Biggest Reason for Boxing's Downfall?

[dr_devious]

Boxing isn't as popular in the UK because there is little to no boxing shown on free to view TV. Its been the same since for over 20 years. Conversely British boxers have more success in world title fights than they've ever done. I think this is not only due to the proliferation of titles, but we also have an extremely strong amateur boxing scene and some exceptionally good trainers, both amateur and professional.

[Ambling Alp II]

Boxing is nowhere near as popular as it once was.
I personally don’t know anyone that has followed it in the last 15 years. I know plenty of people that follow basketball, football, baseball, even golf, tennis, hockey and auto racing.
On the internet, in the sports section I can click on NFL, NBA, MLB, NCAA Football, NCAA Basketball, Tennis, Golf, NASCAR. No boxing tab.
My local newspaper doesn’t cover it all. It used to cover it quite a bit.
It’s almost nowhere to be found on network TV. It used to be a on frequently on ABC, NBC, and CBS.

China and India have never been big in boxing. As the 3rd biggest country in the world, it is a big deal that it has less than 1/10 of the interest that it once had.
Even other countries where it was once quite popular; it’s not as big of a deal. Mexico, South America, the UK, France and Italy as well. And no, it not as popular as it once was in Japan. The uptick in Eastern Europe doesn’t come anywhere near close to making up for all of this.

Watch the 2016 Olympics. See how much attention boxing gets. It was an afterthought in 2012. It used to be a big deal.
Go outide of the Boxrec bubble. Action 20 random people if they know who GGG or Manny is. You may be surprised by the amount of blank stares you get.
The question is no if boxing has declined. It’s why.

[Ambling Alp II]

There has been a lot of good comments, some good food for thought.
Thought I would offer my take on some of the comments.

- The rise of the middle classes following World War II. True, the % of people in poverty in the US has declined quite a bit. However, since the population has grown so much, the sheer amount of people in poverty is actually bigger. So that doesn’t really seem to be a major reason.

- Competition from the UFC. It does cut into the interest of potential fans. However, the UFC is a fringe sport itself. If every single UFC/MMA fan became a boxing fan tomorrow, boxing would still be a minor sport.

-Competition from new forms of non-sports entertainment. To some degree that has hurt. However, the NFL, NBA, MLB, Soccer etc. has still thrived and not declined like boxing.

-Promoters. Good/ethical promoters would help. Bad/unethical promoters have hurt the sport. However, there have always been promoters like that and the sport still thrived.

- Officiating. No doubt about, it had hurt the sport. However, bad officiating has always been a part of boxing and the sport still thrived for decades.

- Not enough venues. Not the biggest factor for the downfall, but an underrated factor. There were way too fights in Las Vegas and Atlantic City and not enough in places like Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia that were once hotbeds for boxing. Imagine if the NFL or the NBA only had teams in a few cities.

- Too many weight classes. Again, the not biggest factor but it is important. There are too many weight classes. That creates too many champions to keep track of and makes it too easy for top fighters to avoid each other.

-Which takes us to the Alphabet Soup Organizations. That have not been the sole reason for boxing’s decline, but as most people in the poll realized, they are by far the biggest problem.
With four major “governing bodies” it’s way too difficult to keep track of who the “real champion” is. It also makes it way too easy for “champions” to avoid each other. It also greatly reduces high quality matches between contenders. Most contenders don’t want to take the risk of fighting another top contender when you can just bide your time and get a title shot soon because there are so many titleholders. And of course the Alphabet Soups are corrupt.

These organizations (and to a lesser extent other factors which we have discussed) have made boxing a fringe sport in which the free TV networks now give very little coverage to. Free TV is an absolute must to be a major sport.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Boxing is nowhere near as popular as it once was.
I personally don’t know anyone that has followed it in the last 15 years. I know plenty of people that follow basketball, football, baseball, even golf, tennis, hockey and auto racing.
On the internet, in the sports section I can click on NFL, NBA, MLB, NCAA Football, NCAA Basketball, Tennis, Golf, NASCAR. No boxing tab.
My local newspaper doesn’t cover it all. It used to cover it quite a bit.
It’s almost nowhere to be found on network TV. It used to be a on frequently on ABC, NBC, and CBS.

China and India have never been big in boxing. As the 3rd biggest country in the world, it is a big deal that it has less than 1/10 of the interest that it once had.
Even other countries where it was once quite popular; it’s not as big of a deal. Mexico, South America, the UK, France and Italy as well. And no, it not as popular as it once was in Japan. The uptick in Eastern Europe doesn’t come anywhere near close to making up for all of this.

Watch the 2016 Olympics. See how much attention boxing gets. It was an afterthought in 2012. It used to be a big deal.
Go outide of the Boxrec bubble. Action 20 random people if they know who GGG or Manny is. You may be surprised by the amount of blank stares you get.
The question is no if boxing has declined. It’s why.

Yeah, back in the 90's my friends and I always watched fights together. They weren't total nerds like me talking about Peter mathebula and Tae-Shik Kim, but they damn sure knew Chavez was fighting Taylor. Granted, we don't see each other as often as we used too but I still talk to them and Boxing is never a discussion.

[littlepug]

i think its futile to hanker after "the good old days" as its never gonna be like that again, we should just count ourselves lucky that we ( those that are old enough) got to live through some great eras and experience it first hand, as for the modern game forget about the B.S and enjoy the fights

[SaadOffTheDeck]

i think its futile to hanker after "the good old days" as its never gonna be like that again, we should just count ourselves lucky that we ( those that are old enough) got to live through some great eras and experience it first hand, as for the modern game forget about the B.S and enjoy the fights

I still watch, but there are rarely 'good' fights anymore. That Vargas/Miura fight was very dramatic and entertaining, but that isn't top 20 for foty in the 80's.

[Ezzard]

The alpha boys are really quite powerless. TV calls the shots and they could put these bandits out of business in 18 months if they so decided. But the alpha boys allow the TV people to keep their hands clean.

The biggest change in my time was the Roy Jones years. Fans seemed more than happy to watch him take on a long line of nobodies and past their prime smaller men. Increasingly the casual fan (and they are really the people that matter when you look at the economics) was less interested in a 50-50 match up. What they wanted was an execution of the kind that defined a Tyson fight. No different to an afternoon on Tyburn Hill. This progressed to Mayweather who essentially put on his own show. Fighting whoever he wanted. When he wanted. With his gloves, ref, weight class, judges, etc…

The big moment in the UK was the rise of SKY TV. Terrestrial TV made a generation of stars who all sold out to SKY. They made their money but pulled the ladder up on the next generation. The BBC tried a comeback but Audley Harrison couldn’t live up to their aspirations.

Even so. Has any UK boxer in living memory had as “balls out” a career as Carl Froch? Fought everyone.

Pac also has had an amazing career.

Mayweather and Pac would be all time greats in any era.

On screen Golovkin looks as good as any MW I’ve seen but he looks unlikely to get the chance to prove it with a resume to match.

[Ambling Alp II]

I agree that the TV Pay Networks have a lot of power and deserve a lot of the blame. They use the Alphabet Soup titles to promote fights. They figure they will get higher ratings if it is for a title shot. Obviously with 4 titles, there are 4x as many "title fights". With the ridiculous amount of weight classes (17 right now), that is potentially 68 "champions".

Each champion had say two defenses a year and their is about 130 title fights a year. That is more than enough for the pay Network's needs.

Of course, this had hurt the sport greatly. There are very few compelling fights to watch and and most people who have watched the sport for a few years can figure out that these titles don't mean much.

Ironically, in the long term it would have been in the interest of the networks to only recognize one champion at each weight class. They would have many more compelling matchups. The sport would be much more popular today than it is. They would get much higher ratings and make more money.

[Tomasino]

The alpha boys are really quite powerless. TV calls the shots and they could put these bandits out of business in 18 months if they so decided. But the alpha boys allow the TV people to keep their hands clean.

The biggest change in my time was the Roy Jones years. Fans seemed more than happy to watch him take on a long line of nobodies and past their prime smaller men. Increasingly the casual fan (and they are really the people that matter when you look at the economics) was less interested in a 50-50 match up. What they wanted was an execution of the kind that defined a Tyson fight. No different to an afternoon on Tyburn Hill. This progressed to Mayweather who essentially put on his own show. Fighting whoever he wanted. When he wanted. With his gloves, ref, weight class, judges, etc…

The big moment in the UK was the rise of SKY TV. Terrestrial TV made a generation of stars who all sold out to SKY. They made their money but pulled the ladder up on the next generation. The BBC tried a comeback but Audley Harrison couldn’t live up to their aspirations.

Even so. Has any UK boxer in living memory had as “balls out” a career as Carl Froch? Fought everyone.

Pac also has had an amazing career.

Mayweather and Pac would be all time greats in any era.

On screen Golovkin looks as good as any MW I’ve seen but he looks unlikely to get the chance to prove it with a resume to match.

Froch represented almost everything good about boxing for a time...willing to fight anyone, with a stand and fight attitude who was willing to risk being KOd to try and win or turn a fight around. Give him 15 rounds and he may well have retired unbeaten, he was really coming on against Ward in the last after being dominated most of the fight. Nails.

[Ambling Alp II]

There have been a few great fighters like Mayweather and Pac who had the ability to have been greats in any era. And Froch fought some good competition. However, how sad that there are so few examples.

Take just about any previous era before the 1990s, and there were several fighters who would have been a great in any era. There were dozens who went out of their way to fight the best.

[Monte Fisto]

The protection of the 0 hurts boxing badly. It encourages all management/promotional teams to weave their fighters through a maze of bollux fights to make money.
I honestly think that boxing gets back to mainstream TV in the UK when fighters are evenly matched. It seems that someone somewhere once decided that the general public only want to see unbeaten fighters or at least they can only sell unbeaten fighters to the public..

[giacomino]

The protection of the 0 hurts boxing badly. It encourages all management/promotional teams to weave their fighters through a maze of bollux fights to make money.
I honestly think that boxing gets back to mainstream TV in the UK when fighters are evenly matched. It seems that someone somewhere once decided that the general public only want to see unbeaten fighters or at least they can only sell unbeaten fighters to the public..

Protecting paper alphabet belts is as big a problem, if not moreso. Promoters like Sauerland in Germany have a system: they build up their fighters on patsies, pay to move them up the rankings, wait for a belt-holder to move up or get promoted to "super champion," and then pounce. They set up a hometown fight for the "vacant title" against a hapless opponent, then, after winning the title, set up one cupcake defense after another. Sauerland fans would pay to see guys like Braehmer or Culcay beat opponents tied to a chair: it doesn't matter, they make money no matter who they fight as long as it's called a "world title fight." There is zero incentive for Braehmer to fight Kovalev, or Sturm, when he was a middleweight, to fight GGG. The fighters are meal tickets to promoters, just like they always were. The difference is the proliferation of "world titles" has made it easier for promoters to steer their fighters clear of legitimate opposition, particularly in some countries or parts of countries, and still make them "world champions."

If you don't believe me re: Sauerland, watch what happens over the next year or so with young prospect Dominic Boesel. He has beaten absolutely nobody, has no pop in his punch, but has mysteriously risen to #1 in the WBO ranking for Kovalev's belt. There is no possibility Sauerland will let him in the ring with Kovalev, so he will wait out his #1 ranking until Kovalev moves up, gives up his belt or is made a "super champion" or something. Then Boesel will fight some undeserving stiff for the "world title," somewhere in the greater Freyburg area. And he will become a "world champion."

[Nile4000]

No 15 round title distance, lack of fights on network tv.

[gilgamesh]

The best not fighting the best.

[Bodyshot3]

The protection of the 0 hurts boxing badly. It encourages all management/promotional teams to weave their fighters through a maze of bollux fights to make money.

I honestly think that boxing gets back to mainstream TV in the UK when fighters are evenly matched. It seems that someone somewhere once decided that the general public only want to see unbeaten fighters or at least they can only sell unbeaten fighters to the public..

Good point there 95gerog.

I have never really got why remaining undefeated has become the absolute/defining reason a fighter gets media coverage or becomes a headline TV act over another, often far better fighter with a couple of losses on his record.

Why has this become so key all of a sudden?

When guys like Andries, Bruno, Benn and Herol Graham lost I was actually more interested-engaged than ever before and made doubly sure that I got to watch their next fight and see how they rebuilt themselves.

[gilgamesh]

The protection of the 0 hurts boxing badly. It encourages all management/promotional teams to weave their fighters through a maze of bollux fights to make money.

I honestly think that boxing gets back to mainstream TV in the UK when fighters are evenly matched. It seems that someone somewhere once decided that the general public only want to see unbeaten fighters or at least they can only sell unbeaten fighters to the public..

Good point there 95gerog.

I have never really got why remaining undefeated has become the absolute/defining reason a fighter gets media coverage or becomes a headline TV act over another, often far better fighter with a couple of losses on his record.

Why has this become so key all of a sudden?

When guys like Andries, Bruno, Benn and Herol Graham lost I was actually more interested-engaged than ever before and made doubly sure that I got to watch their next fight and see how they rebuilt themselves.

Whitey Bimstein: “Show me an undefeated fighter and I’ll show you a guy who’s never fought anybody.”

[Cutman Scabbers]

In the United States a few years after World War II, boxing's downfall was due to a combination of societal change and the advent of television. The dramatic decrease in the number of U.S. professional boxing shows followed.

- Chuck Johnston

I think you're right about television being a major factor.

[Ambling Alp II]

TV did help other sports like basketball and football which competed with boxing for attention and eventually became more popular. However boxing was still very popular and was a major sport as late as the early 1980s. It has been on a gradual decline ever since.

[Bodyshot3]

TV did help other sports like basketball and football which competed with boxing for attention and eventually became more popular. However boxing was still very popular and was a major sport as late as the early 1980s. It has been on a gradual decline ever since.

Agreed...in the UK top-flight football got it's act seriously together over 25 years ago by realising the broadcasters were not a just another good customer but really their most important and wealthy client.

Midweek matches, staggering games over the weekend and the clubs offering access to players and offering first-class media facilities made football something that the broadcasters could really get behind. There was always a match to show - whether it was Saturday, Sunday or Wednesday night - and that sheer regularity of output allowed the broadcasters to build their schedules around one sport.

ITV used to back boxing to the hilt back in the day; Reg Gutteridge was just as well-known as many of the the channel's football commentators and they put boxing on slam-bang in the middle of the key Saturday night schedule.

But they lost faith in boxing because it simply did not offer enough good fights and often enough...whereas football was a more reliable partner.

Football and also rugby union have both given boxing a bit of a hiding in the UK.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

The best not fighting the best.

The shallow pool of 'best' is a bigger problem. Every era had fights we wanted and didn't get but there were so many more top fighters that it didn't matter as much. The promotion feud isn't anything new. There was a WBA/WBC feud preventing unifications in the late 70's/80's. Then there was HBO/Showtime and King/Arum feuding. Never stopped great fights from happening. Now there just aren't many options.

[Counter-puncher]

Has anyone mentioned crack cocaine yet?

I didn't see that as an option in the poll but it would be my pick

[Ketchel]

To think we bemoaned Don King back in the day but just one of his cards today would outstrip a year of the so called "super fights" we are served up.

[Bodyshot3]

To think we bemoaned Don King back in the day but just one of his cards today would outstrip a year of the so called "super fights" we are served up.

Agreed, King often delivered good value but the real 'beef' most of us have with him is the way he stiffed our heroes and left a good many of them with very little to show for their efforts and ensared them in the contract from hell.

Don made some good fights whilst ruining some even greater fighters.

[carspiv]

Alphabet organizations + 17 weight divisions=Chaos. Bigger gloves, 12 round "title" fights instead of 15 rounds. Posses. Long walks to the ring. Theme music.

When Boxing once again understands that the FIGHT matters more than the SHOW, it just might become a top sport once again.

[Kalan]

I guess the vote was over but the massive number of orgs and World Champions is the biggest problem followed by DUCKING and CHERRY PICKED MISMATCHES... How can an undefeated fighter who's 19-0 and wins and interim World Middleweight Title still be chasing a Lineal Title shot 6 years later??? Than the fight which every Boxing fan in the world wanted to see still doesn't happen because a super popular Mexican fighter gives up his World Title rather than make upwards of 30-million dollars ... and face the prospect of getting knocked out.