BoxRec

Posted: **15 Mar 2005, 06:37**

nickd wrote:Anyone care to let me know how boxing torrents works? Would like to get some fights from there. Thanks.

Here's a link which explains how to use torrents, it's really quite simple.

http://boxing-forum.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=636&

However the boxing torrent site seems to have changed it's address so until someone finds out what it is there's no way of accessing their download archive.

Posted: **15 Mar 2005, 07:02**

Thanks.

Posted: **15 Mar 2005, 08:50**

[/img]

Posted: **15 Mar 2005, 11:44**

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Shirow wrote:I'm on to the Sports Cafe but they were checking and haven't got back to me yet.

I don't understand how it works. Is it totally impossible for someone with a big enough dish to get every American channel?
Does a UK broadcaster have to arrange for it to be shown here or can it just be picked up with the right equipment/decoder?

I believe that HBO is a Cable channel rather than satellite but i know for instance that in Bermuda they get American TV by the dish.

It does piss you off. Sky get a cut of the licensing fee, then your Sky basic package payments, then your Sky Sports channel payments, then your PPV payments and on top of that the PPVs are full of adverts and sponsorship. No wonder Murdoch is a multi billionaire.

I've finally made the move to cancel. Boxing is my single biggest reason for keeping Sky. I'm a sucker and i'll pay what they tell me to to see the big fights but if i can't even see them live they can fornicate off.

Boxing Torrents is back up now anyway...
Bermuda is a lot fornicating nearer America than we are. Bear in mind that the curve of the earth is probably going to get in the way if you are in the UK. Sattelites only broadcast along a certain band, they cannot cover the entire planet or even a whole hemisphere.

Well i really don't know how it all works surely if satellite phones can connect from point to point anywhere tv signals can work in the same way?

Anyway Sports Cafe is a no. They can't get HBO live. Tits. Maybe this means a trip to the continent.

Thanks for that info BTW MW.

Apparently the boxing torrents offices were raided a while ago. But there are back up at a slightly different address it was posted on the current scene but that threads disappeared. I'll post it here when i get home tonight.

Posted: **15 Mar 2005, 12:44**

Sattelite signals do not connect 'point to point.'

I believe that sattelite phones often require several sattelites to bounce the signal off of them, however, it's a small signal as it only contains one conversation. Broadcasting a fight is totally different, you're sending a wide signal over a large area, rather than targeting a small one at a local area. Totally different requirements.

Posted: **15 Mar 2005, 13:00**

Yes I've never heard of anyone in Europe picking up HBO direct - but their live feed is obviously being bounced around the globe to Europe, for France, Germany etc - I expect TVN Poland will show it too - but again you'd need a card ( they sell pirate ones in the satellite mags BTW )

Stick a large dish on your roof, and bob's your uncle. I've gotta look into this a bit more - Sky are pathetic, they wouldn't know a decent fight if it bit them in the arse.

If anyone wants to see how the PacMan is looking, there's a decent video of Pedro Fernandez interviewing him over at Ringtalk.com.

I'm leaning towards Manny in this one, but Morales came into his last fight at 144 - that's a huge weight advantage.....

Posted: **15 Mar 2005, 13:04**

By point to point i meant from one point on the globe to another regardless of there being a line of sight to both from a single satellite. I did type up a more detailed description of what i meant then i deleted it as i remembered that this was a boxing forum

I did wonder if for sat phonecalls it bounced from ground to satellite and back each time to the farthest point in that particular satellite's range until it had made it from the sender to the recipient but i thought that would make a conversation impossible with all that latency. I thought maybe the signal was somehow sent between satellites.

Of course 1 call would use up relatively little bandwidth but you've got to assume that these companies are set up to take thousands of calls simultaneously.

We send calls between offices at work by microwave and it's suprising the bandwidth they take if there kept at the same quality as a landline.

I might forget about the boxing altogether and get to the bottom of satellite technology this weekend...

Posted: **15 Mar 2005, 17:12**

DK2112 wrote:What's the new boxing torrents address please?

Here ya go

EDIT : Might be a better idea to keep this on the DL we don't want the authorities breathing down their necks again.

PM me if you need it

Posted: **15 Mar 2005, 18:45**

Thanks. Another thing, is there ANY chance of the likes of Setanta sports putting Erik/Pacman on PPV over here? any chance at all?

Posted: **15 Mar 2005, 19:22**

Shirow wrote:By point to point i meant from one point on the globe to another regardless of there being a line of sight to both from a single satellite. I did type up a more detailed description of what i meant then i deleted it as i remembered that this was a boxing forum

I did wonder if for sat phonecalls it bounced from ground to satellite and back each time to the farthest point in that particular satellite's range until it had made it from the sender to the recipient but i thought that would make a conversation impossible with all that latency. I thought maybe the signal was somehow sent between satellites.

Of course 1 call would use up relatively little bandwidth but you've got to assume that these companies are set up to take thousands of calls simultaneously.

Yeah Microwave's require high power signals and only work over short distances.

I think the sattelites bounce signals off one another to reach their destination if i'm not mistaken, i did used to sell courses on this subject once upon a time, that's the only reason i know.

We send calls between offices at work by microwave and it's suprising the bandwidth they take if there kept at the same quality as a landline.

I might forget about the boxing altogether and get to the bottom of satellite technology this weekend...

Posted: **16 Mar 2005, 13:09**

My money is on Morales. Should be one hell of fight and I share everyones dismay that it ain't being screened live.

A least we'll see it though, as some you mention there's been massive clashes that didn't even make British TV screens :x

Posted: **16 Mar 2005, 13:33**

Pac Man wins this one for me - speed and power. They'll have to start calling him The Mexican Assassin if he pulls this off.

These two are just fantastic for the game - one tough fight after another - no ducking or messing around, just taking on the best out there in 50/50 fights - true modern day warriors.

Posted: **16 Mar 2005, 13:52**

MightyWarrior wrote:These two are just fantastic for the game - one tough fight after another - no ducking or messing around, just taking on the best out there in 50/50 fights - true modern day warriors.

I agree, Barrera as well, all three are REAL Champions.

Posted: **17 Mar 2005, 17:11**

So is there any way to see this live? I wish we could have a channel dedicated to showing these big fights from America. I'd pay for most of them to be honest. Especially if its Manny vs Morales FFS!

Posted: **25 Mar 2005, 19:01**

Just watched the fight on SKY, I had it closer than the SKY team. I had Morales a 115-114 winner.

Great fight.

Posted: **25 Mar 2005, 19:07**

I had Pac the winner myself.

Posted: **25 Mar 2005, 20:04**

I had Morales winning by about 3 rounds. Good fight, Arce-Hussein was exciting too

Posted: **25 Mar 2005, 21:25**

I was annoyed that all seem to have forgotton about Barrera. They were talking like Morales was the man in the devision. Even Paul Demspey's closing line was "after all these war, still proves that EVERYONE is looking up to him at Super Featherweight, bye for now" No, Barrera is the champ and Barrera is the man.

Posted: **26 Mar 2005, 05:46**

I agree with stujones, in the sence that last nights SKY broadcast did seem a bit biased towards Morales (and I'm a Morales fan).

With regards to the fight. I imagine like most other UK fans here last night was the first time I had seen the fight. After reading all the various reports on the fight I was a little shocked how close the fight actually was (IMO).

The SKY team for instance last night kept saying how 'ragged' Pacmans punches were, 'ragged' or not many were still landing.

But like I said I thought Morales won, but it was in my opinion, a lot closer than many other seem to think.

Posted: **26 Mar 2005, 05:56**

Hmm, didn't bother watching it last night but it sounds like the Sky team saw it the way I did. It's repeated at 12:30pm today on Sky Sports 2 so I'm going to have a look and see what they say.

Posted: **26 Mar 2005, 06:54**

what was with that huge clock banner bottom right talk about taking up half of the right side of the screen.

Posted: **26 Mar 2005, 07:36**

I was wondering what was with that

Posted: **26 Mar 2005, 07:56**

REAL_DEAL wrote:what was with that huge clock banner bottom right talk about taking up half of the right side of the screen.

It was annoying.

Posted: **26 Mar 2005, 09:31**

KOJOE90 wrote: last nights SKY broadcast did seem a bit biased towards Morales (and I'm a Morales fan).

Know what you mean. They kept going on about Morales' ability to come back, but weren't giving Pac-Man any credit fior doing the same, even though he was still there with Morales going toe to toe at the final bell.
What a fornicating fight thugh.

Posted: **26 Mar 2005, 09:51**

Boxing News had the fight a draw at 114-114.

BoxRec

Morales vs Pacquiao