Where have all the warriors gone?

[Easton Assassin]

Has anyone here been a fan long enough to remember the days when televised matchups were almost always entertaining fights. In those days before PPV and even closed circuit, it was nothing to turn on WWOS and watch a great fight. Before all the belts, before all the bull****- When fighters spoke of things like legacy and actually fought for respect instead of just assuming they deserved it.

In those days we had men fighting the best they could, the mandatory was actually the best fighter out there besides the champ, and the really serious champs fought each other mutliple times and had epic battles! Thats where i fell in love with boxing. Watching guys like Haugen and Pazienza go at it, watching Mark Breland and Marlon Starling, guys like Hearns and Leonard, Duran,Hagler, Holmes-actually witnessing guys that you knew were somthing special. They had a desire to be the best-at any cost, and went through hell to get that ONE TRUE CHAMPIONSHIP BELT, because it actually meant somthing.

I could go all day about the courage,character, and strength that defined these men, but thats well known and not the point of this post. Shortly after the advent of PPV, Boxing began a decline. The problem started when some little greedy ass exec realized there was a way to untold riches that had yet to be exploited. I know, he said. Lets create a whole bunch of catch weight titles and that way we can build a larger PPv based on championship fights. Nevemind that these titles were bogus aparations created not to enhance the sport but to generates a larger revenue for the guys that televised em.

some will say that these PPV event help to pay the boxers larger purses and that good for boxing. well, great, But how does that honor the men who gave everything they had under a much more comptiative division structure.

Thats why fans today compare a Hopkins to a Hagler, Or a Mayeather to a Leonard. The newer fighter pick up belts against inferior opposition and all of a sudden they are compared to men who would **** their ass if the fight could actually take place.

Hopkins could handle prime Hagler? They couldn't televise that kinda ****!

Mayweather out box Leonard? Yeh- thats exactly what would happen!

Legacy means nothing to this new breed of so called champion. Money is everything. How on earth can we expect a Mayweath to show grit, or heart when he lacks every single characteristic that would make it possible?

How does that kind of champion do justice to those that made the sport great? How as fans can we be fooled into believing these guys are anthing more than oppoutunists looking for the easy buck at our expense?

To support a fighter that doen't even care about the sport is wrong if your a true fan. That boxer might have skill, but ultimatly he would destroy the very sport you love for nothing more than a fat paycheck.

Isn't it time we as fans expext more from those that call themselves champions? Isn't it time we stopped paying for lopsided PPV events just because there is nothing better on?

Opinions welcome!

[adamk1304]

ignore this post, i completely missed the point of the thread.

[Easton Assassin]

It's got nothing to do with courage, it's intelligence, if you can win by out-boxing your opponent, why risk getting knocked out or even long-term brain injury just to satisfy blood-thirsty fans and writers???. You all rfer to guys like gatti and holyfield as warriors, but in a few years it is highly likely that they will be in the same sort of position as muhammad ali.

Um, never said they should shoot for brain damage! just said they should actually fight the best before they claim to be the best!

I used Leonard and hagler as examples for a reason. Leonard was the classic boxer, hagler the slugger, both showed character,class, and a will to fight the best out there! neither is braindamage and both are considered all time greats! I miss your point.

[eazy_mas]

well fand wont pay there medical bills and it better to play it smart and talk well and could think clearly even at old age then taking all this unnesscily beating and bluring out words nobody could help you in that one

[P29]

in my eyes Danny Williams is a warrior, though not a winning warrior a warrior non the less!

there are others they just not comin into mind atm

[drvooh]

Where have the warriors gone...
One just died ( RIP ),,the others have been beaton

[potatoes]

There are some warriors in boxing, just not as many as there once was. Oscar De La Hoya didn't become the biggest draw in boxing by accident, he performed well in the ring and always gave the fans what they paid for. The Golden Boy is proof that a pure boxer does not have to be boring.

[small_warrior]

Has anyone here been a fan long enough to remember the days when televised matchups were almost always entertaining fights. In those days before PPV and even closed circuit, it was nothing to turn on WWOS and watch a great fight. Before all the belts, before all the bull****- When fighters spoke of things like legacy and actually fought for respect instead of just assuming they deserved it.

In those days we had men fighting the best they could, the mandatory was actually the best fighter out there besides the champ, and the really serious champs fought each other mutliple times and had epic battles! Thats where i fell in love with boxing. Watching guys like Haugen and Pazienza go at it, watching Mark Breland and Marlon Starling, guys like Hearns and Leonard, Duran,Hagler, Holmes-actually witnessing guys that you knew were somthing special. They had a desire to be the best-at any cost, and went through hell to get that ONE TRUE CHAMPIONSHIP BELT, because it actually meant somthing.

I could go all day about the courage,character, and strength that defined these men, but thats well known and not the point of this post. Shortly after the advent of PPV, Boxing began a decline. The problem started when some little greedy ass exec realized there was a way to untold riches that had yet to be exploited. I know, he said. Lets create a whole bunch of catch weight titles and that way we can build a larger PPv based on championship fights. Nevemind that these titles were bogus aparations created not to enhance the sport but to generates a larger revenue for the guys that televised em.

some will say that these PPV event help to pay the boxers larger purses and that good for boxing. well, great, But how does that honor the men who gave everything they had under a much more comptiative division structure.

Thats why fans today compare a Hopkins to a Hagler, Or a Mayeather to a Leonard. The newer fighter pick up belts against inferior opposition and all of a sudden they are compared to men who would **** their ass if the fight could actually take place.

Hopkins could handle prime Hagler? They couldn't televise that kinda ****!

Mayweather out box Leonard? Yeh- thats exactly what would happen!

Legacy means nothing to this new breed of so called champion. Money is everything. How on earth can we expect a Mayweath to show grit, or heart when he lacks every single characteristic that would make it possible?

How does that kind of champion do justice to those that made the sport great? How as fans can we be fooled into believing these guys are anthing more than oppoutunists looking for the easy buck at our expense?

To support a fighter that doen't even care about the sport is wrong if your a true fan. That boxer might have skill, but ultimatly he would destroy the very sport you love for nothing more than a fat paycheck.

Isn't it time we as fans expext more from those that call themselves champions? Isn't it time we stopped paying for lopsided PPV events just because there is nothing better on?

Opinions welcome!

Lol this guy is just a little bit nostalgique

[oldgringo]

Um, never said they should shoot for brain damage! just said they should actually fight the best before they claim to be the best!

I used Leonard and hagler as examples for a reason. Leonard was the classic boxer, hagler the slugger, both showed character,class, and a will to fight the best out there! neither is braindamage and both are considered all time greats! I miss your point.

I don't see why you bring Hopkins into this topic.

Hopkins has now faced Trinidad, Tarver, Jones Jr, De La Hoya, Taylor, Johnson...as well as numerous minor title holders and top 10 middleweights. He is about to fight Winky Wright. We're talking about a guy who was dropped on his shoulder and was told that he shouldn't continue, but he picked himself up and eventually STOPPED a very tough opponent in Echols.

Hopkins is one of the toughest, smartest fighters around. He's a dedicated fighter who never comes into a fight in poor shape. Sure his fights became less entertaining later in his career....but that might have something to do with the fact that he was over 40 years of age! He didn't pick up some trinket belt and defend it a million times fighting nobodies, only to turn around and call himself the greatest of all time. He was the undisputed, unified champion for years.

Hopkins toughness and skills would allow him to be very competitive with any middleweight throughout the history of the sport. Hagler wouldn't "****" Bernard Hopkins in any way, shape, or form. It'd be a great fight, Hagler's persistence would ultimately win him the fight, but it wouldn't be easy.

[Easton Assassin]

I don't see why you bring Hopkins into this topic.

Hopkins has now faced Trinidad, Tarver, Jones Jr, De La Hoya, Taylor, Johnson...as well as numerous minor title holders and top 10 middleweights. He is about to fight Winky Wright. We're talking about a guy who was dropped on his shoulder and was told that he shouldn't continue, but he picked himself up and eventually STOPPED a very tough opponent in Echols.

Hopkins is one of the toughest, smartest fighters around. He's a dedicated fighter who never comes into a fight in poor shape. Sure his fights became less entertaining later in his career....but that might have something to do with the fact that he was over 40 years of age! He didn't pick up some trinket belt and defend it a million times fighting nobodies, only to turn around and call himself the greatest of all time. He was the undisputed, unified champion for years.

Hopkins toughness and skills would allow him to be very competitive with any middleweight throughout the history of the sport. Hagler wouldn't "****" Bernard Hopkins in any way, shape, or form. It'd be a great fight, Hagler's persistence would ultimately win him the fight, but it wouldn't be easy.

I see your point. Hopkins is the exception to the rule and maybe a bad analogy here. The gist of the post is refering to the tendancies of modern champs milking the PPV system which is at an all time high. Hagler does ko Hopkins in my opinion mid to late! primes ofcourse!