BoxRec

Boxing Prospect wrote:Completely ignoring Golovkin vs Murray on free t.v.in the UK at a respectable time, or other Golovkin allegedly bouts at a decent time in the UK (Simon, Ishida, Adama)

OK, if you want to go down the route of accusing me of being ignorant.

Far more people watched the DeGale-Khatchikian fight than Murray-Golovkin on Channel 5. 3m watched Fury-Chisora on Channel 5. In terms of the "Simon, Ishida, Adama" bouts, please show me the UK viewing figures for those fights. Exceptions don't override the general rule.

Instead of posting poetic meaningless soundbites. Quote the numbers to backup your claims.

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:I think it's fair to say things have changed.

You’re referring a post of mine that relates to bouts that took place this month. GGG’s fame hasn’t exceeded stratospheric proportions in that time. It’s a case of status quo.

lazboy wrote:Ggg is known among the Uk (now more than ever) remember he had fought notable uk fighters and "relatively anonymous" doesn't seem fitting.

Until the Brook fight, in the UK, GGG would have been fortunate to enjoy viewership figures approaching 100K at 5.30am when his fights were televised by the little-known niche subscription Box-nation channel.

lazboy wrote:Golovkin popularity in the US is also growing/has grown. The amount of US media coverage, the fact that almost every article dealing with Canelo mentions G and that even US media personalities rate him as the most popular boxer in America. The 150k Lemieux argument, although a fact, is old hat. Times change. Canelos falling, G is rising. It happens. It's business. 150k is outdated info that I only see golden boy referring to. As for the split I think it should be 60 canelo, 40, but I doubt they'll agree on that.

The Golovkin-Lemieux fight was only fought eleven months ago. Things haven’t changed that much. If they had, GGG would have faced Brook in the US, in front of his "millions" of fans.

Look, I'm a GGG fan, but there's really no point in pretending that he's any more popular than the numbers suggest.

It's ok my friend. Things in life change. Change is ok. You're in a safe place. You're in "your" safe place. Breathe through this. I'm here with you.

lazboy wrote:It's ok my friend. Things in life change. Change is ok. You're in a safe place. You're in "your" safe place. Breathe through this. I'm here with you.

In other words, you'll believe whatever you want to regardless the fact that the objective truths of reality oppose your beliefs. Good for you!

Enlightened-One wrote:

Boxing Prospect wrote:Completely ignoring Golovkin vs Murray on free t.v.in the UK at a respectable time, or other Golovkin allegedly bouts at a decent time in the UK (Simon, Ishida, Adama)

OK, if you want to go down the route of accusing me of being ignorant.

Far more people watched the DeGale-Khatchikian fight than Murray-Golovkin on Channel 5. 3m watched Fury-Chisora on Channel 5. In terms of the "Simon, Ishida, Adama" bouts, please show me the UK viewing figures for those fights.

Instead of posting poetic meaningless soundbites. Quote the numbers to backup your claims.

Far more people may have watched the DeGale and Fury bouts on 5, but more people saw GGG vs Murray than watch a typical Sky Sports card. So the bout was still seen by a solid UK audience on next to no advertising over here (Channel 5 repeatedly over looked the value of advertising the boxing on their own channel).

The Simon/Ishida/Adama/Fuchigami bouts were on allegedly during day time hours. Figures aren't available, but they weren't at 5:30am, like you seemed to be suggesting.

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:It's ok my friend. Things in life change. Change is ok. You're in a safe place. You're in "your" safe place. Breathe through this. I'm here with you.

In other words, you'll believe whatever you want to regardless the fact that the objective truths of reality oppose your beliefs. Good for you!

I really think my reality differs from yours.

Boxing Prospect wrote:Far more people may have watched the DeGale and Fury bouts on 5, but more people saw GGG vs Murray than watch a typical Sky Sports card. So the bout was still seen by a solid UK audience on next to no advertising over here (Channel 5 repeatedly over looked the value of advertising the boxing on their own channel).

All it proves is that the British people would prefer to watch (in global terms) unheralded fighters from the UK than GGG? It's all about context and facts... and you've supplied none.

Boxing Prospect wrote:The Simon/Ishida/Adama/Fuchigami bouts were on allegedly during day time hours. Figures aren't available, but they weren't at 5:30am, like you seemed to be suggesting.

Your point is irrelevant, because these bouts weren’t televised in the UK... at least, there's no evidence of it.

lazboy wrote:I really think my reality differs from yours.

That's fine by me my friend.

Enjoy your day.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I don't know how accurate they are, but I just saw someone put out 63,000 buys. If that's true, it's 50/50 and the GGG fight never happens.

i'd be pleasently surprised if that
happened, but i find it little hard
to believe at this point. usually the
crowd gives you longer credit if you
are ducking, yet delivered before.
floyd managed to stay away from a
smaller fighter than himself year after
year.

but in the end the mexicans are proud
people and they do not want to see their
super star claiming stardom while
displaying cowardice, which in the end it
is.

lazboy wrote:
It's ok my friend. Things in life change. Change is ok. You're in a safe place. You're in "your" safe place. Breathe through this. I'm here with you.

rover pretending to be objective and balanced is always good for a laugh

Counter-puncher wrote:

lazboy wrote:
It's ok my friend. Things in life change. Change is ok. You're in a safe place. You're in "your" safe place. Breathe through this. I'm here with you.

rover pretending to be objective and balanced is always good for a laugh

Haha imagine being his bunk mate at the psych ward. Farken hell.

The annoying motherf*cker is killing threads. He needs to be banned.

Enlightened-One wrote:

Boxing Prospect wrote:Far more people may have watched the DeGale and Fury bouts on 5, but more people saw GGG vs Murray than watch a typical Sky Sports card. So the bout was still seen by a solid UK audience on next to no advertising over here (Channel 5 repeatedly over looked the value of advertising the boxing on their own channel).

All it proves is that the British people would prefer to watch (in global terms) unheralded fighters from the UK than GGG? It's all about context and facts... and you've supplied none.

Boxing Prospect wrote:The Simon/Ishida/Adama/Fuchigami bouts were on allegedly during day time hours. Figures aren't available, but they weren't at 5:30am, like you seemed to be suggesting.

Your point is irrelevant, because these bouts weren’t televised in the UK... at least, there's no evidence of it.

Point 1-Proves Golovkin has been featured on free British TV prior to facing Brook. So was a known name and had been featured in various mainstream news pieces (including on BBC's website) in the build up to that fight

Point 2 (which proves you know fornicate all about UK media)-Is that EACH of those fights mentioned WERE on UK TV on allegedly-
Here's proof of the Fuchigami fight being on allegedly - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxjzRKpqhE4 and here's proof in regards to the Simon fight https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo7qUMQNnV0. Pretty sure you could find the others if you were bothered.

The truth of the matter is that Canelo still done roughly double the number of buys that Golovkins last PPV achieved in the states.

lefty wrote:The truth of the matter is that Canelo still done roughly double the number of buys that Golovkins last PPV achieved in the states.

So, he can get double of Golovkin's purse: 66 vs 34 percent, not a flat fee which would probably be 10-20% of the purse.

boxing_rocks wrote:The annoying motherf*cker is killing threads. He needs to be banned.

Just ignore him.

boxing_rocks wrote:

lefty wrote:The truth of the matter is that Canelo still done roughly double the number of buys that Golovkins last PPV achieved in the states.

So, he can get double of Golovkin's purse: 66 vs 34 percent, not a flat fee which would probably be 10-20% of the purse.

tide might turn, and imo is turning. the mney drawn in europe and european ppv arrangements is closing in on US earnings. but still, as i see it, canelo needs ggg, not the other way around. golovkin only has a few bucks to gain from this. he wont gain any credit for it in the sport.

Butterbean wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:

lefty wrote:The truth of the matter is that Canelo still done roughly double the number of buys that Golovkins last PPV achieved in the states.

So, he can get double of Golovkin's purse: 66 vs 34 percent, not a flat fee which would probably be 10-20% of the purse.

tide might turn, and imo is turning. the mney drawn in europe and european ppv arrangements is closing in on US earnings. but still, as i see it, canelo needs ggg, not the other way around. golovkin only has a few bucks to gain from this. he wont gain any credit for it in the sport.

I agree. If Golovkin gets Jacobs and then fights Saunders or another top UK fighter in the spring, he will likely be pretty close to Canelo.

Butterbean wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:

lefty wrote:The truth of the matter is that Canelo still done roughly double the number of buys that Golovkins last PPV achieved in the states.

So, he can get double of Golovkin's purse: 66 vs 34 percent, not a flat fee which would probably be 10-20% of the purse.

tide might turn, and imo is turning. the mney drawn in europe and european ppv arrangements is closing in on US earnings. but still, as i see it, canelo needs ggg, not the other way around. golovkin only has a few bucks to gain from this. he wont gain any credit for it in the sport.

How does Canelo need Golovkin? Lol.

to prove himself to the world, no ? canelo has become a joke to the world of boxing. thats why. he claims to be mw champ of the world, yet refuses to fight at that weight. claims to be the best, yet ducks the best fighters out there. and his best accomplishments is a win over a way old over the hill cotto, smaller than him and a one sided outboxing by the feather fisted fraud, mayweather. thats why.

That may be the case but financially he doesn't.

lefty wrote:That may be the case but financially he doesn't.

Financially, he could retire. He and his family are set for life. He wants to be remembered as a Mexican great comparable to Chavez, but behaves like a chicken. If he doesn't fight Golovkin next year, his legacy is screwed.

From Lance Pugmire (LA Times):

Canelo Alvarez's shrinking pay-per-view audience not expected to surpass 300,000 buys

Industry sources point out as sharply diminished interest from mainstream/crossover sports fans, last Saturday’s Canelo Alvarez-Liam Smith fight in Texas isn’t expected to surpass 300,000 pay-per-view buys.

Mexico’s Alvarez (48-1-1, 34 knockouts) knocked out England’s Smith in the ninth round after dropping him in each of the two prior rounds to capture the World Boxing Organization junior-middleweight belt at AT&T Stadium outside Dallas.


While the attendance was more than 51,000, the $64.95 pay-per-view price and disappointment over Alvarez not fighting unbeaten middleweight champion Gennady Golovkin triggered a mass defection.

In November, Alvarez’s unanimous-decision victory over Puerto Rico’s four-division champion Miguel Cotto drew 900,000 buys. Around 500,000 bought Alvarez’s May knockout of British welterweight Amir Khan.

Yet, industry sources claim with satellite figures in and early cable companies reporting, the Alvarez-Smith fight should finish with between 250,000 and 300,000 buys.

The tone from executives at competing promotions Thursday was that Alvarez and his promoter, Oscar De La Hoya, did themselves a great disservice by indicating Alvarez was fighting Golovkin following the Khan triumph.


Golovkin was summoned into the ring by Alvarez, who said he was prepared that second to fight the champion from Kazakhstan who’s now riding a 23-fight knockout streak.

Instead, days later, Alvarez relinquished his World Boxing Council middleweight belt to mandatory challenger Golovkin and promised to fight him in September 2017.

“I’d put tape over [Alvarez’s] mouth and [De La Hoya’s] mouth,” one fight executive said, requesting anonymity because they routinely avoid publicly discussing other’s business. “The idiocy of [Alvarez] calling out Golovkin and fighting someone nobody’s heard of … they put themselves in this position.

“So, right now, he’s in the unenviable position of his next fight is not going to be against Golovkin either, so he’s going to pay the price for it again.”

The shrinking audience for the Smith fight is around the sales Alvarez had in 2014 when he fought little-known Cuban Erislandy Lara.

“Not a good sign,” one television industry source said. “Seems to indicate he is connecting only with hardcore boxing fans,” with fights like this.

Alvarez, 26, fractured his right thumb in Saturday’s bout and will decide whether to either fight again in early 2017 and in May, or just on Cinco de Mayo weekend as the Golovkin fight looms.

Golovkin (36-0, 33 KOs) is negotiating a possible Dec. 10 fight at Madison Square Garden against co-World Boxing Assn. champion Daniel Jacobs, and he also is planning a spring 2017 date.

In England, where Golovkin’s Sept. 10 fifth-round technical knockout of welterweight champion Kell Brook sold out O2 Arena in London, there were 500,000 pay-per-view buys.

boxing_rocks wrote:

lefty wrote:That may be the case but financially he doesn't.

Financially, he could retire. He and his family are set for life. He wants to be remembered as a Mexican great comparable to Chavez, but behaves like a chicken. If he doesn't fight Golovkin next year, his legacy is screwed.

He has a better resume than Golovkin now.

What are people talking about though? How good his resume is, or how he egregiously ducked GGG and dropped his title when he was ordered to fight him?

I thought Mexicans don't fuckk around.

lefty wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:

lefty wrote:That may be the case but financially he doesn't.

Financially, he could retire. He and his family are set for life. He wants to be remembered as a Mexican great comparable to Chavez, but behaves like a chicken. If he doesn't fight Golovkin next year, his legacy is screwed.

He has a better resume than Golovkin now.

He has bigger names on his resume, but Golovkin has certainly performed more impressively, and is coming a lot closer to reaching a historical benchmark.