BoxRec

thought some of steve bunce comments, were a load of BOLLOCKS..re; proffesional fightrs ONLY IN IT FOR THE MONEY...FULL STOP.. crap...theres more to it than that mate... heres one...pride...heres onother..achievment...am sure there are many ex pros..who can add to that....it made my blood boil....

He is actually growing on me. And to be honest at 3am he saves me having to get a coffee cos I could never sleep with his high pitched voice in the background.

i,m the same, seems an alright gezzer.bringing a bit of life to the commentry scene .but then he seems to bring on some rubbish comment ,imo. that just makes me burn... maybe i,m sensitive

If they were not interested in the money then they`d stay in the vest

Ray Robinson once said that when he was skint all he wanted was the big money, when he had the big money all he wanted was the titles and recognition .. how many mouths does the WBC belt alone feed?

Buncey is spot on

Due to his in yer face personality, he will rub ppl up the wrong way. Used to hate the bloke, but now I think he is good. One thing is sure, there's nothing wrong with his scorecards. Also, he manages to wade through a lot of information quickly - given the needlessly confusing ways of boxing, this is important, and Buncey doesn't try to mislead us in subtle ways ala McGuigan, Rawling, Duke etc.

Re the it's all about money. Depends. Was reading an old BM interview with Jamie Moore, which noted he seemed embarrassed that he once held a WBO intercontinental belt. Those kind of baubles that mislead the audience. We've seen Mooresy go for real belts like British, Commonwealth, hopefully European and WBC bewfore long. I'd say there is pride in that.

If you look at fighters, especially those promoted by Maloney and Hennessey (perhaps as a reaction against Warren), they have their fighters go for proper belts and good fights...there IS definite pride in this. Because the money is in the WBU, WBO, vs an average important passed off as a "world number two". Then money is in lying to the audience and when you see fighters take pride in NOT going this way, in going for the real fights, there is real pride in this.

The cutting question is, does pride pay? Do we simply need the "looked after" fighters to transcend their dodgy belts by taking one big fight per year (at very least!). That way, bringing pride and money together perhaps.

Autobarn wrote:Due to his in yer face personality, he will rub ppl up the wrong way. Used to hate the bloke, but now I think he is good. One thing is sure, there's nothing wrong with his scorecards. Also, he manages to wade through a lot of information quickly - given the needlessly confusing ways of boxing, this is important, and Buncey doesn't try to mislead us in subtle ways ala McGuigan, Rawling, Duke etc.

Re the it's all about money. Depends. Was reading an old BM interview with Jamie Moore, which noted he seemed embarrassed that he once held a WBO intercontinental belt.

If you look at fighters, especially those promoted by Maloney and Hennessey (perhaps as a reaction against Warren), they have their fighters go for proper belts and good fights...there IS definite pride in this. Because the money is in the WBU, WBO, vs an average important passed off as a "world number two". Then money is in lying to the audience and when you see fighters take pride in NOT going this way, in going for the real fights, there is real pride in this.

The cutting question is, does pride pay? Do we simply need the "looked after" fighters to transcend their dodgy belts by taking one big fight per year (at very least!). That way, bringing pride and money together perhaps.

Is this about to turn into another Warren / WBU thread.

Autobarn wrote:One thing is sure, there's nothing wrong with his scorecards.

He had Johnson up by one against Dawson. And that was way wrong for me.

Calzaghe is a perfect example ..

He def went for the money early on .. and didn`t he whinge about that after

"no-body has given me the respect I deserve ... etc."

Now he is in the position to get both .. but he could have helped himself a long long time ago ..

Boxers go for the most prestigious belts most probably because they hope that brings the most prestigious pay-days

gotta dis-agree, alot of these guys know theres a possibility of making moneyBIG MONEY....but the reality is, the majority concentrate on developing the skills,achieving personal goals,,staying out of trouble.an maybe..hopefully earning[being given] the opportunity to THEN make a wedge of loot..yeah they wanna make money, but the majority i reckon want to perfom to an acceptable standard,,,,coz they know it will come later...i heard him comment an maybe i zeroed in on that statement an took it as his only view why people box...what about the gents who love a ruck but end up behind bars everytime they let loose????? legal fight ,no jail....!!!

Buncey is fairly knowledgeable, but he tends to exaggerate about the level of prospects. Overall, a necessity in British boxing in my opinion.

I think many times in UK boxing, the attitude is, the title makes the fighter.

The belts used to mean something up until about 1995-1998.

Belts don't mean anything anymore. And boxing is pretty much a conjested laughing stock, largely down to Ricky Hatton.

Terry D wrote:It is all relative. One fighter can hold a WBC title and get paid fook all. Another can earn well from a WBU title. The fighters make the titles, they put bums on seats (and on the canvas in some instances) so all this "I think the shiny green WBC belt will cement my career legacy" is largely nonsense.

A WBC fighter earning little money would drop that belt like a day-brewing shit for a IBO title fight with higher monetary return.

Then talk would go from "the most prestigious title" to "the fighter makes the belt, I'd be proud to hold the IBO title". Once you reach the top the belts are to boxers, in many cases, what a groupie was to member of Motley Crue, interchangeable trinkets. Grab it, use it, see another one, grab that.

Best explanation I've heard.

STP wrote:The belts used to mean something up until about 1995-1998.

Belts don't mean anything anymore. And boxing is pretty much a conjested laughing stock, largely down to Ricky Hatton.

I presume there is some sarcasm there?

STP wrote:largely down to Ricky Hatton.

LARGELY DOWN TO CHRIS EUBANK WITH HIS WBO BULLSHIT

HE TORE BOXING 2 SHREDS

HE LINED UP MANY 'TITLE' DEFENCES IN ADVANCE FOR FOOKSAKE, PICKING ND CHOOSING

MASKE AND MICHALCZEWSKI THEN HAD SIMILAR IN GERMANY AND RJJ AND MAYWEATHER SIMILAR IN US

BUT IT STARTED WITH EUBANKS BULLSHIT

WARREN WENT THAT WAY WITH CALZAGHE ND HATTON

Thought Bunce was excellent.

I have to agree with Bunce's summing up with regards to the money issue - boxing and those involved in it - I am sorry it is about money don't kid yourselves otherwise!!!

jackthehat wrote:Bunce talks absolute bolloks and doesnt know NOTHING about the SPORT of boxing. but hey he gets paid for talking shit, hes making a living with himself, good look to him. He does talk absolute shit though, unbelievable some of the comments he made the other night

It is you who is spouting sh*t - Bunce is the most knowledgable journalist out there concerning both professional and amateur boxing.

With regards to his comments - if his enthusiasm for the sport and his controversial but at the same time close to the bone comments bother you - then f*ck off and watch some other sport where people pussy foot around.

bit steep that spud....

macxwell66 wrote:bit steep that spud....

Not at all - sick of people slagging Bunce when in reality he says it how it is.

Bunce is personality plus tereffic company never a dull moment

i like buncey..an theres probably not alot i disagree with him on ....an he is a goodfella in the flesh,,,contraversy has always been a big seller. but i have to agree with some of the other comments about him..phew..he does spout some bollocks sometimes....that said one mans view is another mans SPEW.. Ps..you got some good knowledge too...

I'm glad there isn't a pic to accompany the thread title.

Buncey's a diamond IMO he has the tendency to over-exagerate his point with bullshit, but his knowledge and enthusiasm for the sport is obvious

Buncey is a hype man (the Flava Flav of boxing on the TV if you will!!) BUT he is knows his stuff and has always been interested in boxing at all levels.

He was at the amateur shows when most other newspaper journo's didnt give 2 sh1ts... pre Audley, pre Amir. He was there presumably working for next to nothing. Thats why I like him, he doesnt just show up for the big fights, you could just as easily see him down at York Hall for the NE Divs as you could see him at Haye v Enzo.

macxwell66 wrote:i like buncey..an theres probably not alot i disagree with him on ....an he is a goodfella in the flesh,,,contraversy has always been a big seller. but i have to agree with some of the other comments about him..phew..he does spout some bollocks sometimes....that said one mans view is another mans SPEW.. Ps..you got some good knowledge too...

Exactly, I think he goes into hyper mode at time because it makes interesting viewing!

Bunce is the best on the box at the moment!

Spud wrote:

jackthehat wrote:Bunce talks absolute bolloks and doesnt know NOTHING about the SPORT of boxing. but hey he gets paid for talking shit, hes making a living with himself, good look to him. He does talk absolute shit though, unbelievable some of the comments he made the other night

It is you who is spouting sh*t - Bunce is the most knowledgable journalist out there concerning both professional and amateur boxing.

With regards to his comments - if his enthusiasm for the sport and his controversial but at the same time close to the bone comments bother you - then f*ck off and watch some other sport where people pussy foot around.

I never thought the day would come but on this, I have to agree with Spud.