what if purses..

[lumiere]

there can only be one winner. why should a fighter get docked for losing a fight or having a lackluster performance? we all know styles make fights.


what about bad judging? should pacquiao have been docked for losing the first bradley fight? or should bradley have been docked for stinking out the joint, but coming away with a victory?

no fighter should have 3 judges decide whether he gets his full purse or not.

performance bonuses are a good idea, but docking your pay for losing is bull****

Youre bringing up some good points the sport isnt perfect.boxers are already losing their belts and their records ruined over bad judging and corruption now tho.some ppl believe those are worth more than money. The idea I brought up was to hopefully bring more excitement to the sport i love.doubt itll ever happen but I would love if some promoters tried it at least

[LoadedWraps]

It would make sense, anything that gives fighters an incentive to fight their hardest and never rest on their success in the ring I would approve of.

And your comparison to other jobs doesn't work larryx, boxing is a professional sport, and a combat sport at that, I think of all the professions in the world, it would make the most sense for prize fighters. They need to fight for something other than legacy/titles/glory once they have attained those three in their careers, and putting the purses on the line for the winner would remedy much of the ducking, cherry picking, mismatches, robberies, and we wouldn't see people going the RJJ route long term, once fighters can't win consistency they fall off and out of the race quickly, then you have a constant recycling system of talent and champions, I think that would be good for the sport long term.


I can tell you right now as an amater that if you were to say "if you win, you get X amount of money" as opposed to "you get paid X amount regardless", I am going into the fight with a completely different mindset.

[lumiere]

It would make sense, anything that gives fighters an incentive to fight their hardest and never rest on their success in the ring I would approve of.

And your comparison to other jobs doesn't work larryx, boxing is a professional sport, and a combat sport at that, I think of all the professions in the world, it would make the most sense for prize fighters. They need to fight for something other than legacy/titles/glory once they have attained those three in their careers, and putting the purses on the line for the winner would remedy much of the ducking, cherry picking, mismatches, robberies, and we wouldn't see people going the RJJ route long term, once fighters can't win consistency they fall off and out of the race quickly, then you have a constant recycling system of talent and champions, I think that would be good for the sport long term.


I can tell you right now as an amater that if you were to say "if you win, you get X amount of money" as opposed to "you get paid X amount regardless", I am going into the fight with a completely different mindset.

YES.my thoughts exactly. Well put man

[Rockin']

So boxer, **** star, fast food worker all the same ? No difference, a jobs a job right?.gotcha very logical

you have not a clue as to what you are speaking.......

[PUK_MY_DANG_34]

performance bonuses are a good idea, but docking your pay for losing is bull****

Exactly, and it's a system that could be easily implemented by the guys cutting the checks.

[PUK_MY_DANG_34]

It would make sense, anything that gives fighters an incentive to fight their hardest and never rest on their success in the ring I would approve of.

And your comparison to other jobs doesn't work larryx, boxing is a professional sport, and a combat sport at that, I think of all the professions in the world, it would make the most sense for prize fighters. They need to fight for something other than legacy/titles/glory once they have attained those three in their careers, and putting the purses on the line for the winner would remedy much of the ducking, cherry picking, mismatches, robberies, and we wouldn't see people going the RJJ route long term, once fighters can't win consistency they fall off and out of the race quickly, then you have a constant recycling system of talent and champions, I think that would be good for the sport long term.


I can tell you right now as an amater that if you were to say "if you win, you get X amount of money" as opposed to "you get paid X amount regardless", I am going into the fight with a completely different mindset.

I think if we put the loser's purses on the line we'd begin to see a dwindling number of new pros.

[VicariousVice]

That's basically what the UFC does and look at how those guys fight. And come to think of it I remember some UFC fighters talk about how the threat of losing makes them fight safer actually, which makes their fights boring. There was a Stephan Bonnar fight where he took a guy down and fought for positional dominance practically the whole fight and Bonnar was usually a very exciting fighter when he was around. Boxers fight safe because they're afraid of losing already, you dock their pay for losing and they'll only fight safer.

I'd say performance bonuses are a better way to go. Cutting a paycheck for losing would make the sport more boring not more exciting.

[elgranluchadore]

That's basically what the UFC does and look at how those guys fight. I'd rather boxers fight a technical fight.

they fight safer because of it, never really risking much going forward unless its for a takedown.

[VicariousVice]

they fight safer because of it, never really risking much going forward unless its for a takedown.

Yeah I edited most of what I wrote after I gave it a bit more thought, look above.

[4Corners]

All you would have is people picking terrible fights so they could win no matter what. I know that happens from time to time now anyways, but you'd literally never see anyone fighting anyone that was remotely a threat.