Does having the fathers/families involved make it worse??

Post Reply
Boxingmad
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 670
Joined: 12 Jul 2004, 07:04

Does having the fathers/families involved make it worse??

Post by Boxingmad »

Just reading about Amir Khan's latest antics involving Paul McCloskey and now his conditioner it just cast my mind back to when Naseem Hamed's brothers started getting involved with his career, and then of course Ricky Hatton brought in his dad Ray to run things. Did it make things worse, or did it actually help in any way?
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Does having the fathers/families involved make it worse??

Post by palooka »

I've not seen many turn out that well to be honest; I can remember Michael Olajide; he was an excellent boxer trained by his dad. That all went pear shape; there's been loads where it has just been a mess.

The only one father/son team that worked well (off the top of my head) is Johnny and Jason Rushton.
1southpaw
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 858
Joined: 28 Apr 2007, 14:23

Re: Does having the fathers/families involved make it worse??

Post by 1southpaw »

simon fox wrote:I've not seen many turn out that well to be honest; I can remember Michael Olajide; he was an excellent boxer trained by his dad. That all went pear shape; there's been loads where it has just been a mess.

The only one father/son team that worked well (off the top of my head) is Johnny and Jason Rushton.
Sam & Gerry storey
bripez
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4877
Joined: 11 Feb 2010, 18:07

Re: Does having the fathers/families involved make it worse??

Post by bripez »

Problems arise when a boxer starts to earn big money.

The examples above did not involve big money so the problem did not arise. Remember Barry McGuigan and "Mr Eastwood" ? As soon as he won his World Title he was pushed out in favour of his brother, and that didn't end well (Stevie Cruz).
freddydoesdallas
Cruiserweight
Posts: 9436
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 13:48

Re: Does having the fathers/families involved make it worse??

Post by freddydoesdallas »

Depends on what you want to judge it on. Hatton's family got him the Mayweather & Pacquiao fights and secured Ricky & Ricky's future family finances for a long time.
Spud
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Does having the fathers/families involved make it worse??

Post by Spud »

To answer the title of the thread - definitely.

Families involvement is sometimes a promoters and trainers nightmare.
mickey1975
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 23130
Joined: 02 Mar 2009, 12:54

Re: Does having the fathers/families involved make it worse??

Post by mickey1975 »

1southpaw wrote:
simon fox wrote:I've not seen many turn out that well to be honest; I can remember Michael Olajide; he was an excellent boxer trained by his dad. That all went pear shape; there's been loads where it has just been a mess.

The only one father/son team that worked well (off the top of my head) is Johnny and Jason Rushton.
Sam & Gerry storey
Calzaghe,Woodhall,Clev?
LeedsLad
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 996
Joined: 02 Jul 2010, 06:15

Re: Does having the fathers/families involved make it worse??

Post by LeedsLad »

To me it depends on the nature of the relationship between the fighter and the family, and also the extent that the family member takes control of the fighter's career.

Ray Hatton did lots of good things for Ricky's career, but toward the end you could tell that he fancied himself as some kind of boxing expert, and was enjoying the limelight too. That also goes for Paul Speak and to a lesser extent Lee Beard.

Enzo Calzaghe was purely a trainer, they left the promotional and managerial side solely to allegedly, and others have had similar arrangements.

I'd imagine there's a hell of a lot more to it than say, being a football agent - those guys are the scum of the earth, earning fortunes and not putting anything back into the game at all.
Post Reply