BoxRec

raylawpc wrote:

Cutman Scabbers wrote:

raylawpc wrote: Yeah, but in 2012 I can watch a fight at Madison Square Garden on my TV. In 1922, I would have had to to endure a two-day train ride to NYC, the expense of a hotel room and meals, and a two day train ride back. That people were willing to do that tell you how popular boxing was in those days. Do you think people today would be willing to do that?

If there were no TV, yes. While there was radio coverage, the only way to see the fights was to be there. And if that were the case now, I think people would go to great lengths to see them.

You really think that today . . . without television . . . 50,000 people would pack Yankee Stadium to see a fight between a not particularly popular ex-champion and a fringe heavyweight contender??

Ric wrote:

raylawpc wrote:

Cutman Scabbers wrote: If there were no TV, yes. While there was radio coverage, the only way to see the fights was to be there. And if that were the case now, I think people would go to great lengths to see them.

You really think that today . . . without television . . . 50,000 people would pack Yankee Stadium to see a fight between a not particularly popular ex-champion and a fringe heavyweight contender??

Don't forget that Luis Angel Firpo was also on this program, and he was very popular at this time. (He'd fight Dempsey for the title a few months later in that famous bout where Dempsey gets knocked thru the ropes and out of the ring.) For years to come, there would be countless boxers who'd take on the name "Young Firpo." As I mentioned in a quiz here some seven years ago, I had read a February 6, 1943 Tacoma News Tribune article by Dillon Graham--the Associated Press's Sports Editor. He wrote that he had gone thru the AP's index card records--which indicate the athletes who had "grabbed" the newspaper headlines for the previous 30 years, from about 1913. Graham came up with a list of about the top 20 or so. The top two were boxers: Dempsey was #1, and Firpo #2 (baseball great Babe Ruth was #3).

raylawpc wrote:

Cutman Scabbers wrote:

raylawpc wrote: Yeah, but in 2012 I can watch a fight at Madison Square Garden on my TV. In 1922, I would have had to to endure a two-day train ride to NYC, the expense of a hotel room and meals, and a two day train ride back. That people were willing to do that tell you how popular boxing was in those days. Do you think people today would be willing to do that?

If there were no TV, yes. While there was radio coverage, the only way to see the fights was to be there. And if that were the case now, I think people would go to great lengths to see them.

You really think that today . . . without television . . . 50,000 people would pack Yankee Stadium to see a fight between a not particularly popular ex-champion and a fringe heavyweight contender??

Cutman Scabbers wrote:

raylawpc wrote:

Cutman Scabbers wrote: If there were no TV, yes. While there was radio coverage, the only way to see the fights was to be there. And if that were the case now, I think people would go to great lengths to see them.

You really think that today . . . without television . . . 50,000 people would pack Yankee Stadium to see a fight between a not particularly popular ex-champion and a fringe heavyweight contender??

Maybe I didn't express this clearly enough. What I mean is that if television -- the technology -- did not exist today (as it did not exist back when "boxing was huge") -- then yes, people would turn out in great numbers to see the shows live, because that would be the only way to actually SEE the matches!

raylawpc wrote:

Cutman Scabbers wrote:

raylawpc wrote: You really think that today . . . without television . . . 50,000 people would pack Yankee Stadium to see a fight between a not particularly popular ex-champion and a fringe heavyweight contender??

Maybe I didn't express this clearly enough. What I mean is that if television -- the technology -- did not exist today (as it did not exist back when "boxing was huge") -- then yes, people would turn out in great numbers to see the shows live, because that would be the only way to actually SEE the matches!

No, you expressed yourself clearly enough. Respectfully, think you are wrong.

Cutman Scabbers wrote:

raylawpc wrote:

Cutman Scabbers wrote: Maybe I didn't express this clearly enough. What I mean is that if television -- the technology -- did not exist today (as it did not exist back when "boxing was huge") -- then yes, people would turn out in great numbers to see the shows live, because that would be the only way to actually SEE the matches!

No, you expressed yourself clearly enough. Respectfully, think you are wrong.

I may well be (wouldn't be the first time) -- but then to what do you attribute the difference?

This thread makes me think about radio coverage of fights. Does anyone know if there is an archive?

I would like to listen to radio coverage of some of the great pre-TV fights.

Brutu wrote:Up until about the late 1960's,
I think the major radio stations(like ABC-radio) use to broadcast live major fights

I think the last fight a major radio station carried live was
Frazier-Ali I in March 1971?

raylawpc wrote:

scallum wrote:

raylawpc wrote: No doubt it made many African-Americans proud. But the idea he did anything to advance the plight of African-Americans is a myth.

I do not know if he personally did anything to advance the cause but his actions of winning the Hwy title gave a oppressed peoples it proudest moment

scallum wrote:

raylawpc wrote:

scallum wrote: I am aware that Mr. Johnson did little to advance the cause of his peoples but him winning the most prestigious title in the universe was extremely uplifting to an oppressed race of humans. A poet of the times remarked about the racial killings after the fight "It is better that a few blacks get killed than the spirit of all blacks"

No doubt it made many African-Americans proud. But the idea he did anything to advance the plight of African-Americans is a myth.

I do not know if he personally did anything to advance the cause but his actions of winning the Hwy title gave a oppressed peoples it proudest moment

scallum wrote:

scallum wrote:

raylawpc wrote: No doubt it made many African-Americans proud. But the idea he did anything to advance the plight of African-Americans is a myth.

I do not know if he personally did anything to advance the cause but his actions of winning the Hwy title gave a oppressed peoples it proudest moment

At the of Johnson winning The Most Prestigious Title in The World this was Africa Americans Proudest moment.

raylawpc wrote:

Brutu wrote:Up until about the late 1960's,
I think the major radio stations(like ABC-radio) use to broadcast live major fights

I think the last fight a major radio station carried live was
Frazier-Ali I in March 1971?

There were some later ones. I remember listening to Ali-Mathis and Patterson-Bonavena on the radio in Oklahoma City. Quarry-Lyle too. There were others but I don't remember specifically which ones. I think Ali-Ellis.

Ambling Alp wrote:Yes there were some on HBO. However, there were many more on network TV than HBO until around this time.

Ambling Alp wrote:Well the move away from the networks (CBS, ABC, NBC) didn't happen overnight. It was gradual. The really big "super fights" were usually on Closed Circuit/Pay Per View. However, the networks still carried a lot of good fights up to the mid-1980s.

Holmes for example, fought almost all of his title fights on network TV in primetime until the first Spinks fight in 1985. There was usually at least one other quality fight on the undercard that was televised. There was a lot of fights on Saturday and Sunday afternoons that were televised by the neworks in the early 1980s, and gradually less and less as the decade wore on.

Even in the late 1980s, there was still occasionally decent fights on network TV; though not in primetime.

BarryWashington wrote:

big train express wrote:looking forward i dont think boxing will ever be able to capture the glory and attention it once had in the past.

I believe : the more people think that, the more likelihood that will be true.

Whereas if people thought the opposite, then the opposite would more likely occur.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:You said the major fights were usually carried live on network TV up until Holmes/Spinks. That was false, no need to drag it out. If you didn't mean to say it, fine. I really can't be bothered to carry on for 2 pages with you over another inane topic because you can't admit that what you said was incorrect.