Fight to WIN...or Fight to ENTERTAIN?

[2501]

Why is there no option for "Do both"?

[ThePunchingBag]

Why not both? Like Pacquiao, Tyson, SRR, Duran etc.. What makes you a draw in boxing is winning in an exciting fashion. If you have the skills to win while being exciting to watch at the same time, then you have a legitimate claim at being p4p the greatest draw in boxing.

[baracuda]

both damn it....whats paying 50 bucks for?.....

[.::|ULTIMATE|::.]

Why not do it Morales or Pacquiao style. Fight to win and kick some ass in the process and gain fans, and legacy, recognition like there is no tomorrow.

[2501]

Why not both? Like Pacquiao, Tyson, SRR, Duran etc.. What makes you a draw in boxing is winning in an exciting fashion. If you have the skills to win while being exciting to watch at the same time, then you have a legitimate claim at being p4p the greatest draw in boxing.

Exactly, the only reason boxing is a business is because its entertainment people pay for .

If you make all this noise, talking about how you're going to SLAUGHTER your opponent, talking about how much action the fight will be, promising all types of fireworks or even promoting a fight as "the fight to save boxing" and then you go in the ring and are more cautious than a vegetarian in a meat market..

Then you have pretty much conned the audience into buying something they were not expecting.

How the hell is this good for the sport? You guys actually believe DLH/Mayweather did very good for the sport just because of the amount of PPV's the fight got.

How?

2.5 Million people tuned in to a fight because they were SOLD that it would be action pack. because they were PROMISED that Floyd wasn't going to pull another Baldomir performance. Did that happen?

Of course not.

But somehow, that did really good for our sport.

And the funny thing is, casual fans don't need an all action brawl either. They just need to be entertained. Or atleast tell them what to expect. We dont need empty promises causing our casuals to go to UFC.

[Al Haymon]

Why is there no option for "Do both"?

because that would be an easy fallback position. Who wouldn't choose that?

[2501]

For these guys, its black and white. If you don't appreciate Floyd's style then "you dont know **** about boxing"

[MANGLER]

Both shoulda been on there.

[Glamour Puss]

Because fighting to win=undefeated record

undefeated record=people wonder who could beat you

People wonder who could beat=people want to see you lose

People want to see you lose=people pay for your fights

People pay for your fights=/


Should I break anything else down for you?

Wrong about everything. You operate under the assumption that losses will break a fighter.

Thats just HBO bull****.

When guys lose, fans get behind them even more to support them.

You can keep embarrassing yourself though.

[Al Haymon]

And the funny thing is, casual fans don't need an all action brawl either. They just need to be entertained. Or atleast tell them what to expect. We dont need empty promises causing our casuals to go to UFC.

You're a tad fixated on Floyd and his fight w Oscar.

Nonetheless, there is a lot of revisionist history around that fight. I watched a competitive fight between two top guys. That was the best DLH we had seen in awhile. Or since. That was high-level boxing. That entertains me.

After the fight, Merch gave it a 8.5/10.

side note: LOL @ 'empty promises'. What are we - schoolgirls?