BoxRec

Ottke/Reid is definitely the one that springs to mind, with Reid seemingly being cautioned every time he had the audacity to try and punch Ottke. Only one person was “allowed” to win that fight – and it wasn’t Reid.

But I think my cynicism has simply grown with the more boxing I’ve watched in general. There are so many ridiculous examples of guided careers, home town referees, weak matchmaking, paper champions with grandiose titles…. I mean, where do you really begin.

Agonisingly prolonged title reigns and mismatches - a sustained quantity of these over the years gave me some cynicism.

If a champ's so amazing, why fight easy opponents, ones that often make you look bad?

And what is the point watching a fight, when you already know whom the winner will be?

That gulf between what's good for the fighter and what's good for the fan - this is pretty wide. On one hand you are seeing fighters who are increasingly financially independent; on the other, audiences are watching something that is very unsporting. Gary Lockett can be absolutely hopeless vs Pavlik, but can buy more "to let" buildings with his money. An anonymous career, but probably a success in what line of business he has outside boxing.

What stops my cynicism is when you see a nice little surprise.

chinny wrote:

Gray-Fox wrote: Pernell Whitaker is the way he is because of cocaine and alcohol, not boxing.

Hmmm are you sure? I don't see too many forty something rock stars coming out of rehab slurring their words.

What a ridiculous riposte. The most defensive boxer in a generation and you think he's punch drunk...

The WBO, also Sugar Rays comeback and the ridiculous two WBC titles online against
Donny LaLonde.

Fwanks pathetic matchmaking and shows should have killed off boxing in this country - especially
this paticular show.

Millennium Stadium, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom (7th April 2007)


That it still thrives somewhat is down to the loyalty of the boxing fan of this country - the CRAP we are fed has made me less of the boxing mad kid I once was.

Oh actually I forgot, I remember as a 10 year old when Pernell Whitaker was robbed of a fantastic win against Chavez.

Also Naz v Lawal

Gray-Fox wrote:

chinny wrote:

Gray-Fox wrote: Pernell Whitaker is the way he is because of cocaine and alcohol, not boxing.

Hmmm are you sure? I don't see too many forty something rock stars coming out of rehab slurring their words.

What a ridiculous riposte. The most defensive boxer in a generation and you think he's punch drunk...

That's what I was thinking, Whitaker rarely if ever took punishment.

Became cynical early to mid-nineties when I saw some of the opponents thrown in with Bruno and co, but the two big decisions that really did it for me were 1999 onwards - Lewis v Holyfield and Barrera v Morales 1.

You feel like following a different sport when you witness robberies like those....

Boxing is a cynical business.
I often wish I could have remained ignorant to the goings on behind the scenes.
Blissful ignorance works for a lot of casual viewers, and we cynics are just that because we have an in depth knowledge of the sport, and don't believe the hype.
So when did I become a cynic ? 1978 when I first got involved in the sport.

twenty six wrote:Boxing is a cynical business.
I often wish I could have remained ignorant to the goings on behind the scenes.
Blissful ignorance works for a lot of casual viewers, and we cynics are just that because we have an in depth knowledge of the sport, and don't believe the hype.
So when did I become a cynic ? 1978 when I first got involved in the sport.

100 percent agree,, The more you know the worst it is.

Human nature = corruption & greed. It can take a little while to find that out but that's the way the world is, boxing is just a small part of it.

Seeing RJJ get turned over in Seoul was bad.

Some pro fights that left a bad taste..

Toney vs Tiberi
Lewis vs Holyfield I
Reid vs Ottke

What keeps me interested is the fact that sooner or later there will be more great fights and with a KO you don't have to rely on bent judges or hometown refs.

BunglesFingers wrote:Human nature = corruption & greed. Seeing RJJ get turned over in Seoul was bad.

I actually disagree that it is human nature, but that's another story. This forum is not the place for political philosophy.

Surely the more you know the better it becomes DD

Gray-Fox wrote:

chinny wrote:

Gray-Fox wrote:
What a ridiculous riposte. The most defensive boxer in a generation and you think he's punch drunk...

Yes I think he's punch drunk. He didn't avoid everything and he had a long career.

My opinion.

The way the British Title has been diluted. Boxers too big to even try to win it. It's as if from the outset they know they can get a WBO shot without even taking a risk. A British title fight used to be a big event. As did EBU and Commonwealth. Prince Rodney versus Chris Pyatt. Honeyghan v Mittee. Minter, Sibson, Andries, Cowdell, Marsh etc... Great sporting moments.

I don't mind the odd fight where a guy like Gary Lockett gets his Rocky Balboa moment. But that should be the exception, not the rule.

The rise of Frank Bruno I suppose.

But you only have to read the history books, about Dempsey, Jackson, LaMotta & the 50's mob, to know cynicism and boxing have always gone hand in hand.

For me it was watching the great Harry Mullan of Boxing News as a summeriser for some sat channel probably sky.... raving about Herbie Hide

Terry D wrote:1995.

What happened in 1995 Tel? Was that the year you started growing your beard?

I became cynical when Chris Eubank was champ. All those defences and world title fights he had were against nobodys excluding Benn/Calzaghe/Thompson. He never fought Toney,Jones,McCllellan or McCallum. I used to ask myself why and when are these fights going to come. And thats when i started to realise that fighters are protected and money was more important than glory. I dont blame Eubank for this as he was a good fighter. Its the promoters(Warren in particular) who piss me off and have made me look at boxing in a different perspective. If Hatton had stayed wit Fwank he would still be fighting the Dennis Pedersens of the boxing world in front of sell out crowds.

Promoters its your fault boxing has gone down the pan so SORT IT OUT before no one cares anymore!!!!

thaibox uk wrote: So to everyone on here what was your turning point?

Frank Bruno. We all like Frank, and he certainly could knock people out, but he built a career figthing opponents (except in World Title Bouts) of limited calibre. Whilst his win over Oliver McCall was totally valid- he clearly won that fight- in retrospect it is hard to see how he deserved the fight in the first place, other than by being a major draw.

Just compare Lennox Lewis' record to Franks- His successes are a genuine series of quality wins over very talented and highly regarded opposition- although, to be fair, as a reigning champion this is to be expected. But even before that, he fought- and beat- quality domestic and European opposition.

The moment i 1st clicked on a boxing messageboard and read the posts of Andrew "Spud" Woollatt

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:The moment i 1st clicked on a boxing messageboard and read the posts of Andrew "Spud" Woollatt

Probably after watching a South African called Jacobs getting robbed after beating the crap out of a shot Colin Dunne. Or maybe after watching poor Francis Ampofo getting robbed in his second fight with Jonny Armour in one of the best fights I've ever seen.