Tweet
BOXING faces ULTIMATE Challenge!
John Whisler: Boxing faces Ultimate challenge
Web Posted: 12/09/2006 09:47 PM CST
San Antonio Express-News
Whisler Call me old-fashioned, old school or just plain old. But I'm having a hard time embracing this whole martial arts/ultimate fighting thing.
Yet I can understand its soaring popularity.
It's different. It's fast-paced. It's cutting-edge. It's also confusing to the uninitiated — people like me — but one thing it's not is boring.
To those who like mixed-martial arts fights, particularly 18-34-year-old white males, the cage is all the rage.
Me? I'll take an exciting 12-round boxing match over one of these one- or two-round, blink-and-it's over MMA fights any day.
But my group, the group that loves boxing, is shrinking.
We had better wake up.
I don't know if this genre of combat sport, led by the wildly successful Ultimate Fighting Championship, is going to last. To be honest, it has the look and feel of a fad, kind of like Toughman. Time will tell, but it's hard to argue with the cold, hard facts.
UFC has pulled even and, in some cases, has gone ahead of boxing when it comes to attendance and pay-per-view ratings. From all indications, the UFC and other variations of the sport have only scratched the surface, too.
Showtime has climbed aboard. Once ESPN and boxing king HBO join the parade, which seems inevitable, interest will skyrocket.
The truth is, many boxing fans have been alienated by some of the sport's well-publicized woes.
Dubious, if not corrupt, decisions, dirty business dealings and a watered-down talent pool — not to mention the head-scratching array of alphabet soup ratings organizations — have many boxing fans looking elsewhere for fistic entertainment.
Boxing has no one to blame but itself. And it's too bad.
Prizefighting has given us names like Louis and Armstrong, Dempsey and Marciano, Frazier and Foreman and Ali. It's provided high drama and some of the greatest moments in sports history, the Thrilla in Manila and the Rumble in the Jungle.
Cage fighting has produced UFC 52, 53, 54, 55 and so on. How sexy is that?
Apparently, UFC pays its marketing people as well as it pays its fighters.
But most of that epic talent and the long list of colorful and charismatic characters in boxing are long gone. They still call it the sweet science, and some of the romance that inspired people like Mailer and Hemingway to write about it is still there, but it's fading.
Ultimate fighting doesn't have the history. It doesn't have boxing's deep roots. But it has one thing boxing doesn't — a growing audience. Its rabid fans like the combination of disciplines the sport offers — boxing, wrestling, jiu-jitsu, judo and others — and the variety of ways a fighter can win.
Oh, yes, and the blood-and-guts violence, too.
By and large, boxing people have turned up their noses at these submission specialists. The standard complaint? Many go into mixed-martial arts fighting only because they can't make it in boxing.
But put Mike Tyson in a UFC octagon against a Tim Sylvia or even a Chuck Liddell, and unless Tyson learns to fight on his back and knocks his opponent out with one punch, he'd have no chance.
Admittedly, I've had limited exposure to ultimate fighting. But what has impressed me most is the sportsmanship that is displayed. To its fighters, most of whom are talented, well-trained and conditioned athletes, at the end of the day, it's just a sport.
And that's refreshing.
The real test for ultimate fighting's long-term health, however, will be when the first fatality occurs on U.S. soil. Yes, the shorter bouts don't produce the head trauma that boxing does. But it'll happen someday.
Until then, I'll stick with boxing.
That being said, I can't afford to ignore the MMA craze much longer. I may be old-school and just old, period. I may not know the difference between an arm bar and a taco bar, but I can learn.
Therefore, I've decided to keep an open mind.
Boxing should do the same.
Web Posted: 12/09/2006 09:47 PM CST
San Antonio Express-News
Whisler Call me old-fashioned, old school or just plain old. But I'm having a hard time embracing this whole martial arts/ultimate fighting thing.
Yet I can understand its soaring popularity.
It's different. It's fast-paced. It's cutting-edge. It's also confusing to the uninitiated — people like me — but one thing it's not is boring.
To those who like mixed-martial arts fights, particularly 18-34-year-old white males, the cage is all the rage.
Me? I'll take an exciting 12-round boxing match over one of these one- or two-round, blink-and-it's over MMA fights any day.
But my group, the group that loves boxing, is shrinking.
We had better wake up.
I don't know if this genre of combat sport, led by the wildly successful Ultimate Fighting Championship, is going to last. To be honest, it has the look and feel of a fad, kind of like Toughman. Time will tell, but it's hard to argue with the cold, hard facts.
UFC has pulled even and, in some cases, has gone ahead of boxing when it comes to attendance and pay-per-view ratings. From all indications, the UFC and other variations of the sport have only scratched the surface, too.
Showtime has climbed aboard. Once ESPN and boxing king HBO join the parade, which seems inevitable, interest will skyrocket.
The truth is, many boxing fans have been alienated by some of the sport's well-publicized woes.
Dubious, if not corrupt, decisions, dirty business dealings and a watered-down talent pool — not to mention the head-scratching array of alphabet soup ratings organizations — have many boxing fans looking elsewhere for fistic entertainment.
Boxing has no one to blame but itself. And it's too bad.
Prizefighting has given us names like Louis and Armstrong, Dempsey and Marciano, Frazier and Foreman and Ali. It's provided high drama and some of the greatest moments in sports history, the Thrilla in Manila and the Rumble in the Jungle.
Cage fighting has produced UFC 52, 53, 54, 55 and so on. How sexy is that?
Apparently, UFC pays its marketing people as well as it pays its fighters.
But most of that epic talent and the long list of colorful and charismatic characters in boxing are long gone. They still call it the sweet science, and some of the romance that inspired people like Mailer and Hemingway to write about it is still there, but it's fading.
Ultimate fighting doesn't have the history. It doesn't have boxing's deep roots. But it has one thing boxing doesn't — a growing audience. Its rabid fans like the combination of disciplines the sport offers — boxing, wrestling, jiu-jitsu, judo and others — and the variety of ways a fighter can win.
Oh, yes, and the blood-and-guts violence, too.
By and large, boxing people have turned up their noses at these submission specialists. The standard complaint? Many go into mixed-martial arts fighting only because they can't make it in boxing.
But put Mike Tyson in a UFC octagon against a Tim Sylvia or even a Chuck Liddell, and unless Tyson learns to fight on his back and knocks his opponent out with one punch, he'd have no chance.
Admittedly, I've had limited exposure to ultimate fighting. But what has impressed me most is the sportsmanship that is displayed. To its fighters, most of whom are talented, well-trained and conditioned athletes, at the end of the day, it's just a sport.
And that's refreshing.
The real test for ultimate fighting's long-term health, however, will be when the first fatality occurs on U.S. soil. Yes, the shorter bouts don't produce the head trauma that boxing does. But it'll happen someday.
Until then, I'll stick with boxing.
That being said, I can't afford to ignore the MMA craze much longer. I may be old-school and just old, period. I may not know the difference between an arm bar and a taco bar, but I can learn.
Therefore, I've decided to keep an open mind.
Boxing should do the same.
Comment