The Ring sold to Turki Alalshikh

[Willie Pep 229]

Someone explain to me why the word w-arts is censored? LOL

[JAB5239]

It can't go worse than 1977. Many among the older ones (namely, among us) cry about Turki and his methods, but had nothing to say when Don King was wheeling and dealing behind the scenes for decades.

A little reminder of the times of yore:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1977_U...20records%20to

This got me thinking.......didn't Peter McNeely become ranked by the WBA before his fight with Tyson? Only 5 of his 36 wins before this were against guys with winning records. I agree with you, it can't get any worse.

[GhostofDempsey]

It may be a step in the right direction, but he has no control over how sanctioning bodies rank fighters. If Ring mags rankings make sense it will add some credibility to the sport. But fighters today, particularly champions, are able to choose and cherry pick their opponents and that has to change.

He said he wants to return the paper publication back to news stands but I'm not sure that's going to make a difference unless they start packing their magazine with interesting articles, rare photos, and more historical content. Most magazines are outdated by the time they make it to print.

[billeau2]

The Ring, the prestigious boxing ****zine, had been involved in the scandal since 1976, because one of the ****zine's then assistant editors, Johnny Ort, had been elevating boxer rankings since 1976 and publishing about fights that never took place for those boxers, and so then updating those boxers' fight records to reflect such non-existent bouts in order for them to be accepted into the tournament by ABC.


Wasn't this common, albeit verbal, all the way back to the bare knuckles days and ever since?

Exaggerated resumes, because they couldn't be confirmed, were always part of boxing negotiations.

All that is different here, is that we became a hierarchical culture that gathers its "knowledge" from a consensus of identified sources and only some by word of mouth. That there were lies is not the 'new' part, it's the medium that changed.

My point being . . . No matter how you dispense the knowledge there will always be a way for management to exaggerate their fighters' resumes.

If it created good match-ups and packed venues are we sure it was a bad thing?

Is promotion bound to ethical behavior? Usually not.

The Ring scandal was boxing as usual. It will happen again just by a different method, a different vessel.

You want the NBA/NFL then create the league. I don't want one. I love prize fighting with all its w-arts. There is always something to 'jaw' about.

Agree about how power always shapes information in a Hierarchy. While it is tempting to think promotion is devoid of ethics, an attitude popularised by the likes of PT Barnum and company, the reality is there are probably ethics within... sort of an "honor among thieves" type thing. The fact that King and Arum have shown such a disregard for ethics probably does not help my case...

[Ben Bolt]

It can't go worse than 1977. Many among the older ones (namely, among us) cry about Turki and his methods, but had nothing to say when Don King was wheeling and dealing behind the scenes for decades.

A little reminder of the times of yore:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1977_U...20records%20to

Well damn...

...thanks for the education!

Here's to you, Johnny Ort, you absolute mental case lol.

Bert Sugar did a terrific job cleaning up the mess (his first action was firing John Ort).
The Ring was at its best under his editorship (1979-83), and it didn't help the WBC that the org banned The Ring from certain events – Sugar and the mag continued to tell the truth about the corrupt alphabet gangs.
Unfortunately, Sugar was not a financial genius. In the end, his improvement of The Ring cost more than it earned, which is said to be the reason he had to go.

[Willow The Wisp]

Got a definition of mainstream? What does mainstream amount to for ya? Or do you just mean more popular?

Anyone that can make the fights we want desperately to see but almost never get to see prime on prime, can up boxing revenues.

The younger generations needed for mainstream are another nut to crack though. Another dynamo a la Tyson could rivet their fickle attentions for a while. But long-haul-like, they ain't coming and boxing will never be what it was to past generations of young 'uns.

There is more violence in a PG14 movie than most boxing matches. If they crave action, there are numerous MMA ogs where it seems more like a real fight and less like a dance. Gotta remember, those young generations are already steeped in every kind of violent action, they don't need boxing as it is, boxing as it is needs them, but as it is cannot have them.

Maybe the mighty Turkey has revolutionary plans for boxing, if that exists.

Don't be so grim.
Mike Tyson is 58 years old and will make 40 million tonight by boxing.
Try doing that in other athletic pursuits.
Boxing isn't a "mainstream" league sport, marketed by a single consortium as a family friendly diversion; but we are stand up primates deep in our core. It's what helped us build dominion over the earth. For that reason; boxing was popular long before anything else; and will remain popular long after most of them are gone.
It doesn't need to fit a mainstream definition to be big and important.

[Willie Pep 229]

ChatGPT

Mike Tyson is guaranteed to earn $10 million for his fight against Jake Paul tonight, with the potential to earn up to $30 million if pay-per-view sales exceed 1.6 million buys.

I say the fight doesn't make 500,000 buys and Tyson makes just over the 10 million.

I am curious to see if this 'Internet performance art' has run its course or is still growing.

I think it's on the decline.

We'll see!

[JAB5239]

ChatGPT

Mike Tyson is guaranteed to earn $10 million for his fight against Jake Paul tonight, with the potential to earn up to $30 million if pay-per-view sales exceed 1.6 million buys.

I say the fight doesn't make 500,000 buys and Tyson makes just over the 10 million.

I am curious to see if this 'Internet performance art' has run its course or is still growing.

I think it's on the decline.

We'll see!

I just read Tyson with make at least 20 mil, and the final number arent in yet. Not sure how this works since it isn't based on PPV buys. Either way, that's a lot of money. Netflix has almost 283 million subscribers worldwide. I'd bet my car there were more than 500k people (subscriptions) that saw this fight tonight.

[Ben Bolt]

This got me thinking.......didn't Peter McNeely become ranked by the WBA before his fight with Tyson? Only 5 of his 36 wins before this were against guys with winning records. I agree with you, it can't get any worse.

On the subject Bert Sugar, perhaps the most unbiased ranking system boxing has ever had, was in effect when he edited The Ring.
The votes of 50 experts around the world determined the rankings each month.
For whoever tried to bribe their way up the rankings, it must've been a heck of a job under those circumstances.

[Willie Pep 229]

No doubt Internet Perforance Art is still going strong. Tyson looks to pull in 20 million and Paul 40. (But I suspect we will hear in a few months that a reduced amount was actually paid. That has been pretty much the standard for these perforance art events. Probably even a law suit or two.)

I watched two rounds (2nd and 3rd) via a hacked feed before it was taken down. To me, those two rounds looked as sad as I expected.

Why do people buy this crap? What a culture we have become!