BoxRec

I can't see this fight going to points in a million years! I could be wrong and it is only my opinion but with these 2 moving up in weight I can't see it going the distance,

Personally I think bellew within 4 rounds, as I say just my opinion and I have been wrong before but at this weight some one is going to k.o.d

What are the odds on Tony cracking up before the bout?

palooka wrote:What are the odds on Tony cracking up before the bout?

Evens haha

Why is Bellew so bothered by Cleverley ? All seems so fake

i think bellew loads up too much and if going to get clev it will be if clev slows down later on and Tony lands with that straight right followed by hook

im swayin towards clev being too swithced on to get caught Early and landing some fast combinations and as weve saw Tony has been hurt in a few recent fights so might go down or get pounced on.

righthook wrote:I can't see this fight going to points in a million years! I could be wrong and it is only my opinion but with these 2 moving up in weight I can't see it going the distance,

Personally I think bellew within 4 rounds, as I say just my opinion and I have been wrong before but at this weight some one is going to k.o.d

Is there a precedent for Sky cancelling a PPV and making it viewable under the normal subscription?

Also, are PPV figures published anywhere?

This is a really poor PPV to put to existing subscribers.

revporl wrote:Is there a precedent for Sky cancelling a PPV and making it viewable under the normal subscription?

Also, are PPV figures published anywhere?

This is a really poor PPV to put to existing subscribers.

They were going to Re-Khan vs McCloskey - but then it jumped to Primetime.

Interesting the Hearns (or maybe just Barry) were there as McCloskey's promoters with their Sky T Shirts on if I remember rightly.

revporl wrote:Is there a precedent for Sky cancelling a PPV and making it viewable under the normal subscription?

Also, are PPV figures published anywhere?

This is a really poor PPV to put to existing subscribers.

There is not a chance this will not b Ppv!

your few pennies a week that go towards boxing from your skysports subscription doesn't cover a bill like this, if u go over the thread and read it u will understand why

A bill like this

revporl wrote:Is there a precedent for Sky cancelling a PPV and making it viewable under the normal subscription?

Also, are PPV figures published anywhere?

This is a really poor PPV to put to existing subscribers.

In May 2010 SKY had lined up and promoted a PPV double bill. From the UK Frank allegedly provided Mitchell vs Katsidis outdoors on a bill which also featured Chisora, DeGale and Ricky Burns. The second part of the bill was supposed to be Khan vs Malgnaggi however about 10 days before the fight there was some kind of disagreement between Khans team and SKY resulting in SKY dropping the fight. Khan vs Malignaggi was picked up by ITV at the last minute and Mitchell vs Katsidis was dropped from PPV and was shown on SKY Sports 3

I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure this is how things went down

What's the chances of Cleverley/Bellew pulling out in the week leading up to the fight with the flu/shoulder injury/sore toe and the bill being reduced to normal sports channel??

dalcumly wrote:What's the chances of Cleverley/Bellew pulling out in the week leading up to the fight with the flu/shoulder injury/sore toe and the bill being reduced to normal sports channel??

That's the only way this would not be Ppv as the bill would fall apart with out the main event but with only 2 weeks to go touch wood nothing happens

righthook wrote:As iv stated earlier I genuinly believe that half the people just like to jump on the band wagon and all slate eddie, when he first announced he was going a Ppv event with bellew cleverly head lining and he said he would have an amazing card, people all started giving him stick and moaning before even hearing a single fight on the under card,

The reason people jumped on it right away is because if Cleverly Bellew was the main event, then how good was the undercard ever going to be? And all those people were proved right anyway. Its a joke to have this as a PPV event, especially when people are paying a sky sports subscription. There's no title on the line, there's really nothing at stake and its two guys who have proved they are fringe world level at best. So the precedent is set right there. Any two fighter who operate below world level but have a dislike of each other are fair game for a PPV attraction. So what exactly do we need the Sky Sports subscription for? But we all know that's not a smart business move, so what they'll do is throw in a bunch of decent cards through the year on 'normal' Sky Sports and then max out the number of PPV fights too, so every real boxing fan is stuck in the same situation of missing out unless they pay through the nose for it all. The casuals are still happy because they have sky sports for the football and whatever else, so boxing is a little bonus now and then and they can easily be whipped up by a PPV too. And there in lies the problem and the reason why all legitimate boxing fans should be well and truly pissed off about this fight being PPV. This fight isn't for real fans and boxing isn't marketed for real fans and promoters like Hearns don't give two fucks about real fans. Its about drawing the casuals in, simple as that. Eddie is trying to cash in off the back of Froch Groves II and draw in a bunch of casuals with a 'story' and the best thing of all? Its pantomime season and Bellew is the perfect pantomime villain. Utter bollocks.

Good post checkhook and I agree with everything you've stated; I imagine the rationale behind it is that Hearn imagines if people are strange and cranky enough to visit a boxing forum they will automatically pay over the odds to watch any old scrap.

I'm not doing it this time and I'll think carefully about it in future as well; we are treated as mugs.

There was a good poster the other day laying out a detailed explanation as to why this bout couldn't happen without PPV - the explanation made perfect sense but it really does mean that boxing is now in Alice In Wonderland territory.

It's interesting how controversy regarding the PPV is hardly mentioned in this week's coverage of the fight in boxing news. Oh well, there's bound to be a free to air repeat a week or so later, I'll watch that. HHopkins v Kovalev is a way bigger fight, and Saunders v Eubank is a way better fight, both included in subscription with allegedly, I take any explanation/justification/excuse for this PPV as pure Barnum style bunkem from Eddie and co and their apologists.

palooka wrote:
There was a good poster the other day laying out a detailed explanation as to why this bout couldn't happen without PPV - the explanation made perfect sense but it really does mean that boxing is now in Alice In Wonderland territory.

What you've got to understand, Koogs is......... Eddie loves PPV because it means more money for Sky and more chance he keeps their support.

CheckHook wrote:

righthook wrote:As iv stated earlier I genuinly believe that half the people just like to jump on the band wagon and all slate eddie, when he first announced he was going a Ppv event with bellew cleverly head lining and he said he would have an amazing card, people all started giving him stick and moaning before even hearing a single fight on the under card,

The reason people jumped on it right away is because if Cleverly Bellew was the main event, then how good was the undercard ever going to be? And all those people were proved right anyway. Its a joke to have this as a PPV event, especially when people are paying a sky sports subscription. There's no title on the line, there's really nothing at stake and its two guys who have proved they are fringe world level at best. So the precedent is set right there. Any two fighter who operate below world level but have a dislike of each other are fair game for a PPV attraction. So what exactly do we need the Sky Sports subscription for? But we all know that's not a smart business move, so what they'll do is throw in a bunch of decent cards through the year on 'normal' Sky Sports and then max out the number of PPV fights too, so every real boxing fan is stuck in the same situation of missing out unless they pay through the nose for it all. The casuals are still happy because they have sky sports for the football and whatever else, so boxing is a little bonus now and then and they can easily be whipped up by a PPV too. And there in lies the problem and the reason why all legitimate boxing fans should be well and truly pissed off about this fight being PPV. This fight isn't for real fans and boxing isn't marketed for real fans and promoters like Hearns don't give two fucks about real fans. Its about drawing the casuals in, simple as that. Eddie is trying to cash in off the back of Froch Groves II and draw in a bunch of casuals with a 'story' and the best thing of all? Its pantomime season and Bellew is the perfect pantomime villain. Utter bollocks.

some people seriously havnt got a clue how the real world works.

Probably allot less than £1 a month goes towards Eddie Hearn/boxing from your sky sports subscription.

The show could never be made without it being PPV, now im not saying for one minute its a great show and everyone should want to watch it im saying the show that is happening on the 22nd couldnt ever be made with out PPV as there is hardly any money that gets put in the boxing pot.

Instead of coming on here and moaning why dont you write a letter to sky saying is there any chance you can stop my football/cricket/golf/rugby on my sports package and put the whole of my sports subscription towards boxing?

No one is happy about paying for this but what choice is there when boxing is not in the top 5 most popular sports on sky?

righthook wrote:

The show could never be made without it being PPV, now im not saying for one minute its a great show and everyone should want to watch it im saying the show that is happening on the 22nd couldnt ever be made with out PPV as there is hardly any money that gets put in the boxing pot.

Simply not true. Bellew v CLev could easily have been made without PPV. Sky are currently doing their damnedest to make it PPV worthy, by building this fake hatred with cringey face to face's. There's not a single competitive under card fight which it's self proves the point that this show is never PPV worthy.

You're missing the whole point of boxing match making/TV coverage.

DazDiCanio wrote:

righthook wrote:

The show could never be made without it being PPV, now im not saying for one minute its a great show and everyone should want to watch it im saying the show that is happening on the 22nd couldnt ever be made with out PPV as there is hardly any money that gets put in the boxing pot.

Simply not true. Bellew v CLev could easily have been made without PPV. Sky are currently doing their damnedest to make it PPV worthy, by building this fake hatred with cringey face to face's. There's not a single competitive under card fight which it's self proves the point that this show is never PPV worthy.

You're missing the whole point of boxing match making/TV coverage.

I completely agree.

righthook - if that's the case, how does any show get made without PPV?

This is not a PPV fight, end of story.

Crazyboy wrote:

DazDiCanio wrote:

righthook wrote:

The show could never be made without it being PPV, now im not saying for one minute its a great show and everyone should want to watch it im saying the show that is happening on the 22nd couldnt ever be made with out PPV as there is hardly any money that gets put in the boxing pot.

Simply not true. Bellew v CLev could easily have been made without PPV. Sky are currently doing their damnedest to make it PPV worthy, by building this fake hatred with cringey face to face's. There's not a single competitive under card fight which it's self proves the point that this show is never PPV worthy.

You're missing the whole point of boxing match making/TV coverage.

I completely agree.

righthook - if that's the case, how does any show get made without PPV?

This is not a PPV fight, end of story.

I'm not sure if I'm speaking to children or if u are a man but if u are a child I will try make it easier to understand.

I said before if you can read????? The show couldn't b made due to all the fighters on it! I didn't say if bellew v cleverly was the only fight it couldn't be made.

Next time it might b worth reading the statements before coming on like a clown

Crazyboy wrote:

DazDiCanio wrote:

righthook wrote:

The show could never be made without it being PPV, now im not saying for one minute its a great show and everyone should want to watch it im saying the show that is happening on the 22nd couldnt ever be made with out PPV as there is hardly any money that gets put in the boxing pot.

Simply not true. Bellew v CLev could easily have been made without PPV. Sky are currently doing their damnedest to make it PPV worthy, by building this fake hatred with cringey face to face's. There's not a single competitive under card fight which it's self proves the point that this show is never PPV worthy.

You're missing the whole point of boxing match making/TV coverage.

I completely agree.

righthook - if that's the case, how does any show get made without PPV?

This is not a PPV fight, end of story.

Again read the statement above if u are actually able to read

I'd certainly prefer to watch Cleverley v Bellew 2 on normal SKY Sports with a 'normal' undercard. If it is the undercard that pushes this show into PPV territory then it seems really strange. None of the fighters individually are PPV worthy and clumping 10 together doesn't make it PPV material.

I'm not a big fan of 5 and 6 hour shows in any case; it is difficult enough to grab any television viewing time but having 6 hours of boxing on is a no no.

righthook wrote: I'm not sure if I'm speaking to children or if u are a man but if u are a child I will try make it easier to understand.

I said before if you can read????? The show couldn't b made due to all the fighters on it! I didn't say if bellew v cleverly was the only fight it couldn't be made.

Next time it might b worth reading the statements before coming on like a clown

Trouble is mate, you've got it backwards - this card isn't PPV because of all the fighters on the undercard. It's PPV simply because Sky & Matchroom decided they wanted to put Cleverly vs Bellew on PPV, and have just added a load of the Matchroom stable onto the undercard in one-sided fights so they can attempt to justify it.

palooka wrote:I'd certainly prefer to watch Cleverley v Bellew 2 on normal SKY Sports with a 'normal' undercard. If it is the undercard that pushes this show into PPV territory then it seems really strange. None of the fighters individually are PPV worthy and clumping 10 together doesn't make it PPV material.

I'm not a big fan of 5 and 6 hour shows in any case; it is difficult enough to grab any television viewing time but having 6 hours of boxing on is a no no.

Yeh agreed, when eddie stated this was going to b PPV because the card was going to be amazing I thought it will well be worth it as there will be 6-7 50-50 good fights on that everyone wants to see instead there are only 2/3 and the rest are miss matches but they have big names

I'm not sure if I'm speaking to children or if u are a man but if u are a child I will try make it easier to understand.

I said before if you can read????? The show couldn't b made due to all the fighters on it! I didn't say if bellew v cleverly was the only fight it couldn't be made.

Next time it might b worth reading the statements before coming on like a clown

I can read and I'm not a child...so in return, have some respect, don't stoop to childish comments and don't be rude. Its like you are frothing at the mouth in defence of this event, relax and breath.

I see what you are saying and thanks for explaining. I see it different that is all.