Since when has being the bigger name trumped being the better fighter??

[Bushbaby]

Title says it all. It seems that the sport I love has morphed into smoke and mirror entertainment over being the best. Who do we blame for this transition?? Where did it start?? Why should I, as a boxing fan worry about who sells more over who's the best??

I'm confused?? Should I jump ship and jump on the (draw) wagon?? Should I start studying who the biggest draw is and forget about who the best fighter is. Why worry about who throws the more solid jab and uses angles and smarts to defeat top tier fighters and worry about who put fans in the seats. That's what it's all about now?? Then maybe forget about being the best by (beating the best) and act like being the bigger draw means you'r the best. That's whats going on now?

[illmaticfighter]

I'm enjoying it actually froch fans are sounding a lot like Floyd fans people they claim to hate lmao.

froch fans: Floyd should fight khan instead of canelo since he'll make more money and have a bigger crowd.

[Bushbaby]

I'm enjoying it actually froch fans are sounding a lot like Floyd fans people they claim to hate lmao.

froch fans: Floyd should fight khan instead of canelo since he'll make more money and have a bigger crowd.

It started with Floyd den. Brainwashing other fanbases huh??

[Ivansmamma]

If the fighters that do the fighting put earning money over legacy then who is the bigger draw becomes more important...

[King_]

I've been wondering the same damn thing since I've mad an account here.... Some of the so called "fans" are laughable.


I'm just going to throw a very loose example and nothing against any of these guys in particular, just using them as example...


I.e some people, in response to someone saying "I would like to see Floyd fight GGG" would say "GGG is a nobody!!! He's got no name or fans, he brings no money!" ..... Those same people will say Cotto, for example... Is an excellent fight for Floyd because he will bring a ton of money/viewers etc.... No chit he will, the man has over a million country men in America who love him (rightfully so) and who would buy that....


BUT that does NOT mean Cotto is a better fighter then GGG, has more of a chance against Floyd, more talent/skil etc. how many fans/viewers a guy brings means absolutely NOTHING in terms of a fighters skill level or chance to beat another fighter. I've been preaching this since I starred posting here...


Once again, popularity of a fighter does NOT translate automatically to skill or anything in the ring.

I don't want to go deeper into it at the moment and this is just a loose example but it boggles my mind some people think popularity somehow equals skills and if you aren't "known" you can't be good? I'm not saying you can't be good if you're popular, just that if you're popular that doesn't automatically mean you're some P4P elite fighter.


The true cherry picks in boxing are the fights that get made simply due to a number of fans/opponents country men willing to buy the fight. As another example, Floyd could fight Marco Antonio Rubio in September and that fight will be bought by thousands and thousands of Mexican fight fans because they're going to support their country men. But does that mean He has a chance to win or does that someone increase his chances of winning/mean that he is super skilled? Absolutely not.


(No hate)

[Bushbaby]

If the fighters that do the fighting put earning money over legacy then who is the bigger draw becomes more important...

Very well said. You make plenty of sense.

[bravestone]

You do know this is a business right? Don Cheadle is a better actor than Will Smith..........guess what?

[Bushbaby]

I've been wondering the same damn thing since I've mad an account here.... Some of the so called "fans" are laughable.


I'm just going to throw a very loose example and nothing against any of these guys in particular, just using them as example...


I.e some people, in response to someone saying "I would like to see Floyd fight GGG" would say "GGG is a nobody!!! He's got no name or fans, he brings no money!" ..... Those same people will say Cotto, for example... Is an excellent fight for Floyd because he will bring a ton of money/viewers etc.... No chit he will, the man has over a million country men in America who love him (rightfully so) and who would buy that....


BUT that does NOT mean Cotto is a better fighter then GGG, has more of a chance against Floyd, more talent/skil etc. how many fans/viewers a guy brings means absolutely NOTHING in terms of a fighters skill level or chance to beat another fighter. I've been preaching this since I starred posting here...


Once again, popularity of a fighter does NOT translate automatically to skill or anything in the ring.

I don't want to go deeper into it at the moment and this is just a loose example but it boggles my mind some people think popularity somehow equals skills and if you aren't "known" you can't be good? I'm not saying you can't be good if you're popular, just that if you're popular that doesn't automatically mean you're some P4P elite fighter.


The true cherry picks in boxing are the fights that get made simply due to a number of fans/opponents country men willing to buy the fight. As another example, Floyd could fight Marco Antonio Rubio in September and that fight will be bought by thousands and thousands of Mexican fight fans because they're going to support their country men. But does that mean He has a chance to win or does that someone increase his chances of winning/mean that he is super skilled? Absolutely not.


(No hate)

Excellent post, love the examples!!

[Wenger Is God]

Is this about Froch and Ward?

I don't think anyone says that because Froch is a bigger draw, he's a better fighter. It's just a simple fact that there aren't that many big fights out there for Ward.

[King_]

If the fighters that do the fighting put earning money over legacy then who is the bigger draw becomes more important...

Okay that's fine. Don't go around naming those fighters "P4P" kings or future ATGs then.