The best way to build a star is by putting them through "the gauntlet", true or false

[Deevel916]

Exactly, different situations in different sports. In boxing the status quo is basically 4 years of fights a top fighter is gonna win pretty easy so when you get to 8 L's on your record it does mean something. Thats basically the rule for most solid prospects who are considered to have championship potential. In the UFC if you keep winning you keep getting pushed higher & having 8 L's doesn't mean so much.

Jon Jones is a perfect example of how high you can go quickly in the UFC. He went from UFC nobody to UFC champion over 8 fights in 2.5 years. A Jon Jones talent in boxing who came from nowhere is probably sitting undefeated just having entered the alphabet rankings around now & is probably 3-4 years from having enough **** you money to be involved in a hit & run accident that could end his career.

Loma is about the only guy with a UFC type schedule & personally I'd love to see more of it. I wanna see a whole lot less guys with 25 fights who've had 0 real tests. I'm anti-the Deontay Wilder career trajectory & more Loma career trajectory. L's are overrated.

Yep. There's no padding your record for your first 20 or so fights over 4-5yrs in UFC. "You're a pro? Get in the lions den and show us what you got".

[kiaba360]

Rosado is the only one that can say he's faced GGG/Quillin/Lemieux/Stevens(BKB). He's not considered a "star" because he lost, but he earned a decent amount of respect that only comes with fighting that type of opposition. Most will not consider him a "star", but he's well-known to a certain degree because he's fought those with some hype behind them. There's different levels of stardom and many ways to attain it, with Canelo being on the cusp of what we usually consider to be "stardom". He has one star on his resume (Floyd) and is about to face another (Cotto), but very few will ever find themselves in that position. That's simply unattainable for the average boxer.

The best way to discover if you have a young fighter with star potential, is to match him tough and gauge his performance. He doesn't necessarily have to win, but give a good account of himself. Match him too tough too early and there's a risk of damaging him. Match him too soft and he begins to stagnate. I think once fighters are considered to be stars is when they should start running the gauntlet. As we know, not all stars are equal. Some promoters know how to "manufacture" them through astute matchmaking, but every star will have their show & prove moments. Some fail in those moments and some succeed.

Also, not everyone's gauntlet looks the same. So maybe if your guy is a star, he'll handle everyone around him with relative ease.

[Scipio2009]

I like pbc but I think they missed a huge opportunity when they launched..

They should have held 4 man tournaments for their own pbc belts, similar to what bellator did early in its launch..

140 pbc championship tourney broner, Peterson, lucas, danny

147 thurman, khan, Porter, ghost

160- Jacobs, quillen, lee, wade


If those were the first few pbc cards, fans would be stoked, and it would legitimize guys

Once champs are crowned you can use tourneys to determine #1 contenders, while the champ has a voluntary title defense..

Having PBC belts makes absolutely no sense, especially when you consider that Haymon seemingly has no quarrel with the WBC, WBA, or IBF (WBO being Arum's sanctioning organization of sort leaves them on the relative outs).

Beyond that, and this gets missed a ton, it'd be 30 years since boxing was on terrestrial TV in any meaningful way. None of the fighters in any of the three tournaments are known well enough by the general sports fan to draw any kind of reaction.

[Weebler I]

In the current era of boxing you do not need to run the gauntlet to be a star. Canelo, GGG, and Wilder look to have star potential and none has what would be considered a "gauntlet" resume.

If you get a string of KO's it seems like casual fans will gravitate toward you if marketed properly.

I don't think it really worked in Wilder's case. The belt is the only thing which gives him credibility. His opponents have been terrible (and way off top 10 before you start a GGG comparison).

[BigAlexSand]

It has been for a long time, that promoters will take time with curtain boxers. They will attempt to build these fighters and polish there styles. Many greats of the past were brought up quite slowly... Is it the right thing? Not necessarily. I believe the perfect example of bringing a fighter up slowly is Mike Tyson and the opposite could be Holyfield. Tyson, was brought up slowly and didn't fight a legit heavyweight till he fought a faded Berbick. Holyfield was thrown in the mix quite early winning his first title in his 12th fight.

Both had very successful careers but one was known better than the other, yet came up in the game much differently.

[BigAlexSand]

**** Chavez didn't win a title till his 44th fight and is still considered one of the top P4P fighters of All time.

[soul_survivor]

**** Chavez didn't win a title till his 44th fight and is still considered one of the top P4P fighters of All time.

That may have been the case but he was only 21 at the time, had debuted at 17. It's not always the number of fights that are important, but also when they happened and against whom.

Canelo is the only guy in recent years to have over 40 fights and only be in his early 20s. He is starting to become a bigger name wit hquality opponents in Trout, Mayweather and Lara.

Anyway, in terms of building a star, there's only so much a promoter can do: pit him against quality opponents, get him fights as often as possible early on, have him gain experience in the ring and not just the gym and have a good trainer there to back up the fighter.

But ultimately it comes down to natural talent, ability and hard work on the part of the fighter.

Fighting the best and winning.losing just accentuates all that and exposes him to a larger audience, but it all has to start with the fighter himself.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

There's levels to boxing, and too many fighters fight below their level on a consistent basis.

[Tom Cruise]

It's obviously a thin line between matching guys tough and wrecking them physically and/or mentally. But prospects need tough fights, its how they learn about mistakes they are making and correct them.

Tony harrison fought willie Nelson the other and lost by ko. Obviously that wasn't ideal, but at the same time i bet he learned from that fight more than he would from 10 easy ko wins. At some point fighters need to be tested, and win or lose they need to learn from those tests to become better fighters.

Take each prospect as they come i say. If Joshua is smashing everyone he faces within a few rounds then he probably needs to step up. At the same time Callum Smith has struggled at the level he is at so there is no point shoving him further forward until he is ready.

[BWC]

False. The best way to build a star is lots of fights with fighters below them before getting a title shot..