1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The fleecing of boxing

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by boots, May 14, 2007.

  1. boots

    boots New Member

    I spent the weekend reviewing the De La Hoya - Mayweather fiasco. While the fight was entertaining, two things stood out. 1, that De La Hoya should retire. 2, Both De La Hoya and Mayweather were putting on a show and not trying to hurt each other. 3, Boxing actually needs Don King.
    Did anyone else get the same message
  2. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    Boxing actually needs Don King!?!

    Are you insane? Tripping on LSD? Forget to use the blue sarcasm font?
  3. boots

    boots New Member

    With Don, you knew you were getting a crooked show, but it was a show. This Golden Boy bullshit was a farce. The good guy-bad guy thing. And these two want to do it again? What a rip off.
  4. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    Let's treat boxing like we do trolls. Ignore it. Don't spend your money on it or watch replays.
  5. PopeDirkBenedict

    PopeDirkBenedict Active Member

    Boxing doesn't need Don King. It needs several compelling heavyweight fighters. Lets face it, no matter how many excellent boxers there are at the lower weights, heavyweight boxing is the only level that has the chance to consistently hold the public's attention. But ever since Tyson became a circus sideshow and Holyfield could no longer win, the heavyweight division has been awful. Give boxing a troika of compelling fighters with different styles -- think Ali, Frazier, Foreman -- and I think the public would return.

    But to quote the old baseball joke, a manager says his team needs just two more players to become a pennant contender. But, he says, "The players are Ruth and Gehrig." Good luck finding those compelling fighters.
  6. rallen13

    rallen13 Member

    This is where AA and I totally differ. Unless you have covered boxing at ringside, seen the ballet-like movement, the speed and actual grace of the sport, it will pass you by. Granted, the cuts and blood are not necessarily pretty to see, but I have covered championship bout that had far less mayhem, blood guts and gore than an NFL game, and fewer lasting effects.
    Don't give up on it until you have tried it. It is a very scientific sport as long as people like Mike Tyson aren't involved. The lighter weights in particular, are fantastic to watch.
  7. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    I like boxing as a sport. It's professional boxing, like organized religion, that turns me off. I won't watch it on principle, not because I don't like it. I covered the armed forces boxing tournament in 1990 and enjoyed it thoroughly, especially seeing the likes of Julian Wheeler, who had a relatively decent pro career.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page