Why don't we have "winner takes all'?

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • baroidi
    Undisputed Champion
    Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
    • May 2017
    • 2190
    • 787
    • 638
    • 23,547

    #11
    why not just have them fight to the death, two man enters, one man leaves, ThunderDome!! The way the world is heading, it's not too far fetched an idea...

    Comment

    • Fanofreason
      Undisputed Champion
      Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
      • Sep 2016
      • 1818
      • 255
      • 7
      • 38,882

      #12
      Every fight should be 75-25 winner

      That would fix boxing. No big fight no big purse

      Comment

      • Boksfan
        Undisputed Champion
        Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
        • Nov 2017
        • 9185
        • 277
        • 355
        • 66,176

        #13
        Are you gonna pay for fighter training camp, trainer and next year of living if he lose? In that case why not, lets have winner takes it all. Now go tell that to Floyd Mayweather, I wanna see how he slaps you

        Comment

        • Phenom
          Phenomdeaux
          Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
          • May 2010
          • 12218
          • 494
          • 363
          • 101,474

          #14
          Originally posted by Joe Beamish
          It WOULD be cool to get MORE of the purse for a KO, though.
          They do that on smaller cards and undercard win/KO bonus

          But a winner take all is insane imagine going through 12 weeks camp and all of the expenses and end up taking an ass whopping for free

          Comment

          • Larry the boss
            EDUCATED
            Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
            • Jan 2011
            • 90798
            • 6,419
            • 4,473
            • 2,500,480

            #15
            why should the person who loses not get paid?? makes 0 sense

            Comment

            • buge
              Undisputed Champion
              Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
              • Sep 2014
              • 1535
              • 281
              • 1,113
              • 19,919

              #16
              not winner take all, but I agree that winner should take a large chunk of it

              Comment

              • _Rexy_
                Undisputed Champion
                Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                • Jan 2018
                • 27929
                • 6,140
                • 3,585
                • 358,040

                #17
                Nobody is going to risk their life for free. Fighters would be going into debt with this. Camp fees, corner men, promoters...it’s all from the purse

                Comment

                • OnlyBeingHonest
                  Contender
                  Silver Champion - 100-500 posts
                  • Dec 2015
                  • 447
                  • 86
                  • 111
                  • 17,452

                  #18
                  Ya'll think boxing has a lot of robberies now, it would be worse with winner takes all.

                  Comment

                  • Curtis Harper
                    Banned
                    Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
                    • Dec 2018
                    • 10113
                    • 254
                    • 446
                    • 303,080

                    #19
                    Originally posted by Airtioteclint
                    I understand that one fighter feels like they draw in more money so they deserve more but doesn't that mean he's not confident in his ability to win?

                    And I suspect it would make a lot of more exciting fights. A losing fighter will still try to give it all he's got if he doesn't have the "oh well i still get paid" mentality in the ring.

                    It would also stop a lot of bs fights where a nobody is calling out a big name just to survive and collect too.

                    Or am i just not understanding how it all works?
                    You'd never get regular fights made. Mismatches are a vital part to boxing and bums depend on that ''getting knocked the fu ck out'' money.

                    Unification bouts....now you're talking

                    Comment

                    • Bjl12
                      Banned
                      • Sep 2016
                      • 4952
                      • 185
                      • 28
                      • 59,933

                      #20
                      Originally posted by Airtioteclint
                      I understand that one fighter feels like they draw in more money so they deserve more but doesn't that mean he's not confident in his ability to win?

                      And I suspect it would make a lot of more exciting fights. A losing fighter will still try to give it all he's got if he doesn't have the "oh well i still get paid" mentality in the ring.

                      It would also stop a lot of bs fights where a nobody is calling out a big name just to survive and collect too.

                      Or am i just not understanding how it all works?
                      You're a fuc.king idiot

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      TOP