George Foreman fought 9 TIMES in 1988.

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

One of those fights being against Qawi. Furthermore, this fighting twice a year **** is unacceptable!

FYI, George Foreman is pushing 65 and walks, talks and thinks just fine.

So because George Foreman did it, then everyone can? Many more didn't fight as much as him, and now can't hold a conversation or remember what they did 5 seconds ago.

This is an absurd thread.

[Public_Enemy]

I agree. I would love to see fighters in the ring more often. The game has changed a lot over the past 10-20 years though. Fighters make a lot more money now so they don't feel the need to fight as often. They're also competing for tv time/dates. Most of these guys aren't going to take fights that aren't on a major cable network.

[BattleAxePurist]

What exactly is your point were all those fights televised?

Fighters nowadays make so much money per fight that it doesn't serve them to take as many fights and just wait for tv dates that will pay them more than they could make fighting 7 guys on undercards.

Which is why there's so much questioning why fighters are all signing w/Haymon bcse that means their activity rate will decrease once guys reach a level of pay they will expect that as norm also it's why they won't fight as much cuts losses can happen that will diminish potential earning.

[soul_survivor]

Fact is, even in the golden age of boxing, when fighters fought so many times a year, it was often against mediocre or bum level opponents, more akin to sparring than actual fights. There were 2 or 3 title fights or top level opponents sprinkled in. A lot of those fights were non-title affairs.

But I agree, fighting twice a year is ridiculous but as long as top level fighters are getting paid 10-20 million dollars a fight, why would they fight any more? Look at the amount of money Wlad, Manny, Floyd and these days Froch make from a single year containing 2 or max 3 fights, no need to fight more often.

In terms of damage to a fighter, that varies, like someone already said, look at the state of Meldrick Taylor...yet look at Chavez Sr with 100+ fights, he seems to be fine.

[BattleAxePurist]

Fact is, even in the golden age of boxing, when fighters fought so many times a year, it was often against mediocre or bum level opponents, more akin to sparring than actual fights. There were 2 or 3 title fights or top level opponents sprinkled in. A lot of those fights were non-title affairs.

But I agree, fighting twice a year is ridiculous but as long as top level fighters are getting paid 10-20 million dollars a fight, why would they fight any more? Look at the amount of money Wlad, Manny, Floyd and these days Froch make from a single year containing 2 or max 3 fights, no need to fight more often.

In terms of damage to a fighter, that varies, like someone already said, look at the state of Meldrick Taylor...yet look at Chavez Sr with 100+ fights, he seems to be fine.

Not saying anything negative about old tymers but those fighters with 100+ plus wins most of those were literally against guys looking for a meal yeah they fought more often as per there sparring where it seems like fighters nowadays have longer camps to fill that void.

[SeekDaGreat]

What exactly is your point were all those fights televised?

Fighters nowadays make so much money per fight that it doesn't serve them to take as many fights and just wait for tv dates that will pay them more than they could make fighting 7 guys on undercards.

Which is why there's so much questioning why fighters are all signing w/Haymon bcse that means their activity rate will decrease once guys reach a level of pay they will expect that as norm also it's why they won't fight as much cuts losses can happen that will diminish potential earning.

What do you mean what is my point. I said fighting twice a year is unnacceptable. I thought I made that very clear as my last sentence.

Atleast I thought I made it clear....I thought............

[BattleAxePurist]

What do you mean what is my point. I said fighting twice a year is unnacceptable. I thought I made that very clear as my last sentence.

Atleast I thought I made it clear....I thought............

He fought 9 times and 2 is unacceptable why again? bcse he has no health issues really that's a clear reason to fight more way to generalize.

[arraamis]

So because George Foreman did it, then everyone can? Many more didn't fight as much as him, and now can't hold a conversation or remember what they did 5 seconds ago.

This is an absurd thread.

^^^This!!!

Guys fight based on need rather than fixed schedules or generated stats. Once guys get on the higher end of the purse generating scale, there's really no need to subject themselves to the grueling training regiments and fights on the regular. Boxing is a physically demanding sport where guys take quite a bit of punishment. And I believe they all take into consideration that there's life after boxing.

As already stated, boxers of the past fought all the time because it was a way to put food on the table. And the competition wasn't really that stiff.

Another point is that boxers today, are well aware that there's no organization behind the sport that would provide and secure medical attention when they're in need. Sadly, boxers are on their own if they get crippled in the ring -- More the reason to consider health and future outside of the sport.

[Wreckless]

in '88 he fought 9 times while already 39yo.

[DLT]

U guys are complaining about Ron Salka now. If guys fought 9 times per year then Salka would probably be the 2nd best guy they fought. Fighters can easily do that now just like they do sparring. It's the same thing