Money vs. Legacy

Fight for your legacy and $ will inevitably be there. Israel Vazquez and Rafael Marquez three fights was legacy fights and those fight was as big as it could have been.

I look at the issue as money in boxing is the result of customer demand for fights. A fight that produces large $$$ is one that is in high demand. Therefore in my opinion, it's infinitely harder to go wrong when fighting for money than it is fighting for legacy.

Fight for your legacy and $ will inevitably be there. Talk out your ass and eventually you will make sense.

Fight for your legacy and $ will inevitably be there.

thats a great point. it makes me laugh how so many ppl who clearly have no historical knowledge say things like SRR SRL fought for pride and legacy. robinson openly said he doesnt enjoy boxing, he doesnt like the sport its just his job he only cares about the money. ppl r forgettin SRL only even turned pro because of money issues and his whole career was based on seeking the biggest FINANCIAL fights. ppl wont admit or kno it now but they will praise floyd when he retires It is very sad, but you are absolutely correct. Only the chosen few will make the big dollars, the rest will make nothing more than a Chinaman's wages.

If you fight like mike tyson or jack dempsey you're going to get paid and you're going to be famous. You must also be managed and promoted like Tyson or Dempsey.

Well I think some fighters care more than others about proving themselves as the best and beating better opponents, but money's always going to be a factor in choice of opposition. Even when Shane Mosley fought Winky Wright, it wasn't like "oh I'm going to give this guy a big fight out of the kindness of my heart and to prove to everyone I can beat a very good difficult opponent". Mosley's pride and ego wouldn't allow him to accept less than 50% of the purse for a 3rd De La Hoya fight, and then he was supposed to fight Mayorga. But Mayorga lost to Spinks, and Winky was the 3rd option. In regards to fighters not caring less, it's tough to compare their mindsets. Maybe some fighters today learned from the likes of Robinson and Louis who ended up broke and decided to steer their careers more carefully. Perhaps there is a decrease in pride nowadays. Or maybe it's just the circumstances of the times. I have little doubt that Robinson, who was a nightmare to negotiate with, and freely admitted he didn't enjoy the sport and saw it as a business, would be enjoying a nice HBO contract right now, fighting about twice a year, making the best business decisions. thats a great point. it makes me laugh how so many ppl who clearly have no historical knowledge say things like SRR SRL fought for pride and legacy. robinson openly said he doesnt enjoy boxing, he doesnt like the sport its just his job he only cares about the money. ppl r forgettin SRL only even turned pro because of money issues and his whole career was based on seeking the biggest FINANCIAL fights. ppl wont admit or kno it now but they will praise floyd when he retires

Well I think some fighters care more than others about proving themselves as the best and beating better opponents, but money's always going to be a factor in choice of opposition. Even when Shane Mosley fought Winky Wright, it wasn't like "oh I'm going to give this guy a big fight out of the kindness of my heart and to prove to everyone I can beat a very good difficult opponent". Mosley's pride and ego wouldn't allow him to accept less than 50% of the purse for a 3rd De La Hoya fight, and then he was supposed to fight Mayorga. But Mayorga lost to Spinks, and Winky was the 3rd option. In regards to fighters not caring less, it's tough to compare their mindsets. Maybe some fighters today learned from the likes of Robinson and Louis who ended up broke and decided to steer their careers more carefully. Perhaps there is a decrease in pride nowadays. Or maybe it's just the circumstances of the times. I have little doubt that Robinson, who was a nightmare to negotiate with, and freely admitted he didn't enjoy the sport and saw it as a business, would be enjoying a nice HBO contract right now, fighting about twice a year, making the best business decisions. You made really good sense. A lot of your reasons probably tie in to boxing's decrease in popularity over the years.

Interesting, I'm more informed about those 2 heavyweights. Thanks. Not many people would know what you just said due to the difference in era's & age of the people on here. I think due to the media now etc as you mentioned it is easier to crap on fighters now, but isn't that in a way going to make it easier to crap on today's fighters moreso in 50 years, than those fighters of 50 years ago? Point being to get into the status of the greats of the past, you've got to go above & beyond today...and it just doesn't seem like fighters want to, or care to. Even when they have the ability... Well I think some fighters care more than others about proving themselves as the best and beating better opponents, but money's always going to be a factor in choice of opposition. Even when Shane Mosley fought Winky Wright, it wasn't like "oh I'm going to give this guy a big fight out of the kindness of my heart and to prove to everyone I can beat a very good difficult opponent". Mosley's pride and ego wouldn't allow him to accept less than 50% of the purse for a 3rd De La Hoya fight, and then he was supposed to fight Mayorga. But Mayorga lost to Spinks, and Winky was the 3rd option. In regards to fighters not caring less, it's tough to compare their mindsets. Maybe some fighters today learned from the likes of Robinson and Louis who ended up broke and decided to steer their careers more carefully. Perhaps there is a decrease in pride nowadays. Or maybe it's just the circumstances of the times. I have little doubt that Robinson, who was a nightmare to negotiate with, and freely admitted he didn't enjoy the sport and saw it as a business, would be enjoying a nice HBO contract right now, fighting about twice a year, making the best business decisions.

People will come around after Floyd retires, many fighters were not liked until they retired and people took a deep breath and realized what they did in the sport. Floyd has proven himself over and over again and still gets criticized, if he beat King Kong there will still be criticism. C'mon bro, it wouldn't be fair to say he isn't a great great fighter, but it also isn't fair not to say he's missed a lot of big names & sterner tests (regardless of reason) that will always hurt him imo.

;5324316']fighters of the past fought the best because they did'nt have a choice if they wanted to get paid more than 50$ I see it as they fought more often due to money, not necessarily fighting the best due to the money. Plenty of great fighters never got title shots because there wasn't enough money. If you were a heavyweight champ though, you could get away with fighting infrequently.

Jack Dempsey didn't fight the best around when he was champ. It wasn't necessarily his fault, at least not later on when he did sign to fight Willis and the fight fell apart, but earlier on he was quoted as saying he'd "pay attention to colored fighters". He was inactive for much of his reign, and taking part in well-paid exhibitions. He gets sh!tted on repeatedly for never facing Harry Wills. Not just by boxing forum people, but by historians like Jack Newfield (RIP). Jack Johnson didn't fight the top black fighters after he won the title. He fought them before it, but there was no money in them after he won the title, so except for that one farce of a fight with Jim Johnson, he only fought the white contenders who would pay more. Leonard got some crap in the late 80s for not facing certain dangerous middleweights like McCallum, Nunn, and Kalambay. He was taking bigger money fights. He also gets sh!t all the time for not fighting Pryor by people who watch too much Legendary Nights. Ray Robinson gets some criticism for pricing himself out of a Charley Burley fight. He priced himself out of many fights, actually. He was notorious for it. Of course, when your resume is as deep as Robinson's is, or you have a list of wins over the likes of Duran, Benitez, Hearns, and Hagler like Leonard does, you're more likely to get a pass for whom you didn't fight. But of course nowadays with all the media, offers that are heard about, fighters "calling out" (like that means fukk all anyway) other fighters, etc....fighters are going to get nitpicked more and criticized for not fighting certain opponents. Interesting, I'm more informed about those 2 heavyweights. Thanks. Not many people would know what you just said due to the difference in era's & age of the people on here. I think due to the media now etc as you mentioned it is easier to crap on fighters now, but isn't that in a way going to make it easier to crap on today's fighters moreso in 50 years, than those fighters of 50 years ago? Point being to get into the status of the greats of the past, you've got to go above & beyond today...and it just doesn't seem like fighters want to, or care to. Even when they have the ability...

I might be wrong, but I'm sure these fighters fought the best as well. I don't really hear people saying these fighters should have fought so & so or so & so. Jack Dempsey didn't fight the best around when he was champ. It wasn't necessarily his fault, at least not later on when he did sign to fight Willis and the fight fell apart, but earlier on he was quoted as saying he'd "pay attention to colored fighters". He was inactive for much of his reign, and taking part in well-paid exhibitions. He gets sh!tted on repeatedly for never facing Harry Wills. Not just by boxing forum people, but by historians like Jack Newfield (RIP). Jack Johnson didn't fight the top black fighters after he won the title. He fought them before it, but there was no money in them after he won the title, so except for that one farce of a fight with Jim Johnson, he only fought the white contenders who would pay more. Leonard got some crap in the late 80s for not facing certain dangerous middleweights like McCallum, Nunn, and Kalambay. He was taking bigger money fights. He also gets sh!t all the time for not fighting Pryor by people who watch too much Legendary Nights. Ray Robinson gets some criticism for pricing himself out of a Charley Burley fight. He priced himself out of many fights, actually. He was notorious for it. Of course, when your resume is as deep as Robinson's is, or you have a list of wins over the likes of Duran, Benitez, Hearns, and Hagler like Leonard does, you're more likely to get a pass for whom you didn't fight. But of course nowadays with all the media, offers that are heard about, fighters "calling out" (like that means fukk all anyway) other fighters, etc....fighters are going to get nitpicked more and criticized for not fighting certain opponents.

If you fight like mike tyson or jack dempsey you're going to get paid and you're going to be famous.

Check out the boxing history section. There was recently something about Dempsey with some good debating. Johnson avoided every other black fighter during his reign, reason being black vs black made no money since people did not care to see Johnson losing to another black guy. Robinson priced himseld out (the irony!) of a fight with Charley Burley, when it was already set. Leonard did a number of things you should already be informed about.

I might be wrong, but I'm sure these fighters fought the best as well. I don't really hear people saying these fighters should have fought so & so or so & so. Given that the amount of bitching boxing fans and scribes is amplified exponentially by the internet, the magnitude of complaints is actually different. Because of this, I am not surprised that you didn't know this.

You mean like Jack Johnson, Jack Dempsey, Ray Robinson or Ray Leonard? I might be wrong, but I'm sure these fighters fought the best as well. I don't really hear people saying these fighters should have fought so & so or so & so.

I didn't know if you were singling him out or not, but he's a good example. I can think of others. You can go straight to Cotto. Cotto can fight Mosley again, Mayweather and Manny and that will help him with legacy and money. It works that way for most fighters. I get what you're saying, he could do even MORE. However, with that in mind, only a fighter knows where his body and mind are at. Perhaps he knows what he'll be able to carry out. If he can't beat those three, plus Williams, Margarito, Hatton and De La Hoya again, and Victor Ortiz and maybe a built up Amir Khan, without losing his zero, that could take AWAY from the type of legacy he wants. You can have a perfectly crafted undefeated record and reasonably fight the best, or you can take the chance and bite off more than you can chew. Fans typically like the latter, but I can't hate on a fighter for preferring the former. Bingo, can't hate a fighter for the former, but can't give him the same respect or hold him in as high a regard as the latter.

I've read a lot of posts on here supporting money decisions over legacy decisions, rightfully so. That's if your a come up fighter making a few k a fight. When you're in a position to actually build a legacy, you've already got the money. A couple million here or there doesn't effect the food on your families plate. If you can't survive with a 5 million purse you're not going to survive with a 10 million purse. If you can't manage money it doesn't matter how much you have. The point being people that support fighters decisions that are only financially rewarding, that's fine, it shows you don't really care about the sport. But what does that really show about the fighter? I think it shows greed, selfishness, & a clear disregard for the fans who are the reason you're making the big money to begin with. I mean when you're making 8 figure paydays, WTF is a million or two here or there really going to do? Above all it shows the neglect & disrespect for the sport itself. One that was pioneered by greats, fighting other greats, multiple times if need be, their passion and desire to be the best stood out. The hunger, the drive to be called THE best and leave no doubt. Every other professional sport forces you to play the best to determine who is the best. Boxing never needed this in the past because if you believed you were the best, you would go out and prove it & we saw the big fights. The moral of the story is when you have the money, and you still go after it without showing much regard for legacy, that says as much about you as a person and as a fighter. Fighters like these won't be talked about 50 years down the road. Most fighters are in boxing because they truly love boxing & every aspect of it coupled with that competetive spirit. It really is sad to see some of the very best fighters show no regard for this and forget about once they see money. You mean like Jack Johnson, Jack Dempsey, Ray Robinson or Ray Leonard?

Money disappears very quickly. What you think a fighter is getting paid is not what ends up in his bank account. It is easy to throw around a lot of theories when you have had no experience in the business of boxing. Legacy is about rhetoric, money is about reality. I know it's a helluva lot more than common folk make. I also know common folk have a roof, food on the table, vehicles, clothes, take vacations etc. I dont care how much a fighter takes home, if he's living in a mansion, a driveway full of cars, a closet the size of a master bedroom etc, he has enough money. And if he doesn't, he never will. If he's stupid enough to let it just disappear without investing or putting it away he probably deserves to lose it. If he isn't smart enough to pay an accountant to look after some, well that speaks for itself. Other pro sports offer programs, counseling, guidance on money management etc.