BoxRec

benion wrote:

I'd just like to see some quality control with fighters still having some freedom on opponents selection. I'd like to see things broken down into various skill level tiers. If you win or lose a certain number of fights you go up or down a tier. Then you'd have a top tier with 10, 20 guys in it that could only fight each other & if you are lose a certain number of fights you drop down. This would give fans more even fights at all levels of the game & it'd insure the best are always fighting the best.

I love that idea. If you drop to tier 2 you have to have to win 80% of your fights at tier 2, against fellow tier 2 fighters, with a minimum of 5 fights. Tier 1 fighters must win 80% of their fights based on their last 10 fights. Seven of those ten fights must be against fellow tier 1 fighters with at least 5 fights at that tier. You can't make a living fighting guys who only have 1 or 2 fights into that tier. It would clear up confusion among casual boxing fans because records can be deceiving. I'm just throwing stuff out there but I really like this idea. Would love to get other people opinions on this

Thanks & yea I've been a fan of this concept for quite awhile. Oddly enough I hijacked it from Japanese sumo wrestling. Its more of a hybrid of what they do as they have a tournament format, but the overall concept is the same. You win or lose your way up or down the tiers. How you go about moving people up or down tiers or how many fighters should be in a tier is a debatable thing, but I definitely believe it'd enhance the competitiveness of fights & insure at the top of the sport in every division they'd be elite caliber fights every time out.

Haymon is clearly trying to devalue and optimally get rid of organizations. The simple reason is that he wants to have a total control over matchmaking. He is creating monopoly that would allow him to retain all the money in the busyness. Most interesting question is if ABCs will start fighting back. Regardless of what Haymon is paying them now in the long run it spells there end. We have already seen more vigorous enforcing of mandatory rule. I wonder if they order more mandatory defenses for Haymon fighters, starting with Garcia and Peterson. Then we will see if Haymons Mickey Mouse Championship and Belt is enough and if he can do without the rest of the boxing world.

Is it the end of the WBA, IBF, WBC and WBO?

Al Haymon has his own belt now, last one out of the WBC office's turn off the lights

Haymon just another scammer like DK if the alphabet boys get rid of this bullsh.. interim/world/super world champions especially the WBA
they might actually help the sport BOXING has been around a lot longer then MMA/UFC if we follow them we'r fu..ed.

ClivePatrickLyons wrote:Haymon just another scammer like DK if the alphabet boys get rid of this bullsh.. interim/world/super world champions especially the WBA
they might actually help the sport BOXING has been around a lot longer then MMA/UFC if we follow them we'r fu..ed.

Besides both being black and from Cleveland how is he a scammer like Don King. Nothing causes white angst more than a minority being successful without their permission

Tarkus wrote:He is creating monopoly that would allow him to retain all the money in the busyness.

I don't see how anything Al is doing or could be doing is qualifying as a monopoly. Anyone could do what Al is doing if they were willing to risk as much money as Al has. In fact I expect we will see more "Advisors" who outsource promotional duties in the future. I wouldn't be surprised to learn Roc Nation is doing this to some degree already or will be. Facebook being the social network of choice didn't happen because they were a monopoly its because they took risks & were innovative. Al is taking risks & being innovative to & maybe he'll become the boxing entity of choice or maybe he won't. If he was a monopoly there would be no chance of failure. I think people just like saying the word monopoly.

Most interesting question is if ABCs will start fighting back.

They already have. Although they've done it in regards to AIBA Pro Boxing who they've seen as enough of a threat to their business model that all the abc orgs except the WBO(?) are having periodic meetings about ways to work together. They also have made moves to get AIBA Pro Boxing out of the pro game. I'm curious to what their reaction will be to PBC myself, but I'm positive there will be some fight back type response.

ReggieDiggs
He tries to monopolize matchmaking by working behind the promoters and making sure other fighters dont get a title shot. If there were no independent sanctioning organizations he will have a total control of who gets the title. If this is not a monopoly I dont know what is.

Tarkus wrote: ReggieDiggs
He tries to monopolize matchmaking by working behind the promoters and making sure other fighters dont get a title shot. If there were no independent sanctioning organizations he will have a total control of who gets the title. If this is not a monopoly I dont know what is.

Monopolize matchmaking?!?! I don't even know what exactly that is or how you do that. I don't know how creating an entity that more fighters wanna fight under than any previous entity in the history of boxing (I'd assume anyway, I've never heard of anyone having a 170+ boxers outfit I know that much) is being a monopoly & not just about providing a good service that boxers wanna be involved with. When GBP or TR or other promoters had huge rosters were they monopolizing? Whats the threshold that = a monopoly?

And he's definitely not working behind promoters, he's just hiring promoters to promote. There is no law or rule or whatever that suggests that you can't do that that I'm aware of.

The ppl thinking that Haymon is doing this for the better of boxing and for the fans to give us the best fighting the best are fuuuuucking idiots.

This is Haymon the same guy who advised Floyd

The same guy who pitted Danny Garcia with that club fighter.

The same guy who has mares fighting nothing but bums.

And the same guy who reportedly is paying off potential pacquiao sparring partners so to give Floyd an advantage.

Now thats some bitchass hoe shiit.

This guy aint in the business of helping boxing or doing anything for the fans period.

So please ppl wake the fuuck up.

kidbazooka1 wrote:The ppl thinking that Haymon is doing this for the better of boxing and for the fans to give us the best fighting the best are fuuuuucking idiots.

Idk that anyone is saying anything like that. I think a good strategy in any business is to give the customers what they want. And some of the things Al is doing seem to led towards giving the customers what they want. Boxing on free TV, more boxing on TV, top fighters fighting each other on a regular basis, less abc corruption, less bs promotional contracts that lock guys up for years or sit them on the bench for a year. Andre Ward, Mikey Garcia, Julio Cesar Chavez Jr having lost a year or more of their careers recently, meanwhile Lucas M. wanted out of his deal with Al a couple weeks ago & got out of his deal with Al with no drama & is in a FOTY type fight in April.

I don't see the issue with rooting for a guy who could help boxing get to a better place while lining his own pockets & if he fails he fails. Its not as serious as this battle of good & evil some knuckleheads are suggesting. Al is a guy whos trying to make some money & there is a by product of perhaps the sport getting better if his concept works. That fact he got more people watching boxing in the US than anyone has in almost two decades suggests he's on a better path than anyone else with power in boxing right now.

ReggieDiggs wrote:

kidbazooka1 wrote:The ppl thinking that Haymon is doing this for the better of boxing and for the fans to give us the best fighting the best are fuuuuucking idiots.

Idk that anyone is saying anything like that. I think a good strategy in any business is to give the customers what they want. And some of the things Al is doing seem to led towards giving the customers what they want. Boxing on free TV, more boxing on TV, top fighters fighting each other on a regular basis, less abc corruption, less bs promotional contracts that lock guys up for years or sit them on the bench for a year. Andre Ward, Mikey Garcia, Julio Cesar Chavez Jr having lost a year or more of their careers recently, meanwhile Lucas M. wanted out of his deal with Al a couple weeks ago & got out of his deal with Al with no drama & is in a FOTY type fight in April.

I don't see the issue with rooting for a guy who could help boxing get to a better place while lining his own pockets & if he fails he fails. Its not as serious as this battle of good & evil some knuckleheads are suggesting. Al is a guy whos trying to make some money & there is a by product of perhaps the sport getting better if his concept works. That fact he got more people watching boxing in the US than anyone has in almost two decades suggests he's on a better path than anyone else with power in boxing right now.

Quick question Reg.

Do you think Matthysse would have been
put in against Provo if he was still with Haymon?

Mattysse v Provodnikov is a must watch tv fight sorry but no way Haymon would have agreed to that.

Now dont get me wrong i love free fights just as much as the next guy but i much rather watch Mattysse v Provodnikov than Garcia v salka ,broner v molina or porter v no hoper Garcia.

In short i prefer fights that are closely matched than a fight where no way the A side will even be pushed.

kidbazooka1 wrote: Quick question Reg.

Do you think Matthysse would have been
put in against Provo if he was still with Haymon?

Mattysse v Provodnikov is a must watch tv fight sorry but no way Haymon would have agreed to that.

Now dont get me wrong i love free fights just as much as the next guy but i much rather watch Mattysse v Provodnikov than Garcia v salka ,broner v molina or porter v no hoper Garcia.

In short i prefer fights that are closely matched than a fight where no way the A side will even be pushed.

Idk enough about the Lucas or TR situation involved to make that fight to make a informed answer on that subject. It sounds like Lucas leaving had nothing to do with the Ruslan fight being or not being made & it was purely a situation where him & his management wanted to stay loyal to Oscar. And I mean people have been wanting to see Robert vs Keith & that just happened so its not like Al isn't putting on fights people wanna see & risking L's for his guys.

I feel like I'm gonna hear about Garcia vs Salka forever lol. I can only assume you were equally appalled that arguably the #2 fighter in the world fought Chris Algieri recently on PPV. People act like no one has made mismatch fights before Al Haymon came along. Sadly there are mismatched fights every day, but no one cares unless it helps push their agenda.

But I mean I'm kinda used to most boxing fans being glass half empty about virtually everything so this ain't nothing new. If the top ten things you see as a problem in boxing got fixed tomorrow you'd probably be freaking out bout that #11 thing like crazy within 24hrs.

ReggieDiggs wrote:

kidbazooka1 wrote: Quick question Reg.

Do you think Matthysse would have been
put in against Provo if he was still with Haymon?

Mattysse v Provodnikov is a must watch tv fight sorry but no way Haymon would have agreed to that.

Now dont get me wrong i love free fights just as much as the next guy but i much rather watch Mattysse v Provodnikov than Garcia v salka ,broner v molina or porter v no hoper Garcia.

In short i prefer fights that are closely matched than a fight where no way the A side will even be pushed.

Idk enough about the Lucas or TR situation involved to make that fight to make a informed answer on that subject. It sounds like Lucas leaving had nothing to do with the Ruslan fight being or not being made & it was purely a situation where him & his management wanted to stay loyal to Oscar. And I mean people have been wanting to see Robert vs Keith & that just happened so its not like Al isn't putting on fights people wanna see & risking L's for his guys.

I feel like I'm gonna hear about Garcia vs Salka forever lol. I can only assume you were equally appalled that arguably the #2 fighter in the world fought Chris Algieri recently on PPV. People act like no one has made mismatch fights before Al Haymon came along. Sadly there are mismatched fights every day, but no one cares unless it helps push their agenda.

But I mean I'm kinda used to most boxing fans being glass half empty about virtually everything so this ain't nothing new. If the top ten things you see as a problem in boxing got fixed tomorrow you'd probably be freaking out bout that #11 thing like crazy within 24hrs.

Oh i feel you on the manny/algieri fight that was bullshiit.

And im no arum supporter that pos has done much worse than Haymon obviously but all im saying is dont expect Al Haymon to be the saviour of boxing.

These muthafuckers are all the same.

Dont know how long you been around this sport but boxing is what it is. We gonna have folks saying oh boxing is dead and we gonna folks saying oh boxing is back its saved.

Boxing will always be here it ain't never dying and it ain't never gonna be cleaned up.

kidbazooka1 wrote:The ppl thinking that Haymon is doing this for the better of boxing and for the fans to give us the best fighting the best are fuuuuucking idiots.

Not sure about anyone else, but I certainly don't think that.
Haymons motives, like every other promoter, manager or governing body is driven by self-interest and the pursuit of money and power.
And if he is successful, he will become an disgustingly wealthy and powerful man within the sport.

But I do believe that what he is doing could potentially be the solution to boxings problems.
Other promoters have tried to "take over" previously but the the key differences to Haymon's strategy, other than the model of "advisor/manager" working behind the scenes are 1. Creating his own title and 2. using free to air networks.
This can build a huge US fan base for his product and providing he negates the need for ABC titles, like the UFC, create an entity that exist above the sport, where the best all gravitate towards.

Is Haymon doing this for the good of boxing? No
Could it end up fixing boxing? I believe it could.
Should Haymon end up being the Dana Whyte of boxing, I think the issue of bad match making is resolved.

He had a stable of fighters to protect and do the best for before.
But if he ends up owning the franchise that effectively runs the sport, then we can see a set up like the UFC where fighters fight others of similar quality, climb the ladder on 1 ranking structure and reach the top where the best fight the best.

If, one day, all the top names are in the PBC (as they are in UFC) there would be no reason to protect fighter from fighting rival promoters fighters, they would all be under the same banner, with one title, it would be in everyone's best interest for the best to fight the best, that would create the most money.

I don't think it'll work, as there are too many greedy power hungry rivals to Haymon to let him take all the spoils.
But it's the first time I've ever seen a potential solution to boxings many and varied issues.

kidbazooka1 wrote: These muthafuckers are all the same.

Dont know how long you been around this sport but boxing is what it is. We gonna have folks saying oh boxing is dead and we gonna folks saying oh boxing is back its saved.

Boxing will always be here it ain't never dying and it ain't never gonna be cleaned up.

LOL.

I mean I can agree to that to a degree. For me actions speak more than words though. People in boxing love to say sh!t & fans love hearing it. I don't take it very seriously. There is nothing as funny & frustrating to me as when a boxer says some crazy sh!t & boxing fans talk about it literally when its largely if not clearly words to hype himself up, play mind games with his opponent or just give a reporter something interesting for his newspaper or website that could garner him some fans in the future.

I'm the same way with promoters, trainers, managers, officials & all those guys. You can tell me anything, but til you start showing me something I'm not buying it cuz this is a heavy on hype business so words have less value. Thing with Al Haymon that has put me in the believer category is he's doing something. Haymon has spent millions of dollars to try to build a platform that has never been built in boxing before. The Bob Arum's & the Oscar De La Hoya's are not putting as many chips in the pot of trying something new & maybe something better as Haymon has. Haymon has possibly more skin in the game than anyone in boxing history, not wearing trunks, & if this concept, this experiment fails he's gonna be a punchline in boxing til our children die.

I don't really see this as a saving boxing or boxing is dying thing. Those type of words are born outta the need to downplay boxings successes & failures. Boxing isn't a living creature. It can't die. It could get banned or something at some point in our growing pussified culture. I don't believe thats in any way a current threat though. Right now Boxing can be improved without question. Hell it can be made worse too. To not believe that is just being naive or being guarded about your feelings of hope or despair as a fan of the sport. And the people who work towards improving boxing & bringing back the fans or getting rid of all the champions or making judging the judges a thing or make competitive fights on every card a thing will be compensated. Its just that simple.

The fact that Richard Shaffer is behind Al Haymon 100% gives me a very optimistic look at where this whole thing is going. What Al Haymon is doing is good for the sport, the more fighters who join his stable the less risk involved for Haymon and the more likely we are going to get evenly matched fights more consistently. Both Top Rank and Golden Boy promotions (the 2 most powerful promotional companies in that past 10 years) are looking weaker and weaker as far as their stables are concerned, while Haymons stable continues to grow at a very rapid pace. Haymon is a very smart business man and has some of the best minds in boxing working with him, if that isn't promising (for the fans and the fighters)for the sport of boxing I don't know what is.

It's no secret that Haymon takes care of his fighters, he gets them paid and gets them what they want. I have yet to hear any fighter under Al Haymon that had anything bad to say about him, only praises. Haymon is a honest guy (although some dispute this claim with out any thing to back it up) and building a platform that boxing has been missing for a long time. It's only a matter of time (5 years, 10 years whatever) before he's the most recognized guy in boxing and will be the Dana White of the boxing world if things continue to trickle the way they have. At this point it's a work in progress, but regardless of some of the more negative people on here thinking it's a bad thing (for some twisted reason), it's great for boxing. The thing is, after Mayweather and Pacquiao are gone there are no real PPV stars left in boxing. I'm not saying Haymon won't have PPV events in the future, but starting out on network TV to build up his fighters is absolutely brilliant. For his first network televised event getting over 4 million views is another great sign that Haymon has a great product, there's room to grow, but it's a great start and I hope it becomes a trend. If boxing needs anything right now it's for boxing to be available for everyone to watch and there will be a lot of new boxing fans by the years end with 4 more network televised events to come.

From the original post, I have surmised that because Robert Guerrero showed heart, all of the ABC organizations have come to an end. Thank you, Robert Guerrero, for single-handedly saving boxing with your heart.

Lackeos wrote:From the original post, I have surmised that because Robert Guerrero showed heart, all of the ABC organizations have come to an end. Thank you, Robert Guerrero, for single-handedly saving boxing with your heart.

Although: the way some of the denizens of this board have suddenly raised up a boxing promoter & his selfish machinations as ushering in some sort of halcyon new era for the sport is, frankly, hilarious.

Mostly it seems like reality-denying wish-fulfilment from people who should know better. As to the likes of "Haymon looks out for the fighters!"--well, I'm sure blind Lamon Brewster & brain-damaged Jermain Taylor were well looked-out for.

I don't care what hideously rich slimy bastards do (boxing promoters are all slimy bastards, all of them), as long as boxing survives. But sanctifying someone on the basis of one's fannish delusions, ignoring the very real problems (rankings, the lack of foreign fighters' involvement thus turning this into a parochial, provincial 'Murrican reality show, the likelihood of corruption when so much power is concentrated in so few hands) & especially ignoring the glaring fvcking elephant in the room:

This man has held the entire sport to ransom, no, even worse, he has actively made it even shitter for two years plus, just so he could buy up fighters & make his "new dawn" look better by comparison, even though he still gets in the way of the best fights & continues to serve up average fights & safety-first routine outings which you lot are annointing...

& if you don't believe me, any of you Kool-Aid drinkin' motherfuckers wanna bet if we'll see Kovalev & Stevenson, or Garcia vs Crawford, or Quillin vs Golovkin, i.e. the real fights the fans are crying out for, have been crying out for?

I wanna see fights, ffs. The only good thing about the UFC is that people get the best fights. All the other shite is fvcking stupid fripperies, & not good for fighters or fans: the way money is apportioned, the rampant drug abuse, the fvcking stupid T-shirts... None of that matters, because they have the best fights. But if this stupid thing isn't serving up the best fights, the PBC has failed & you lot are a bunch of fvcking willing dupes.

Tl;dr: You lot of Haymon fanboys are all fvcking mental. Wish in one hand, shite in the other, see which one gets filled up first.

any of you Kool-Aid drinkin' motherfuckers wanna bet if we'll see Kovalev & Stevenson, or Garcia vs Crawford, or Quillin vs Golovkin, i.e. the real fights the fans are crying out for, have been crying out for?

We'll see those fights when Kovalev & Crawford start to wonder why they're being paid half of what PBC fighters are being paid while fighting equal or better competition.

What Haymon needs to do is buy out the WBC, WBA, WBO and/or IBF, thus uniting the belts into one single entity!

He then needs to be sponsoered by someone like The Ring Magazine (although this may not be possible as I think they are owned by GoldenBoy) so he can have an independent ranking in place!

Then he should create a nice looking belt for each weight division, scrapping a few of the divisions in the process, leaving him with Flyweight, Bantamweight, Featherweight, Lightweight, Welterweight, Middleweight, Super Middleweight, Light Heavyweight, Cruiserweight and Heavyweight! A nice round even 10 for weight divisions, instead of the current 18 we have!

benion wrote:

any of you Kool-Aid drinkin' motherfuckers wanna bet if we'll see Kovalev & Stevenson, or Garcia vs Crawford, or Quillin vs Golovkin, i.e. the real fights the fans are crying out for, have been crying out for?

We'll see those fights when Kovalev & Crawford start to wonder why they're being paid half of what PBC fighters are being paid while fighting equal or better competition.

Explain to me, please, how that's qualitatively different than saying "Stevenson/Quillin/Garcia/Klitschko/whomever are chumps for not fighting for Bob Arum, & because of their intractable refusal that's why we don't get good fights?"

Datsue wrote:

benion wrote:

any of you Kool-Aid drinkin' motherfuckers wanna bet if we'll see Kovalev & Stevenson, or Garcia vs Crawford, or Quillin vs Golovkin, i.e. the real fights the fans are crying out for, have been crying out for?

We'll see those fights when Kovalev & Crawford start to wonder why they're being paid half of what PBC fighters are being paid while fighting equal or better competition.

Explain to me, please, how that's qualitatively different than saying "Stevenson/Quillin/Garcia/Klitschko/whomever are chumps for not fighting for Bob Arum, & because of their intractable refusal that's why we don't get good fights?"

Kovalev/Stevenson is the perfect example. Stevenson choose to go with Haymon/Showtime essentially ending any potential fight for the time being. Stevenson was called a ducker, coward ect. Since then we've seen Stevenson earn more money fighting lesser competition and Kovalev earn a paltry $500K for fighting one of the best there every was. I think he only took home $150K after fees. Now Kovalev knows HBO refuses to work with Haymon. If Kovalev signs a contact extension with HBO he's killing any chance for a fight against Stevenson. If you want to say he's doing what's best for him you also have to say that about Stevenson when he signed the Showtime deal.

benion wrote:

Datsue wrote: Explain to me, please, how that's qualitatively different than saying "Stevenson/Quillin/Garcia/Klitschko/whomever are chumps for not fighting for Bob Arum, & because of their intractable refusal that's why we don't get good fights?"

Kovalev/Stevenson is the perfect example. Stevenson choose to go with Haymon/Showtime essentially ending any potential fight for the time being. Stevenson was called a ducker, coward ect. Since then we've seen Stevenson earn more money fighting lesser competition and Kovalev earn a paltry $500K for fighting one of the best there every was. I think he only took home $150K after fees. Now Kovalev knows HBO refuses to work with Haymon. If Kovalev signs a contact extension with HBO he's killing any chance for a fight against Stevenson. If you want to say he's doing what's best for him you also have to say that about Stevenson when he signed the Showtime deal.

So, using your new version of logic, Kovalev is the bad guy for fighting, like, decent fighters who aren't useless pudenda, whilst Stevenson is to be applauded for fighting never-weres, retreads & hasbeens? & the guy willing to fight all-comers, we side against them now because they're not getting with the motherfucking programme & ceding total control to Saint Al?

& this also extends to any other fighter on the planet, it's immediately, say, Golovkin's fault that Danny Jacobs is fighting Caleb Truax?

I just like to have all this set out in front of me so I'm sure I'm not making any assumptions here, 'cos it's like the collective IQ has dropped, & for around here, that's saying something.

Datsue wrote:*If* (enormous, world-distortingly massive IF, an if that's "big" in the way one thinks of God or love as big) the belt is not restricted to his stable of fighters & by some bizarre quirk of fate or mass hallucinatory event the belt becomes recognised & valued globally, then yeah no problem ditch the ABC's.

If, as I believe, it's just a crummy marketing tool which'll be awarded as Haymon sees fit & the ABC belts are just tossed around as scraps for the rest of his stable or fought over by fighters who didn't make it or whatever, so we basically end up with a two-tier system whereby the top Yanks only fight for Haymon & the PBC & fighters from the rest of the planet still go on with the ABC's, then it's a fornicate-stupid idea.

Knowing boxing, it'll be the fornicate-stupid idea.

PS: Remember when Hamed was getting shite from the ABC orgs? With HBO money, he said "Fark you" to them & just fought the best (cleaning out the division anyway). Barrera followed suit. When Manny beat him, that started bringing the belts back to prominence, as Pacquiao's constant division-hopping from then on involved recognised title fights.

Two things can be drawn from this:

A) you don't need a stupid belt--any stupid belt--when everyone knows you're the boss.

B) Fighters from outside the US, especially ones that are poor, in general still care about belts.

C) Going back to Manny, at feather he wanted belts so badly he agreed to fight JMM, who no-one really wanted to fight & who spent his free time collecting as many of the vacant alpha titles as he could get his hands on. This also clues one in as to the future of those belts, at least in the short-term, as avoided fighters & non-(Haymon)represented fighters will still pursue them for their own goals.

I agree. The environments in boxing and MMA are COMPLETELY different. Haymon is never going to get near a monopoly, and thus if he decides to operate in his own universe, it's only going to hurt the sport and not help it.

Datsue wrote:
I just like to have all this set out in front of me so I'm sure I'm not making any assumptions here, 'cos it's like the collective IQ has dropped, & for around here, that's saying something.