Granath

However, Tyson NEVER stood with Fighters like Ali, Foreman, Lyle, Norton or Shavers... How could he? All of those guys had retired when Mike was around. That makes no sense whatsoever...

I think the debate is because there are two Mike Tysons. The one who trained with Kevin Rooney and the one corrupted by Don King. The Kevin Rooney Tyson was a thing to behold. A wrecking ball. Clubber Lang come to life. That guy was amazingly fast, incredible head movement, threw in combinations with destructive power in both hands. He also had an underrated jab and went to the body. He was a great fighter and easily the most fun to watch since the TV age. The Don King Tyson was a shell of his former self. Less head movement, punches didn't come in bunches and didn't jab as much. He still had the power and hand speed but he just didn't use the same gifts that got him to the summit. This is the one who lost against Holyfield and later Lewis. The will was still strong - in fact 90s Tyson was probably stronger mentally than 80s Tyson - but the game wasn't there anymore. I have Mike 7th in my All-Time list because at his peak he was about as good as any other HW in history. I have him 7th because he couldn't sustain that peak. Essentially Mike is Big George Foreman without the comeback.

Margarito is the epitome of what boxing should be. Heart, courage, incredible drive, and the warrior spirit. He was a monster in his prime and Floyd ducked him. A cheat and a liar is what boxing should be? God pity the sport. Every sport has rules and every sport has cardinal/unbreakable rules. You don't bunt in the bottom of the 9th down by 6 runs to break up a no hitter or purposely throw a 98 mph fastball into someone's skull. You don't spear your opponent in the head after the whistle. You don't gouge the eyes. You don't hit an opponent in the back of the head with your stick. You don't go into the stands to fight a fan. And you don't load your gloves. You don't plaster your wraps or take out the padding. Billy Collins forever is the poster child of what can happen when someone does. It is one of the most sacrosanct rules in boxing and Margarcheato knowingly broke it. He is, and will always be, primarily remembered for being a cheating bum.

POS bum who tried to cheat and got caught. I have little doubt that he cheated against Cotto either - the photo evidence supports this - and we saw what happened in the rematch when he couldn't cheat. His attempt to cheat could have done to Cotto and Mosley what happened to Billy Collins. Disgusting. Zero respect for Margacheato. I thoroughly enjoyed watching him get beat from pillar to post against Paq and Cotto but he should have been banned for life.

Marg is a scum bag for sure. But most boxers would definitely put plaster in their gloves if they thought they would get away with it. All those things you mention aren't really the samething. Mosley roided in his fights. Most fighters do. Most boxers are all scum bags. There are a few fighters that are clean, of course, as proven by the fighters who immediately signed onto the clean testing program. I laugh when people bring up 'roids for boxers, especially from fights/fighters 20+ years ago. Nobody cared back then. No one cared in baseball and no one cared in boxing. It's a much bigger deal now but trying to apply today's standard to the past is silly. People who want to bring up Mosley's 2003 steroid use or RJJs use in the 90s are just trolling. No one cared then about it and the fact that they used doesn't change anything now. Boxing inherently is a sport about hurting the other guy so any advantage, legal or illegal, can injure an opponent. But no one knows that taking a steroid or an illegal drug to cut weight could result in potentially career-altering damage to an opponent. It's possible but there's really no way to tell if taking a steroid results in the punch being juuuust hard enough to cause permanent damage. But we know, from documented cases, that loading your gloves does. It ends careers. It kills people. This is not disputed. All cheating is not created equal and loading your gloves is no longer boxing, it's assault with a deadly weapon. Would most boxers do it? I would hope not and the ones I know I don't think would have. But if that answer is yes then that says something about the lack of ethics in the sport. My goal in the ring was to beat the other guy but not illegally. So I wouldn't have plastered my hands or slipped a razor into my glove any more than I would have carried a baseball bat into the ring.

I was thinking about this and, honest to goodness I don't think I have one. I'm at the age where my favorite guys are all retired and/or dead. I rooted for guys like Ali, Tyson, Hagler, Kostya Tszyu, Oscar and Monzón. I loved following RJJ. Today? I root against certain guys. I despise cheaters like Margacheato. I dislike bad people like Broner. I don't care who they fight I'm rooting for the other guy. Zab Judah was like that after going after the referee. It didn't matter who he fought, I'm rooting against his butt. I'm not a particularly big fan of guys who duck fights or take absurd match-ups simply for money (Mayweather). Those are bad fights that give boxing a bad name. Rematch Pac and all is forgiven and I won't root for either guy, just for a better fight than last time. I don't dislike Tyson Fury but I think his style in the ring makes for bad viewing (who wants to see 12 round fights where 150 combined punches are landed?). I'm not fond of overt braggarts (Prince Nasseem Hamed) who seem to have little respect for their opponents. But basically if you're not an outright thug or overt cheat then I don't really care. The vast majority of guys go into the ring and do their work and I don't root for any of them personally. I hope for a good fight. I watch boxing for the enjoyment of the sport. I guess that is why I'm often so dispassionate about the outcome. I really don't have a dog in the fight. That comes with age, I guess.

If NSB had an ''All Time Stupid Thread'' category....This ranks #1. Probably. I truly worry about the mental health of the OP. This is some far-out kind of stuff.

Oh it's true, people do hate Marciano, but, it isn't racism it's boxing bias. Marciano is a shining example of how so much of boxing is unfounded bull**** people just repeat unchallenged. In order to retain certain stances that are popular in boxing circles fans must make excuses for the anomaly that is Marciano. I like your post but trimmed it a bit because I don't want to quote the whole thing. It is boxing bias but I think it's different than you think. Marciano is seen as the last great pre-modern HW. I'm not saying he is but there's definitely a bias that Ali (and therefore Liston before him) is the start of the modern HW era. Ali (Frazier/Foreman) begot Holmes begot Tyson begot Holyfield/Bowe/Lewis...and so on. That's also the reason that Floyd Patterson isn't even considered a great HW at all (and I'm not arguing he should). But in my experience those guys are considered from a different era - smaller, shorter, slower and not as skilled. I think that's not necessarily correct but that's how Rocky is seen because that's how all pre-modern HWs are seen. It also has to do with the minimum number of title defenses. Rock got his start late for boxing - 24 - and therefore wasn't even hitting the bigger fights until he was about 30. Thus he only defended his title 6 times and then walked away at 32. So I agree with you in the way he is seen but I believe it's due to a different cause. I'm not saying it's right.

Who knew such a small country could be so powerful and successful given its size and make so many people angry Its moments like this that make me proud to be British God save the Queen! I can't see that phrase and not think of this: https://t2.genius.com/unsafe/220x220/https%3A%2F%2Fimages.genius.com%2F6e6812f114345df75f4f7f42cdb3bef2.1000x1000x1.jpg

I know no regular network fights have a budget over around 4 mil. So Wilder making 3 might even be too much because they have to pay every other fighter on the card. So you know more than the LA Times about the contract details? So Wilder parlayed a meeting last week with DAZN executive chairman John Skipper into a likely -- but unconfirmed – bump in purse from the original $12.5 million he was offered to fight Breazeale on Showtime

Alt spotted. You’ll be in here with your main agreeing with yourself no doubt. Can't attack the message so attack the messenger? Not the first time I've been accused of an alt. I'm still waiting to find out who I'm supposed to be. Please let me know. ---- And as expected, the same crew still refuse to admit they were barking up the wrong tree all along. If Wilder wins against Breazeale, which isn't a sure thing, he'll make far more than he would have signing now. PS - Wilder isn't getting $12.5M for Breazeale. There's little doubt Showtime upped their offer. https://www.latimes.com/sports/boxing/la-sp-boxing-mma-newsletter-20190319-story.html And if he can get that for fighting his mando, why they hell would he ever take similar bank to fight AJ (who would take home 5x that number)?

What happened? He lost, repeatedly. It's not management and promotion. It seems some people demand a conspiracy theory for everything. Prescott just didn't perform in the ring. Two fights after Khan he lost a decision against Miguel Vazquez. It was a SD but he should have lost on all 3 cards. The fight after that was his real shot at being a name and he lost by a wide margin on the cards, spoiling his chance at the WBO lightweight title. Ironically, Khan won the super-lightweight title on the same card AND Billy Joe Saunders & Tony Bellew both fought early in their careers. Good card. He then won a couple of fights but then got KO'd by Alvarado for a minor title. After that it was all downhill. He was a better-than-average fighter who happened to score a good punch against a named guy with a glass jaw. But in fights with better competition his limitations were repeatedly exposed.

I don't ****ing know and apparently they don't either :lol1: +1000 /thread

In an interview Breazeale was asked his opinion on Wilder rejecting 20mil to fight him which guaranteed him a shot at AJ even if Breazeale won and total package was 120mil and about the 6mil he was offered. Breazeale replied he had no idea he was offered 6mil and it was never brought to his attention. He said if the offer was real then he isn’t best pleased as that is a lot of money but when on to state that Wilder should have accepted the 120mil as Wilder will never get and offer like that again and he hopes after he beats Wilder he gets the same offer to fight AJ himself in a big rematch. Judging from reports Breazeale is expected to be making around 3 mil total for this fight so that’s 50% of what DAZN offered and would indicate Wilder is making around 10mil based on the 70/30 split. As Haymon is also Breazeale’s advisor, why didn’t he also advise him on how much DAZN was offering? I know they are catering to keep Wilder happy but what about Breazeales interests? I'm not so sure I agree with your police work there, Lou. Wilder was getting $12.5M before and there's little doubt that Showtime upped the offer after the DAZN push. It's a good bet they matched it or came very close to that $20M number. Which sets up Wilder to make a 3 fight deal that probably approaches $150M if he takes on both Fury and AJ. While it would have been nice for Wilder's camp to look out for Breazeale's interests, let's face it - none of those guys do that. They're all out for themselves. So Breazeale got screwed in this deal but he can change it all around by beating Wilder.

Given the announcement today of DAZN's rates doubling this thread didn't age particularly well. https://www.boxingscene.com/dazn-reveals-9999-yearly-plan-monthly-increase-1999--137287

Lol at the alt talking about not having the balls to be straightforward. You telling me I don’t have “intelligence” to figure out who’s alt you are, would be a strange thing to say for someone who’s not an alt. If you think I'm an alt then take a guess. Come on. I challenge you to do so. Make formal accusation and ask a mod to figure it out. Hell, I'll give you 3 guesses and odds. What's so funny about this fat boy is that you're worried about who I am and no matter what you guess you're wrong.

He is not worth what they want for him. I just read an article from the LA Times which quotes Al Haymon as telling Wilder the $40m offer was "training camp money" for Floyd Mayweather, and therefore shouldn't be accepted. So, is Haymon putting Wilder in the same earning bracket as Floyd now? Nobody in their right mind will pay Wilder that kind of money. It is clear they are trying to cash all their chips with the Anthony Joshua fight. I'm not critisizing them for that, but it is crystal clear. I agree they're trying to cash their chips in with the AJ fight just like GGG cashed his in with Canelo. I don't think Haymon thinks Wilder is going to earn Floyd's $300M but should both AJ and Wilder win their next bouts without controversy, that fight is worth probably in excess of $140M (pulling a number out of my fat Yank backside). People have to remember that HW fights have always commanded a premium and that one between two undefeated, title-holding HWs from opposite sides of the pond is a promoter's dream. Wilder probably can get $60M of it with AJ getting $80M. Both guys will cash in and if the fight is competitive, exciting or controversial there would be a rematch which would exceed those numbers. Then either guy could drive a fight with Fury for excellent money. There's probably $150M or more reasonably available to Wilder if he beats AJ and AJ probably has $200M or more coming to him if he can beat Wilder. What's scary is that those numbers may actually be low. Most estimates here and elsewhere have actually been on the low end when talking about the gate for top tier fights. An undefeated Wilder vs. AJ is absolutely top tier.

nothing in your list matters, casuals dont know any of that, he is no ppv atraction, he could go to a local grocery store and no one will know who he is, and to be honest here in america he will never be an atraction... he is a big atraction in uk ... Quite obvious that you don't know anything about marketing.

joshua is no ppv atraction in the us, period... is a good fight, but nothing else when it comes to ppv... casuals dont know who joshua is... 1 mill ppvs, yeah right... You realize that's what promoters do, don't you? Joshua is an undefeated gold medalist. His KO percentage is 95%. He looks like an Adonis. He has a great smile and is articulate. He has two major titles. He's a Brit. He's a heavyweight. This is what we call low hanging fruit. If a promoter can't sell this guy in the US then they couldn't sell water in the desert. Not to mention he's being smart by fighting in Madison Square Garden to raise his US profile. This is not a difficult task. Just like it shouldn't be hard to sell Wilder to UK fans as the swing-from-the-fences, brash American undefeated HW champion.

I don't think we know enough to make that judgement. What I do know is this: The AJ fans said Wilder was ducking at $5m and that it was a good deal. The AJ fans said Wilder was ducking at $15m and that it was a good deal. The AJ fans now say Wilder is ducking at $40m and that it was a good deal. The first two statements weren't true at the time yet the AJ fans were all up in arms about how Wilder was a chump who was ducking AJ. Now it shows that all the AJ fans were wrong - those deals SUCKED as some of us said they did. So the first people to admit they were wrong are those AJ fans. Now I'm inclined to believe that the current offers are good. I think we're finally into the ballpark of what is the reasonable market rate (which makes the $15M offer CHUMP CHANGE, which is what I've said consistently). But I'm not privy to all the offers Wilder has received and I doubt anyone else here is either. It may be that by waiting another 3 months and KOing Breazeale - if he does it - could up that offer to $200M over 3-4 fights. We simply don't know what the maximum upside is. If Wilder thinks (or more likely if it's already down on paper) that he could make more by winning his next one and then signing then he's just betting on himself. It could be a smart move. Or this deal could be reasonably as good as it gets, he knows it and he's ducking AJ. Both are equally plausible and we probably won't know which it is until we see what happens after the next fight.

Markets aren't static. They're constantly responding to changes in supply or demand. To state that the entrance of DAZN, the threat that their model poses to established players and the money they've already spent in acquisition costs alone hasn't impacted on this process is to fundamentally misunderstand the current boxing landscape. You're talking to someone with an economics degree. I didn't say DAZN didn't have an impact. DAZN is just cutting through the BS of the terrible offers and publicly establishing a realistic assessment of the worth. But the money has always been there for big fights and that's seen time and time again. Wilder's value didn't suddenly jump $25M because DAZN offered it to him. It's just that the offers before from Hearn have consistently been lowballs. They offered AJ $50 and it was a nonstarter - not even worth presenting the deal - because no fighter worth his salt like AJ is going to cap his earnings potential on such a huge fight. Undefeated heavyweight champs with great KO records don't fight every day. The public drools over those kinds of fights and they're always at a premium. The whole point is that the ducking claims on BOTH sides are entirely horsecrap. They're continuing to build the gate and each side is seeing who blinks first. Eventually that pot of gold will get so large that it won't matter as long as they keep knocking out their opponents. Wilder has to blink first because at his age his time frame is much shorter. He needs to fight AJ in the next couple of years before he slips to have any chance at the main bout and the inevitable rematch. This fight happens either in November or in 2020 and both guys will make huge bank.

ugly queen? She’s 92 you sick ****. Is that what turns you on? Sorry she’s not sexy enough for you That's a great age. She can pop our her false teeth to give me a hummer and she's now short enough I can rest a beer on her head while she's doing it. PS - I'm just messing around. The Queen Mum is awesome.

I find it hard to be insulted by someone from a country who elected trump as president. Just like I find it hard to be insulted by someone from a country who has Theresa May as Prime Minister. Each is an impotent idiot and I'm not sure which has the smaller ball sack. ----- In all seriousness I quite love the UK and London, which is my favorite city in the world. Been there quite a few times to visit cousins who remain on the other side of the pond. I love Brit trash TV (Jeremy Kyle and If You Can't Pay) as a guilty pleasure and I love some bangers and mash. With that said, if someone is going to make a post about "fat Yanks" it's unsurprising that someone else makes a post about the Big Book of British Smiles. https://ih0.redbubble.net/image.437233103.0978/flat,550x550,075,f.u5.jpg

It’s not a certainty that the offer will increase...but it is a certainty that wilder would have made more fighting breazeale on dazn...alt. Actually, it's not. We already know Showtime upped their offer. We don't know how much. I'm still waiting for you to tell me who I'm supposed to be. If you truly believe that I'm an alt, either you don't have the intelligence to figure it out or the balls to say it. Please feel free to contact any admin and have them look into it down to my MAC address.

You'd think Finkel would get showtime to cover the difference from th DAZN offer instead of Wilder mising out aa they're the billion dollar company and Wilders just the fighter, they should be rewarding his loyalty not making him miss out and take all the risk of losing. This is a one way relationship if ever there was. The article says that Showtime is covering at least part of it. My guess is that they're covering most of it. If I were Wilder I probably would have taken the recent DAZN deal - too much guaranteed money to leave it on the table. But I've said here and elsewhere that should both he and AJ win as expected then that guaranteed money is going to climb considerably. Wilder is essentially betting on himself and this could be a case of justified self-confidence or it could be like the old adage of someone defending themselves in court have a fool for a client. It remains to be seen.

I'm sure they have looked after Wilder and paid him close to 20 Mil but they must be taking a loss in that event. Either way they will cater for Wilder while screwing Dominic up. Part of his purse made its way to Wilder I'm guessing. I wouldn't make that assumption. I think Breazeale is probably on a fixed number - this isn't PPV after all - and therefore just didn't get a bump whereas he would have under DAZN. Otherwise, he'd pull out and sue for breach of contract.

Likewise, at times I've given up on his forum due to the sheer volume of trolling but I have enjoyed this discussion. On the location, I would only say that it may be difficult for US fans to appreciate just how deep the level of suspicion is on both the fairness of scorecards and also other aspects around selection of referee, conditions at the arena etc etc. Most people feel Fury was robbed on just that kind of setup, why would AJ risk that? Joshua has been fighting in front of 90k in his hometown, he is the number one, unified champion, earns massive revenue outside the ring and has far better alternative options to earn should a Wilder fight not be agreed. Or as US fans have taught us he's the A side. Is a promoter really being short sighted in maintaining this position unless a good reason is provided to abandon it? So the impetus to move the fight to the US to pursue what was at the time a marginal rise in his purse to accommodate team Wilders desires to maximise return simply wasn't there. AJ makes 60m+ next year without this fight, hes still improving as a fighter, it's not easy to exert leverage on that position. Now of course it looks like they will fight in the US first, but likely on a promotion they control. On the second point, it's too early to tell if the current bullish activity in US boxing can translate into revenues. Can the PPV model stand alongside the subscription services? Or does something have to give? Yeah, there is a lot of posturing on this forum and it's refreshing to discuss something with someone without the dick-measuring contest. Just a couple of thoughts on your excellent post above. (1) Note that the ringside press on the Wilder/Fury fight was very mixed. The majority of those polled at ringside believed that it was a very close fight. The plurality I believe was for a draw and no fighter got a majority for a win. It is a constant drumbeat here but I chalk it up to sour grapes. I've never seen a fight in my life that went 12 rounds where someone landed 82 punches and was floored twice without knocking down the other guy but was somehow robbed of victory. I'd tell any fighter the same thing - land more punches next time (same goes to Wilder). Yeah, I know that this is a trigger for some people so they ought not to respond on this point. Those are the facts and they're entitled to have their own opinions. But I guarantee if those roles were reversed Fury fans would still be screaming about the decision because the other guy got knocked down twice, the punches were almost even and their guy was moving forward the entire night. (2) The whole A side / B side presents something in black and white when it's not nearly that clear cut. There's a big difference between fighting Whyte or fighting Schwartz for example and each of those guys will be paid accordingly. It's not just a matter that the "B side" gets the scraps every time. If that fighter increases the interest and the purse significantly, then they have leverage. In this case, Joshua may earn $60M next year but he will likely exceed that in one fight. Since he is not the unified champion the only way for him to raise his profile in the US is to unify the belts. That means a fight with Wilder. He could take the low-risk road but at this point the big money requires a unification bout. (3) From Wilder's standpoint, taking $5M or even $15M was insulting when he knew that he was bringing much more to the table than that. It's a high-risk fight for them both (Joshua is the favorite) and that's a lot of risk for him without the corresponding reward. Both promoters aren't going to sign until they believe the money is too good to pass up. So if Joshua loses he can sleep on a bed made up of pounds sterling banknotes. Same for Wilder on a bed made up of C-Bills. Wilder isn't going to take 1/4th of the gate. While I don't think this fight ends up 50/50, Wilder's camp is going to make sure they don't look bad by taking half as much either. If both guys win their next fight, I believe that the interest will be about as big as it's going to get for a title fight between two undefeated champions. There's more than enough money to go around and it'll get done. Of course, if either loses then all the talk will be how they messed up and should have taken the payday earlier. Wilder, in particular, needs to do something within a relatively short time frame or he'll run the risk of getting too old. On the second point, I think both can co-exist if carefully balanced. If there's not enough big fights on the subscription model then people won't pay for it. If most of the good fights are there then no one will want to pay for a PPV. But if there's enough compelling content to justify the sub model I can still see boxing fans splurging for a big PPV event.

Depends if you think Wilder beats AJ or not. If you really believe he beats him then Wilder should've taken the first offer, which I think would've yielded about 35m over two fights and which left him an American undisputed HW champion of the world and the first man to hold all 4 belts at that weight. He would've become a global sensation overnight and countless endorsements would've followed. By now he would be well on the way to a billion dollar fortune because he'd still have a couple of years left at prime. If you don't believe he can beat AJ then he was right to hold on and maximise his returns from this fight. Only however if he does eventually manage to put pen to paper. Until that happens he could be one unlucky punch or even training camp accident away from blowing a massive opportunity. It doesn't "depend". Now if he had wanted to, he would have gotten about $100m for those same two fights. So yeah, $35m was peanuts and a totally unreasonable BS offer no matter how much someone wants to spin it. One thing hasn't changed - Wilder is still betting on himself. He could have taken the certain money but he's continually doubled down on his ability to bank more later. His pile of chips has steadily increased. Was this the right time to push them to the middle? Perhaps, but it's pretty obvious that he doesn't think so.

lol yikes shut the hell up, second round was close but not a clear round, if anything it was a pity round to give to him are you seriously crying abut potential robbery in a 12-0 fight, seek help Pretty much my assessment as well. Why are people looking so hard for stupid conspiracy theories that they'll question the judging on a near/total shutout?

Wilder was offered $40 mil per Joshua fight + 20 mil for a fight that's worth 3 on Showtime (Breazeale). Wilder is down 17 mil already by fighting Breazeale on Showtime instead of DAZN. Do you honestly not know how much Wilder is making to fight Breazeale? Are you that ignorant that you'd post without knowing something so basic? If so, educate yourself: https://www.latimes.com/sports/boxing/la-sp-boxing-mma-newsletter-20190319-story.html