Why don't you watch boxing?

[PartyGirlUK]

Hey guys - the UFC thread got me thinking why it is so much bigger than boxing amongst the young male demographic, and why in all demographics it has gained remarkedly on boxing over the past few years.

I don't want this thread to degrade into a mudslinging contest. The issue about which athletes are better, which is more gay, who wins a street fight Tyson or Fedor or any other such nonsense isnt the point. fwiw I enjoy both sports, and obviously anyone who gets to the top of either sport has to have a bunch of bravery and be an incredible athlete.

20 years ago boxing was pretty big. I can't remember the last time I heard people outside my boxing friends talk about 'the fight', except for DeLaHoya v. Mayweather. imo the problem isn't that people don't like boxing, it's a matter of marketing. There have been some exceptional fights in the past couple of years, but for whatever reason most people haven't seen them (I think Corrales - Castillo made it's way into the mainstream a bit......).

Here are some things that UFC does really well that boxing doesn't

i) The UFC decides who fights who. In boxing, the fighters/promoters do. So in UFC the best guys are going to fight each other, in boxing each guy acts in his best interests (which often leads to top fighters avoiding each other for easier fayre) which devalues the product offered.

ii) UFC has 4(?) weight classes and one champion in each. Boxing has 16 and 4 or 5 world champions in each division. There is the issue in MMA of multiple fighting organizations, but UFC seems to be solving that by monopolizing the best talent out there. So, in MMA, there are 4 legitimate world champions, average fan knows who they are, the champs have to fight 3 times a year, against the best opposition available. Compelling. Boxing is a mess.

iii) Network effects. People like to watch sports with other people. UFC has done a great job of appearing cool and in fashion, took off amongst some people, and right now if someone is indifferent between watching boxing or UFC on a Saturday night, they are more likely to plump for UFC, because that's what their buddies are watching.

iv) (Edited in): Boxing revolves around the heavyweight division and the HWs bloooooooow right now (and all the top ones are non-Americans). It's interesting that MMA seems to have a more even distribution of interest by weight than boxing. Any ideas why this is?

Also to a large extent MMA and boxing are substitute goods, so the rise of the UFC almost necessitates a fall in the popularity of boxing.

Note that boxers are still getting paid WAY more than MMA stars. This is also interesting.

There's a lot more to it than that, and hopefully you can provide some insight. Two weeks ago was a fight for the legitimate boxing middleweight championship of the world. It was on regular HBO, not PPV. It was one of the best MW title fights ever, a real great watch. For those of you who watch MMA, I'd like to know i) Did you know the fight was going on ii) Did you watch it, why/why not, iii) Did you hear about the result/that it was a great fight.

Also, please start your reply with the number of currently active boxers you can name (list them for bonus points [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] )

D

[ArturiusX]

For the mainstream, its all about the heavy weights. And at the moment, they couldn't be more boring, less charismatic, and there's no grudge matches going on.

[PerDoom]

I know what fight you are talking about. Jermaine Taylor vs. Kelly Pavlik. I think it really epitomizes how mma is taking over boxing. Kelly Pavlik is really unknown by me. I have a sporadic following with boxing, and I have no idea who Kelly Pavlik is. I guess he knocked out some people. Who knows?

Whereas in the mma realm, I know who the top five people are in a weight class. The top fighters face the top people continually. And how do I know this? Because I actually get to see them fight. Boxing, who knows when I will be able to see #3, #4, #5 fight? Hell, might take years before #1 faces anyone inside the top 20.

MMA, #1 fights #2. Always. There is a continual battle to see who #2 is too. You get to see the people come up. Its all shown on the same card.

So largely, it can be down to promotion. Boxing has down a horrific job promoting events. Largely due to the multitude of 3-4 letter orginizations that put out phony rankings. This guy is ranked #3 in WBO and #15 in IBF. WBO says #1 must fight this guy or we strip him of the belt, but IBF says you must fight this guy or we strip you. So there are 4-5 "champs" all at the same time. Ring magazine has helped this to some extent over the past couple of years, but not anywhere near the level that one organization (UFC) putting on all the fights could compare to.

Another problem as to why boxing is failing is that people like action. They like the KO. Naturally, heavyweight is the casual fans favorite division. That division is in a complete freefall to say the least in boxing.

MMA, really anything can happen at any moment. One slippage at any moment in positioning, you are either KOed, taken down, or submitted. Instantly. Much more exciting to watch than a technically sound boxing match.

[jaydub]

Dean,

You missed several of the most significant reasons:

1. MMA fights are far shorter and generally feature more action (lay and pray notwithstanding).
2. MMA fights are far more likely to end quickly, unexpectedly, and brutally.
3. MMA fights are perceived as more "real".

For the young male audience, those are critical.

I can probably name a couple dozen active fighters but to your point, years ago I could have named more.

J

[guids]

I like boxing way more than mma. I like the middleweights for the speed/artistry, I love the heavyweights for the atmosphere, I cant get into mma because it just seems like one long mountain dew commercial

[Jon1000]

i like watching boxing more than MMA, but that is probably only because a couple of my friends are boxing fanatics and their families or themselves get like every PPV of any kind of significance.

As a casual fan, the number of free fights I can watch is a plus for me in MMA. I can watch big fights on basic cable a lot of the time, and I think the availability and the marketing is what brings me back.

All things equal, I'd rather watch two top boxers of almost any weight class fight, but it feels like it happens too infrequently.

Boxing seems to be huge with all the Filipino and Hispanic people I know. Weird, b/c i only know of manny. are there a ton of filipino boxers i don't know about?

the constant level of popularity across weight classes in MMA i think has to do with the knockout/dramatic stoppage potential being more equal than across boxing weight classes.

I don't know if this is correct or not, but I have the thought in the back of my head that a lot of guys on the UFC undercards have spent a fraction of the time developing their skills that most boxers who start fighting really early.

[hobbes9324]

As an old guy, I may (or may not) have some insight as to why boxing has gone into the tank....

1) Proliferation of weight classes and various sanctioning to the point where there are probably a hundred or so "world champions" running around. The fact that some left handed Bulgarian dyslexic has been crowned the smegmaweight champion by the WWBCF just doesn't seem to entrace people, for some reason.

2) PPV for all sorts of good, bad and "meh" fights - if you buy ONE turkey, it sort of leaves a bad taste in your mouth, and you're less likely to pony up the next time. And there have been a fair number of turkeys.

3) For better or worse, the heavyweight division has been beyond lousy for a long time - for the casual fan, that's pretty much all they care about.

4) The eternal mystery of why Don King hasn't been shot, stabbed, or found floating in an oil drum. He has done more than anyone else to take a shady, underhanded sport and run it down to the point where child molesters get better press.
It's hard to believe, but at one time SI had pretty much a weekly feature on boxing - now, unless Tyson is caught biting the head off a nun, no press. So no following.....

MM MD

[MikeyPatriot]

As a kid, I would watch SportsCenter before going to school (elementary school). I enjoyed finding out the results of the big boxing matches. I'd say I was aware of who the big fighters were and such. I was introduced to MMA when a friend of mine and I rented a bunch of the early UFC VHS tapes in late middle school/high school. I didn't have enough to pony up for PPV, and I kind of forgot about it until last year. Since then, I've become extremely devoted to MMA and, as a result, combat sports. Which means, I am interested in boxing (and ADCC and K-1, etc.) because of my re-interest in MMA. I think the boxing vs. MMA debate is silly, and you should enjoy both.

Now, I have a few nitpicks with your post.

[ QUOTE ]

Here are some things that UFC does really well that boxing doesn't

i) The UFC decides who fights who. In boxing, the fighters/promoters do. So in UFC the best guys are going to fight each other, in boxing each guy acts in his best interests (which often leads to top fighters avoiding each other for easier fayre) which devalues the product offered.

[/ QUOTE ]

The best guys don't fight each other. It's gonna get a little better with the UFC buying Pride, but it looks like Fedor isn't going to sign. It's taken forever to get Wandy/Chuck, which may or may not happen. Guys like Gomi, Aoki, Kang, etc. etc. etc. are stuck in limbo right now and will probably stay in Japan. Big inter-promotional fights don't happen. It's still probably better than boxing, but it isn't perfect.

[ QUOTE ]
ii) UFC has 4(?) weight classes and one champion in each. Boxing has 16 and 4 or 5 world champions in each division. There is the issue in MMA of multiple fighting organizations, but UFC seems to be solving that by monopolizing the best talent out there. So, in MMA, there are 4 legitimate world champions, average fan knows who they are, the champs have to fight 3 times a year, against the best opposition available. Compelling. Boxing is a mess.

[/ QUOTE ]

UFC has 5 divisions - 155, 170, 185, 205, and 265. I actually think think there's room for 1 or two more. I'd like to see something more like 155, 165, 175, 185/190, 205, 265. There's a lot of guys in each weight class right now who are stuck between trying to fight at their more or less natural weight or having to cut 15-20 pounds to keep up with everyone else. Again, it's still probably better than boxing with it's 43 weight classes, but it can be improved upon.

[ QUOTE ]
iii) Network effects. People like to watch sports with other people. UFC has done a great job of appearing cool and in fashion, took off amongst some people, and right now if someone is indifferent between watching boxing or UFC on a Saturday night, they are more likely to plump for UFC, because that's what their buddies are watching.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree with this, though I wish they'd cut out the pro wrestling/metal/macho [censored] with their marketing.

[ QUOTE ]
iv) (Edited in): Boxing revolves around the heavyweight division and the HWs bloooooooow right now (and all the top ones are non-Americans). It's interesting that MMA seems to have a more even distribution of interest by weight than boxing. Any ideas why this is?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a lot of this has to do with the fact that there's only 5 divisions. There's definitely a lot less talent at HW than at 170-205.

And to the guy who said this:
[ QUOTE ]
MMA, #1 fights #2. Always. There is a continual battle to see who #2 is too. You get to see the people come up. Its all shown on the same card.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is so far from the truth. The UFC doesn't even have official rankings (Shooto in Japan does though), so it's impossible to have #1 vs. #2 fights. The only rankings that exist are done by independent websites. The UFC sets up fights based on how they can market a card. Why else would Keith Jardine, coming off a loss to a newcomer, fight Chuck Liddell in the main event of UFC 76? Why did Randy Couture fight Tim Sylvia for the title at UFC 68?

FWIW, I think the UFC does a good job at putting together intriguing and relevant fights. But they certainly don't put #1 against #2, etc., because they don't have a (public) ranking system.

[MikeyPatriot]

One thing that I've kind of been thinking about...

Boxing:limit hold'em::MMA:NL hold'em

I hate using poker as an analogy, but does that make sense to anyone else?

[jaydub]

[ QUOTE ]
One thing that I've kind of been thinking about...

Boxing:limit hold'em::MMA:NL hold'em

I hate using poker as an analogy, but does that make sense to anyone else?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really, it's an attempt to shoehorn an analogy where a simple comment about the less restrictive rules would do. Why it has to be mapped back to a card game makes little sense.

Edit: and these checkers, chess, roshambo analogies are equally tarded.

J