face the best at some point. And, even if they do eventually face the best, they are not required to face stern challenges along the way if they don't choose to. And even if they face stern challenges, they can still decide when and how often. That has to have some kind of impact on the quality of play. Put simply, boxing is different than any other sport, so the usual rules just don't apply.
The talent is there I'm sure, but are they compelled to hone the craft at the same level? Arguably, they aren't as much anymore.
The talent is there I'm sure, but are they compelled to hone the craft at the same level? Arguably, they aren't as much anymore.
-
Counter-puncher
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 39141
- Joined: 20 May 2008, 11:41
Re: For those who say Boxing has "evolved"
jas80s wrote: ↑05 Jan 2021, 14:44 Boxing is the only sport I can think of where the best are not required to face the best at some point. And, even if they do eventually face the best, they are not required to face stern challenges along the way if they don't choose to. And even if they face stern challenges, they can still decide when and how often. That has to have some kind of impact on the quality of play. Put simply, boxing is different than any other sport, so the usual rules just don't apply.