The Ring sold to Turki Alalshikh

[JAB5239]

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!

If it were a PPV I never would have watched it. The only real bright spot of the card was the Taylor-Serrano women's fight. I don't watch a lot of women's boxing, but that fight was a scorcher!

[Willow The Wisp]

Ring's always been a publication sold on the idea that the journalism and ratings and such are unaffected by the size of wallets in boxing while just by coincidence having a deep connection with a promoter or some other deep walleted boxing businessman.

Nothing has really changed.

I'd love to believe in the objectivity of the publication but when you start life as Tex Richard's personal promotional publication it's hard to break out of the industry you created and monopolized.

**** **** ton of alt rankings similar to Ring but none are even close in popularity. The fact that TBRB and BoxRec are really the only names worthy of dropping in Ring's mention speaks volumes as to Ring's domination of unsanctioned ratings.

For years it was common to conflate the Ring titles with the lineal titles. Because Ring invented the industry, the verbiage, the idea ... like y'all do know John L went his entire lifetime never having heard the term lineal champion. ... Because Ring made up lineal and gave that idea to everyone. John L being lineal 1 is posthumous, likewise, John L being the signifier of the end of LPRR and the beginning of QBR is a Ring/Nat Fleischer concept.

I'm excited by the opportunity for someone to do something new with Ring, but I'd bet he's more of the same. Paid promo ranking with a dash of sniffing Fleischer farts.

Sure. That's a thoughtful post.
But I'm compelled to add, that if you start reading with issue #1 and continue reading them through the 20s, 30's, 40s, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, 10's, 20's, and the very solid content published this year; it will likely occur to anyone, that perhaps you are being too critical, of an Institution, and a product of love, and art.
Eh?

[JAB5239]

Sure. That's a thoughtful post.
But I'm compelled to add, that if you start reading with issue #1 and continue reading them through the 20s, 30's, 40s, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, 10's, 20's, and the very solid content published this year; it will likely occur to anyone, that perhaps you are being too critical, of an Institution, and a product of love, and art.
Eh?

This really makes a lot of sense. We always as a society look back and automatically think better. This definitely holds true in many cases, but MAYBE not this one. Journalism has changed dramatically over the years since I've been alive at least.

[Marchegiano]

Sure. That's a thoughtful post.
But I'm compelled to add, that if you start reading with issue #1 and continue reading them through the 20s, 30's, 40s, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, 10's, 20's, and the very solid content published this year; it will likely occur to anyone, that perhaps you are being too critical, of an Institution, and a product of love, and art.
Eh?

I'm not sure which direction I should take this so I'll lightly touch on two different issues and see which is more interesting to youse lot if either.


1.) I do blame older generations for their piss-poor coverage. You're literally still defending it.

2.) That's disrespectful to my research, and basically everyone else who ever uncovered anything and shared their finds for free. Love? for the low low price of 9.99? Bro you got more love for this sport in your dandruff than most these failure journalists who get in where they can will ever experience.

[QueensburyRules]

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

- - wa-rts is ugly the same as ******, ie stu-pid

[Willow The Wisp]

I'm not sure which direction I should take this so I'll lightly touch on two different issues and see which is more interesting to youse lot if either.


1.) I do blame older generations for their piss-poor coverage. You're literally still defending it.

2.) That's disrespectful to my research, and basically everyone else who ever uncovered anything and shared their finds for free. Love? for the low low price of 9.99? Bro you got more love for this sport in your dandruff than most these failure journalists who get in where they can will ever experience.

Divergent option shouldn't be treated as disrespect in this instance, my friend on the next barstool. I am pleased to validate your efforts.
But I'm at a loss to discover the purpose of cynicism in this context.

A monthly industry publication is invariably going to be spearheaded by an aficionado and interested party, or group of them.
Nat Fleischer (1887 - 1972), Dan Daniel (1890 - 1981), Ike Dorgan (1879 - 1960), and Tex Rickard (1870 - 1929), the publication's founders, all fit the description. Cleansing subjectivity here may have forced some content of more balanced exposure, perhaps, but fighters aligned outside of that New York sphere were never ignored. Hardly.
The magazine’s ratings, (and I am not referring to Johnny Ort), were never my favorites, personally. The rival VSS publications under Stanley Weston's stewardship and Lou Eskin's Boxing Illustrated (After 62') produced ratings which were composed more accurately, vindicated through attrition.

My only point is that the sport was better because of those dedicated publications.
The evolution (devolution) of combat sports journalism is one of several lengthy discussions that could be undertaken, spurred on by your provocative assertions.
The Ring is " The Bible of Boxing", the axis of combat sport, and is about to be reborn yet again.

[Ben Bolt]

The rival VSS publications under Stanley Weston's stewardship and Lou Eskin's Boxing Illustrated ...

Lew Eskin's gloomiest day as head of Boxing Illustrated must have been when he had to write an editorial about why Wilford Scypion vs. Willie Classen ended as it did.
Classen sustained fatal injuries in the fight, Eskin was the referee.

I owned that copy once (probably Boxing Ill. March 1980), but got rid of my boxing collection years ago.
Back then, I was too young to be that concerned, but it had been interesting to read that editorial today.

[QueensburyRules]

Lew Eskin's gloomiest day as head of Boxing Illustrated must have been when he had to write an editorial about why Wilford Scypion vs. Willie Classen ended as it did.
Classen sustained fatal injuries in the fight, Eskin was the referee.

I owned that copy once (probably Boxing Ill. March 1980), but got rid of my boxing collection years ago.
Back then, I was too young to be that concerned, but it had been interesting to read that editorial today.

- - When we moved into a nicer neighborhood, my mom wanting to make a gentlemen out of me forbid me wearing jeans and fighting before forcing me to give up my fabulous baseball card collection, prob valued @ $50-100K today as well as my Hot Rod Magazines.

[Ben Bolt]

- - When we moved into a nicer neighborhood, my mom wanting to make a gentlemen out of me forbid me wearing jeans and fighting before forcing me to give up my fabulous baseball card collection, prob valued @ $50-100K today as well as my Hot Rod ****zines.

I’ve thrown away a lot with mixed feelings – being relieved of the burden of collecting and at the same time regretting the loss of the collection.
But I guess, if I had had a collection of baseball cards I probably would have kept it. Doesn’t take up much space.