Boxing needs excitement!

[badboypeenoy]

I didn't see that much clinching in either of there recent fights nor did they run. But as for ppv i agree with that most of the fights today don't deserve ppv. Earlier I read a post as to weather or not Pac Hatten was a ppv worthy fight in the see of ppv fights we have today fights like that damn sure are but as they weren't ppv quality nor where they ppv fights. When faced with a good fighter Vitali Klitschko imo is very exciting and ppv worthy. If your post was pointed at Klits if not. I apologize for the misunderstanding. But would you be as disapointed in the fights if you whatced them on pub tv hbo box after dark or show time non ppv. You wouldn't more than likely be content on calling them boring lackluster or what have you. IMO ppv is the main killer of boxing and the cause of people getting so upset and calling the fights boring and what have you. And yeah some of the fights are just down right rediculously boring to whatch from time to time. But take the good with the bad. I guess my question is would you think they where as boring if they didn't cost you 50 bucks a pop?

Once you begin showing lots of clinching and running on free TV and regular HBO, you'd see more people turning to MMA. At least on PPV, only those who are REALLY interested to watch boxing gets to see it, and would end-up disappointed by an overhyped fight which becomes a glorified sparring session like dela Hoya vs. Hopkins. Sometimes you get Cunningham vs. Adamek on free TV but you don't see them as hyped as Mayweather's PPVs where he promises action but does more clinching, dodging and running than actual boxing in the actual fight.

[badboypeenoy]

Agreed in part. But you got to look at it from a fighters point of view. Especially an established fighter. Why would you change what is working for you.

I'm not a fan of Juan Manuel Marquez, but he definitely has changed his style from a pure counter-puncher into a more crowd pleasing offensive-minded fighter. Instead of becoming another liability to the sport, he has now become one of its main attractions with or without Pacquiao.

I'm not a fan of Calslappy, I think he cherry picks his opponents but his workrate just translates into action and excitement.

[AntDawg]

Boxing need to have fights on regular tv like they used to.

[S A M U R A I]

I agree in a way, and in another I disagree. It depends on what you like to see in a fight. Do you appreciate all-out aggression and pure thrills? Or do you appreciate the subtleties of the sport, pure boxing, defense-first-based-counter-punchers? Maybe an all-round fighter who can do it all? I choose the latter, by the way, and if he can give us a KO, that's great. Pacquiao is a perfect example of a fighter I love to watch.

I think the heavyweight division currently lacks excitement. We expect brutal knockouts (especially those of us who grew up watching Tyson and use him as the ultimate benchmark for other heavies) but I think the other divisions are just fine, there is some great talent out there and we've been given some great fights. 2008 was a fantastic year for boxing. 2009 will be good too.

Again, it depends on what you want to see. After all, it's called 'boxing', not 'knockouts'.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

[badboypeenoy]

Boxing need to have fights on regular tv like they used to.

I agree, but I hope they show less boring fighters. Exciting up-and-comers can be featured on regular TV and entice audiences back to boxing. Seeing action packed fights from sub-elite fighters would in-turn make PPV of elite-fighters more mouth-watering. Preferring to feature exciting fighters over runners and clinchers would also start a change of style preference among boxers that would be good for the sport in the long-run. I mean, if you have hand-speed and good footwork, but use them to run around the ring instead of boxing, and the networks won't give you exposure because that, you will change that "boring" style and adapt a style that would earn you exposure and possibly a shot at PPV. BORING FIGHTERS doesn't deserve airtime.

[KennyWeldon]

want excitement?? watch Pacman everytime he fights...Im Mexican 100% and I just love this little guy, he goes in there and gets straight to the point. There ain't no playing around when you see him in that ring! You can always expect action and I don't think i've ever seen any of his fights and felt cheated out of my money.

[badboypeenoy]

I agree in a way, and in another I disagree. It depends on what you like to see in a fight. Do you appreciate all-out aggression and pure thrills? Or do you appreciate the subtleties of the sport, pure boxing, defense-first-based-counter-punchers? Maybe an all-round fighter who can do it all? I choose the latter, by the way, and if he can give us a KO, that's great. Pacquiao is a perfect example of a fighter I love to watch.

Pacman is nowhere near boring, even when pitted with an overmatched opponent.

I think the heavyweight division currently lacks excitement. We expect brutal knockouts (especially those of us who grew up watching Tyson and use him as the ultimate benchmark for other heavies) but I think the other divisions are just fine, there is some great talent out there and we've been given some great fights. 2008 was a fantastic year for boxing. 2009 will be good too.

Again, it depends on what you want to see. After all, it's called 'boxing', not 'knockouts'.

Yeah, it is "boxing" not running and clinching either.

[DiegoFuego]

I really don't respect the opinion of anyone who thinks what Mayweather does is boring. He adapts to any style, which is why he fights different almost every time out and the reason he's undefeated unlike most of the brawlers you mentioned who are going to get beat by legitimate boxers. If you think he's boring, what do you call what he did to Corrales, Gatti and NDou? He can't fight 147lbers and 154lbers the way he fights Gatti. If you only fight one way, you will inevitably lose.

Wladimir Klitschko is boring. I think anyone can agree with that. But to call Mayweather boring is to say, "I don't like boxing, just brawling"

[S A M U R A I]

Pacman is nowhere near boring, even when pitted with an overmatched opponent.

Yeah, it is "boxing" not running and clinching either.

I agree on both points. I don't appreciate the clinching, or pot-shotting, 'running' style of fighting either, but it works for some people and they like it. That's all I was saying. Basically, there's no clear answer I can give like "yes, it needs more excitement". It's more complex than that. I'm quite happy with boxing except for the heavyweights, but that's OK, I can just ignore them and focus on the fights I want to see.

I give props to David Haye for trying to inject some excitement into the heavy division, though, and I will watch him fight.

For the record, I voted YES on your poll. Boxing needs excitement, of course, but there is already plenty. Still, a YES vote is better than a NO.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

[badboypeenoy]

I really don't respect the opinion of anyone who thinks what Mayweather does is boring. He adapts to any style, which is why he fights different almost every time out and the reason he's undefeated unlike most of the brawlers you mentioned who are going to get beat by legitimate boxers. If you think he's boring, what do you call what he did to Corrales, Gatti and NDou? He can't fight 147lbers and 154lbers the way he fights Gatti. If you only fight one way, you will inevitably lose.

Wladimir Klitschko is boring. I think anyone can agree with that. But to call Mayweather boring is to say, "I don't like boxing, just brawling"

Hatton, Corrales, Castillo, dela Hoya and even Gatti are exciting fighters, they lost to Mayweather but that doesn't mean Mayweather is exciting. Pit Mayweather with another boring fighter and you have yourself a guaranteed Baldomir vs. Mayweather type of fight.