BoxRec

Bolling vs Caperallo March 4th, winner takes all.......What a concept, if successful i hope it's practiced more to encourage the best to fight the best and perform at there best, of course there's a downside to the poor bloke who loses, but 2 guys fighting for 1 prize will provide an exciting concept.

Bolling winner wide UD

I Love it to! Prize Fighting at its best

bolling should do it i reckon,wouldnt be surprised if the purse is as such because caparello wont leave victoria, anyway,its a good match up

Nice idea but I'm sure it would actually discourage the best from fighting the best. While any boxer will project confidence, the reality is they probably wouldn't wan to take any chance on losing their entire purse.

I'm with you dawg.

You have a good point though Oliver.

Is it legal? Can you make somebody fight for nothing?

We were a British colony when slavery was abolished in the British Empire in 1833.

I agree with Brute. It's wrong to not pay both guys. What happens if the fight is a Gatti-Ward style fight. Do both guys not deserve to get paid.

Brute wrote:Is it legal? Can you make somebody fight for nothing?

We were a British colony when slavery was abolished in the British Empire in 1833.

It ain't illegal, but whilst guys often egg each other on with winner takes all, it doesn't happen e.g. Talipeau/Waters
Possibly a different story if guys cleared 50k p.a. out of boxing. Dipping out on 5 or 10k wouldn't exactly send them to Salvos for food vouchers.

I Think after this fight a few will be converted.

It's not like I'm hoping this to be the new pay structure for boxing, just saying 2 good fighters, both up and coming with a hoop to shoot at $. Should be entertaining.

I think its a great idea, good on the two of them. Especially given so many guys these days are only about the $$$

Theres a 8 man tournament being organised in NZ at the moment $10,000 winner takes all similar to the prizefighter in the UK. However the first two rounds of the tourny wont go on your record so it protects you to a point whereby if you loose in the first round u dont get paid anyhting but you also dont get a blemish on your record. Only the final fight will go on the fighters record and by then your fighting for $10,000 for a win $1,000 for a loss!

I still disagree. If a man is a professional boxer it means that boxing is his living. If he is unpaid, is he covered by Worker's Compensation or is he just classed as fighting as an amateur?

Boxing also carries a high risk of injury that causes problems if he has other employment. Let's forget the gladiatorial crap and be serious.

I have to admit houndy it sounds good. Expect fighters.

theres no way this will catch on. imagine the injustice if the fight is a real barn burner and the decision is split and controversial and the loser walks away with nothing. i guess you could have bonus type pay structures for good fights but then whats the criteria?

adamheight wrote:theres no way this will catch on. imagine the injustice if the fight is a real barn burner and the decision is split and controversial and the loser walks away with nothing. i guess you could have bonus type pay structures for good fights but then whats the criteria?

Exactly my thoughts also.

I don't actually believe this is 'winner take all'. I think it's just a nice piece of marketing spin.

No way will fighters fight for no purse. Might be like that 'back in the day', but no more...

:P So cynical PST

The eight man, winner takes all K1 isn't really winner takes all, the fighters also get 'appearance money'

Marlin wrote::P So cynical PST

As much as we may 'want' to believe they are fighting for the glory, the realist in me say's, "wake up to yourself" and then I come back to reality!

Bolling's a top prospect. I'd like to see him do well and bounce back from that South African IBO attempt last year which in my opinion, he should never have taken. (And I said this before he went)

Michael Bolling and Paul Fleming are my two favourite Aussie prospects I'd love to see go on and do good things. They both have bright futures with a good patient approach, both young and no need to rush them anywhere yet.

We could sure use prizemoney like that in NZ Boxing for some of our pros.

It's a very,very decent way to promote a fight, I think a lot of people are taking it the wrong way, and are probably putting too much emphasis on the possability of injustice. How about taking it for a great opportunity to bare witness to a potential local classic. Both guys can clearly fight, but the spin on the fight can only provide an exciting pace to a more than needed live audience nationally.

No one should care about who gets paid except for the 2 doing a dance in the squared circle, theres no injustice, only chivalry between 2 hard bastards who are promoting that they are going to entertain, as a fan and a advocate of the sport, nothing has excited me more this year.

Relax and enjoy

Hounddawg wrote:It's a very,very decent way to promote a fight, I think a lot of people are taking it the wrong way, and are probably putting too much emphasis on the possability of injustice. How about taking it for a great opportunity to bare witness to a potential local classic. Both guys can clearly fight, but the spin on the fight can only provide an exciting pace to a more than needed live audience nationally.

No one should care about who gets paid except for the 2 doing a dance in the squared circle, theres no injustice, only chivalry between 2 hard bastards who are promoting that they are going to entertain, as a fan and a advocate of the sport, nothing has excited me more this year.

Relax and enjoy

that,s the way i look at it,the boy,s are willingto back theirselves,the loser can walk away saying he at least stood up to be counted, i just hope the judges get it right, and the ref doesn,t put on dodgy standing eight counts.all the best

Standing 8 is in force & quite common in Victoria. At times 2 or 3. Farked if I know why prolong the inevitable? I rarely bothered to record them in Boxrec

ben k wrote:

adamheight wrote:theres no way this will catch on. imagine the injustice if the fight is a real barn burner and the decision is split and controversial and the loser walks away with nothing. i guess you could have bonus type pay structures for good fights but then whats the criteria?

Exactly my thoughts also.

That's a good point. On top of that, if it's close and/or controversial, the loser could well allege foul play.

could just b a promotional ploy too, if it is, i have seen a lot worse the last cupple years