More or less promotions?

Post Reply
Khaosai-Galaxy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2739
Joined: 29 Apr 2007, 12:15

More or less promotions?

Post by Khaosai-Galaxy »

What do you think would be better for boxing in the UK?

A very small number of big, powerful promotions, with the ability to control the presentation of the product from end to end, dictate terms etc.


OR

Large number of smaller promotions, each with their own distribution channels and methods of presentations, who work together (or not) on an ad hoc basis.


Basically, Closed Platform vs Open Sourced, for you computer geeks.
Bronxbull666
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 384
Joined: 16 Aug 2012, 17:00

Re: More or less promotions?

Post by Bronxbull666 »

If you are forcing a decision between the two, then I'd go for the smaller promotions. Ideally they'd have an ad hoc mentality and work together. There'd be healthy rivalry, no monopolisation, probably better ranking systems to create equal opportunities for fighters. The best would have to fight more regularly and honesty would prevail.

I do like the current climate tbh. The best prospects all seem to get a bit of notoriety early doors. I know the smaller promotions are pretty much a feeder system to the larger promotions, but everyone gets a slice of the cake, just different sized slices. I think it's a healthy competitive business at the moment in Britain.
Wales
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7854
Joined: 23 Mar 2004, 14:05

Re: More or less promotions?

Post by Wales »

One Promoter, UFC style, ensuring we dont miss out on fights like Hatton Witter etc... never goingt o happen though, and I agree the way its working at the moment seems the best its been for a long while.
Khaosai-Galaxy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2739
Joined: 29 Apr 2007, 12:15

Re: More or less promotions?

Post by Khaosai-Galaxy »

Wales wrote:One Promoter, UFC style, ensuring we dont miss out on fights like Hatton Witter etc... never goingt o happen though, and I agree the way its working at the moment seems the best its been for a long while.

I think there are probably more "B" level stars (Frotch, et al) in good fights then there has been for a long time, however there isn't really any "A" stars at the moment, no Hameds, Lewis, Eubanks, Benns etc.
Bronxbull666
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 384
Joined: 16 Aug 2012, 17:00

Re: More or less promotions?

Post by Bronxbull666 »

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:
Wales wrote:One Promoter, UFC style, ensuring we dont miss out on fights like Hatton Witter etc... never goingt o happen though, and I agree the way its working at the moment seems the best its been for a long while.

I think there are probably more "B" level stars (Frotch, et al) in good fights then there has been for a long time, however there isn't really any "A" stars at the moment, no Hameds, Lewis, Eubanks, Benns etc.
To be fair, Eubank, Benn, Hamed were not the best in their divisions. This is a typical, stuck in the past perception of boxing. Just because they were on ITV 15-20 years ago, the casual fan thinks they were the be all and end all.

As for Lewis, yes he was good, but he wasn't the best! Bowe would have dethroned him, prime Tyson would have if he hadn't raped that naive woman, and Vitali beat him fair and square, Lewis had to lace him and butt him to win.

Calzaghe is the only A class fighter since Wilde! Price will be the next if Frampton doesn't beat him to it.
Loynesy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1767
Joined: 26 Sep 2003, 08:29

Re: More or less promotions?

Post by Loynesy »

I assume you are being ironic/provocative Bronx?
Last edited by Loynesy on 18 Sep 2012, 04:46, edited 1 time in total.
Khaosai-Galaxy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2739
Joined: 29 Apr 2007, 12:15

Re: More or less promotions?

Post by Khaosai-Galaxy »

Bronxbull666 wrote:
Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:
Wales wrote:One Promoter, UFC style, ensuring we dont miss out on fights like Hatton Witter etc... never goingt o happen though, and I agree the way its working at the moment seems the best its been for a long while.

I think there are probably more "B" level stars (Frotch, et al) in good fights then there has been for a long time, however there isn't really any "A" stars at the moment, no Hameds, Lewis, Eubanks, Benns etc.
To be fair, Eubank, Benn, Hamed were not the best in their divisions. This is a typical, stuck in the past perception of boxing. Just because they were on ITV 15-20 years ago, the casual fan thinks they were the be all and end all.

As for Lewis, yes he was good, but he wasn't the best! Bowe would have dethroned him, prime Tyson would have if he hadn't raped that naive woman, and Vitali beat him fair and square, Lewis had to lace him and butt him to win.

Calzaghe is the only A class fighter since Wilde! Price will be the next if Frampton doesn't beat him to it.

Yes i assume this is a joke.

Just in case it isnt, go and re-read what i wrote. I said 'stars' not 'fighters'
Bronxbull666
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 384
Joined: 16 Aug 2012, 17:00

Re: More or less promotions?

Post by Bronxbull666 »

Yeh sorry, few too many Vinos last night. Total mis-read!
Khaosai-Galaxy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2739
Joined: 29 Apr 2007, 12:15

Re: More or less promotions?

Post by Khaosai-Galaxy »

Bronxbull666 wrote:Yeh sorry, few too many Vinos last night. Total mis-read!

Hang your head in shame, young man.
Bronxbull666
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 384
Joined: 16 Aug 2012, 17:00

Re: More or less promotions?

Post by Bronxbull666 »

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:
Bronxbull666 wrote:Yeh sorry, few too many Vinos last night. Total mis-read!

Hang your head in shame, young man.
I post more crap than normal when plonked. :oops:
Post Reply