Have boxing standards ever been lower?

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • JakeTheBoxer
    undisputed champion
    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
    • Dec 2014
    • 21070
    • 4,611
    • 2,796
    • 123,960

    #1

    Have boxing standards ever been lower?

    Benavidez beats Plant and Andrade at 168. His fans: oh, he will take on 175 division.

    Fury beats old Klitschko, Wilder, Whyte. His fans: oh, he would beat every heavyweight in the history.

    Teo Lopez beats Taylor at 140. His dad: oh, my boy beats Crawford at 147. My boy is the best.

    Davis beats....washed up Ryan Garcia. His fans: oh, he is the face of boxing. Davis: I am the best, nobody beats me ( lol).

    Crawford beats Spence. His fans: oh, he is the best welterweight ever ( rofl).

    Have boxing standards ever been so low?

    Now boxers and their fans mean they are something based on 2 solid wins, lol.
    Last edited by JakeTheBoxer; 02-22-2024, 02:49 AM.
  • N/A
    BANNED
    Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
    • Aug 2023
    • 1075
    • 364
    • 711
    • 0

    #2
    I don't know how the fans were decades ago, probably the same level, it is just the boxers that were fighting more. Probably the most clueless fans are the noisiest and leave a bad impression.

    How about AJ beat older Wlad in a life-and-death fight and his fans say "he fought a better version of Wlad than Fury"? People are putting Lomachenko as a legend with barely 17 fights, not all of them won even - this is a low standard as well. Others believe the one-dimensional slow plodder Joyce is some top boxer, but on top of them, others decided that Zhang is a great boxer right because he badly beat Joyce twice.

    Leave the hype that is also fortified by promoters and journalists. Fighters are judged in time, often more objectively. People will have the chance to watch their fights.

    Comment

    • Roadblock
      Undisputed Champion
      Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
      • May 2006
      • 14031
      • 3,535
      • 428
      • 108,713

      #3
      Originally posted by fifth_root
      I don't know how the fans were decades ago, probably the same level, it is just the boxers that were fighting more. Probably the most clueless fans are the noisiest and leave a bad impression.

      How about AJ beat older Wlad in a life-and-death fight and his fans say "he fought a better version of Wlad than Fury"? People are putting Lomachenko as a legend with barely 17 fights, not all of them won even - this is a low standard as well. Others believe the one-dimensional slow plodder Joyce is some top boxer, but on top of them, others decided that Zhang is a great boxer right because he badly beat Joyce twice.

      Leave the hype that is also fortified by promoters and journalists. Fighters are judged in time, often more objectively. People will have the chance to watch their fights.
      No, they were different because there was no internet; if you were keen on boxing, you had to source news from gyms and magazines live shows and the little on mainstream TV for the really big fights, I remember listening to fights on the radio; today's fans are extremely gullible and influenced by so much random nonsense across social media, its the mob of sheep mentality taking over the world and genuine top guys get lost in the soup.

      Comment

      • N/A
        BANNED
        Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
        • Aug 2023
        • 1075
        • 364
        • 711
        • 0

        #4
        Originally posted by Roadblock

        No, they were different because there was no internet; if you were keen on boxing, you had to source news from gyms and magazines live shows and the little on mainstream TV for the really big fights, I remember listening to fights on the radio; today's fans are extremely gullible and influenced by so much random nonsense across social media, its the mob of sheep mentality taking over the world and genuine top guys get lost in the soup.
        So back in the day, many fans didn't see all the fights, which questions their quality of judgement. Nowadays, as you say and I meant the same - they are influenced by the nonsense around, which I call hype. In both cases, a lot of crap comes from the media - either magazines, radio, TV, internet at present. Nowadays I think the BS is worse. But at least, we are capable of freely discussing.

        Comment

        • Roadblock
          Undisputed Champion
          Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
          • May 2006
          • 14031
          • 3,535
          • 428
          • 108,713

          #5
          Originally posted by fifth_root

          So back in the day, many fans didn't see all the fights, which questions their quality of judgement. Nowadays, as you say and I meant the same - they are influenced by the nonsense around, which I call hype. In both cases, a lot of crap comes from the media - either magazines, radio, TV, internet at present. Nowadays I think the BS is worse. But at least, we are capable of freely discussing.
          Yes a lot of fights were not seen by fans, not like today, the big ones like Ali Leonard Hearns etc were on mainstream TV, to be a fan of boxing you pretty much had to frequent gyms and be a part of the sport and go to shows it was just so different than today, as in everything the media always spun BS but it was just less, but that's not just boxing that's life in general, it really is outa control today and getting worse, its hard to imagine the changes Ive seen from pumping gas with a handle filling a glass tank on top the bowser that gravity fed into your fuel tank, to folks gathering around the radio as there was no TV, I remember our first B/W TV and the old man put three cellophane strips on the TV, a blue on top a red in the middle and green on the bottom and him saying color TV lol, times are changing so fast the masses don't realise how quickly we are wrecking everything.

          Comment

          Working...
          TOP