If Fighters Were Fighting Five or Six Times a Year...

[Tony Trick-Pony]

How many would stay unbeaten? How many more matches would be made where new stars could rise? Would the "0" really matter that much anymore? Would boxing's popularity rise with more exposure?
Thoughts and opinions?

[Pechorin]

How many would stay unbeaten? How many more matches would be made where new stars could rise? Would the "0" really matter that much anymore? Would boxing's popularity rise with more exposure?
Thoughts and opinions?

I feel that most of today's boxers are more athletes, and less skilled, than in the past. Pushing their bodies to physical limit, I don't they could fight that many times a year without suffering from exaughstion.

And even if they could, the way these guys today want to get paid a million bucks to fight bums it wouldn't be possible at all.

[Reloaded]

The ones that take the least punishment, if they cant hit you they cant beat you.

[JJRod]

How many would stay unbeaten? How many more matches would be made where new stars could rise? Would the "0" really matter that much anymore? Would boxing's popularity rise with more exposure?
Thoughts and opinions?

If boxers were boxing more often their popularity would rise imo.
I also think they'd be less weight issues, less ducking fights, and fighters would actually improve their techniques.

[al-Xander]

Would be more realistic if you say 3 times a year. One fight a year has become the norm these days.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

If boxers were boxing more often their popularity would rise imo.
I also think they'd be less weight issues, less ducking fights, and fighters would actually improve their techniques.

Yeah, man. I think the techniques and sharpness would greatly improve. Robinson was great because his natural talent, but also because he was in the ring all the time. Keeps a fighter sharp.

[juggernaut666]

In the long run you would see less quality,more wear and tear. It works for journyman but as you get to the important fights,you will see more losses for top guys with less attention to a particular fighter and more chance of losing if you fight more with less time to prepare,it would also force more top guys fighting each other and boxings fanbase thinks a fighter is washed out if they lose so it will also hurt the fighters.

It would increase boxings popularity and set a UFc like stage where guys fight more often but you will get the least prepared guys fighting each other. Skills dont diminish if one fights less if they have experiance,they will deteriorate for most with more milage,theres a differance between staing in shape and training for a fight.

the more often you fight the more chance you will lose,thinking you will be more skilled and sharper fighting more may be true for some but it will only benefit the elite guuys who have more talent.Rushing a less talented fighter will surly favor a dominant champion with naturally better skills.

my solution to this is a champion in any promotion should be required to fight no less than twice a year,but reaquired 3 times a year unless you prove injury.

[Larry the boss]

If they were fighting that often, you would have even more mismatches..look at history, when fighters fought that often the fought 2 good fights and 4 cab drivers

[MrRolltide91]

If they were fighting that often, you would have even more mismatches..look at history, when fighters fought that often the fought 2 good fights and 4 cab drivers

Yep.......

[True-Boxing-Fan]

If they were fighting that often, you would have even more mismatches..look at history, when fighters fought that often the fought 2 good fights and 4 cab drivers

But at least they got in two good fights. Now it's like fight two bums a year and follow it up with a decent fight then back to the bums. Nowadays you get fighters only fighting a tough fight once every two-three years.

Ask me I'd prefer the 5-6 fight year system with a fighter fighting three bums as long as they got in two tough matchups too. That's way better than how its been for the last 15 years.