Did Mayweather vs De La Hoya save boxing?

That is absolutely ridiculous on it's face. I watch boxing and am a huge fan, but I would not watch lions tear into men. I would say those that watch UCF and the like would though. Boxing is a highly misunderstood sport and I contend that it is one of the most physically demanding sports around. It takes a very high level of physical fitness to be able to step into the ring and go 12 rounds with another individual. If you feel this way about boxing, do you feel the same way about Karate or Tae Kwan do, or Do Re Mi? I bet not, I bet you consider them to be very much a sport. Boxing is a sport with or without all the problems the governing bodies may be causing.

As to the article, we were asked to name five boxers outside Oscar and Mayweather. Ok, simple.
1. Bernard Hopkins
2. Jermaine Taylor
3. Roy Jones Jr.
4. Diego Corrales
5. Arturo Gatti
6. Shane Mosely
7. Manny Pacquiao
8. Winky Wright
9. Antonio Tarver
10. Ricky Hatton

There are lots of big names in boxing today, just not so much in the heavy weight division, for one reason or another, and there have also been some fantastic knockouts in recent years. Did you witness the Corrales, Castillo slugfest last year, in which Corrales gets knocked down 3 times in one round only to get back up and knock Castillo out? I agree with a lot of what you say, but

an you name another sport that asks fans to drop $50 bucks on two guys we've never seen fight, but we are told that it's the fight of the decade for a belt that we have never heard of

If you have never heard of Oscar de la Hoya and Floyd Mayweather Jr before this past Saturday nite then are you really one to be judging boxing and telling us how to fix it? But then again, I'm a huge fan of boxing, and I know that there are several other avenues for true boxing fans to catch boxing without having to only watch them on PPV. Both HBO and Showtime feature boxing on their respective channels almost every month. This is a good way to catch fights with boxers that are both well known but fighting an unkown and therefore doesn't warrant a PPV attraction and to catch the rising stars. I can remember watching Jermaine Taylor fight on HBO and even on ESPN friday nite fights before anyone knew who he was. ESPN is another avenue, they usually have friday nite fights every week and sometimes on Tuesday nites, this is a great way to catch the up and coming fighters, as I remember watching Jermaine Taylor on there.

The bottom line is that if you only watch boxing when a huge event is broadcast on PPV, then you have no one to blame but yourself for why you don't know much about boxing.

I am 34 years old and have been watching boxing ever since I can remember, because of my father who was a huge fan. Back then, in the late 70's and early 80's, you could catch fights pretty much every weekend on network TV, but to be fair that was before cable became ubiquitous. It is hardly fair to complain about boxing not being on network tv anymore when I just mentioned two channels that it is on that 99% of the people out there have. I love boxing and will be a fan till the day I die.

I say good riddance to a truly brutal, dehumanizing "sport." Nothing says "culture" like bashing another guy's face in.

I couldn't agree more.

Boxing is a highly misunderstood sport and I contend that it is one of the most physically demanding sports around. It takes a very high level of physical fitness to be able to step into the ring and go 12 rounds with another individual.

Umm, so what?

If you feel this way about boxing, do you feel the same way about Karate or Tae Kwan do, or Do Re Mi?

Yes, absolutely.

In baseball and basketball, you have games. In tennis and golf, you have matches. In boxing, you have fights. Any sport where the contest is a fight is inherently barbaric. We, as a culture, should move on.

And by the way, Phaedrus, am I missing something, or are the three channels that you mentioned in your comment HBO, Showtime, and ESPN? Are you seriously claiming that 99% of people have two of those three channels? Seriously??

Diego CorralesRIP Chico.

We, as a culture, should move on.Please feel free to move on if you wish, but please do not attempt to impose your opinions of culture on others. Boxing is a sport and is here to stay.

In boxing, you also have matches. You can call them fights if you wish, but the bottom line is this. If you don't like boxing and think it is barbaric, then so be it, don't watch it. But how arrogant one has to be to contend that we as a society should move on!! Who the hell are you? The culture police? Don't like it? Don't watch it. It's really as simple as that.

And yes, I'm claiming that the vast majority of people in the US today have either Satellite television or cable, ESPN comes standard and HBO is pretty much ubiquitous. If it wasn't then how do you explain the wild popularity of the Sopranos and Sex and the City? Which brings up another point, with all the gratuitous violence on TV today, such as the Sopranos, CSI and the like, you really want to complain about a sport? A sport which is refereed? For all the violence you claim boxing contains, I contend that it is very tame by comparison to most television. It is not just two people beating each other to a bloody pulp, if you think so, you have boxing confused with UCF. Boxing has referees who can and do stop matches if anyone even looks like they might get hurt. I have seen many fights where the fighter who lost due to a stoppage was adamantly upset, but the whole point is to keep them safe. Boxing has rules and regulations just like any other sport.

Boxing is an olympic sport for Christs sake.

I don't think Christ would approve of boxing, now that you mention it.

Please feel free to move on if you wish, but please do not attempt to impose your opinions of culture on others.

How, excatly, is offering a differing opinion in a public forum "imposing" an opinion? There used to be this thing free speech in America.... nevermind.

No matter how regulated, the 'sport' is about beating the crap out of the other guy. When a condition of victory is knocking the other guy unconscious, it is a brutal sport. I feel the same way about any martial art. I would watch curling before I watch any of that junk. But that's just me, I won't judge.

No matter how regulated, the 'sport' is about beating the crap out of the other guy. When a condition of victory is knocking the other guy unconscious, it is a brutal sport. I feel the same way about any martial art.

Seriously,
you need to read "fight club"

If you can't see the beauty in two human beings willing to risk everything in ANY activity, you're missing out on an important aspect of humanity.

And yes, I'm claiming that the vast majority of people in the US today have either Satellite television or cable, ESPN comes standard and HBO is pretty much ubiquitous.

ESPN claims penetration into about 92% of American households. That number is probably on the high side (considering the source—remember, there's a reason it was a big deal that Monday Night Football moved from a broadcast network to a cable channel, and there's a reason that no one really cares about cable ratings). HBO says it has 28MM subscribers. That's barely one in four households. One in four. I would say then that 99% and your use of the word 'ubiquitous' were just a wee bit off.

For all the violence you claim boxing contains, I contend that it is very tame by comparison to most television.

Umm, except that boxing is, ya know, real. And I don't remember defending the violence on television anywhere. Ever. In my life. Though I will just slightly here: Have you never seen The Sopranos? If you have, you might want to look the word 'gratuitous' up before you go bandying it about again.

Boxing is an olympic sport for Christs sake.

Wow. Who in the hell cares about that?

Seriously, you need to read "fight club"

If you can't see the beauty in two human beings willing to risk everything in ANY activity, you're missing out on an important aspect of humanity.

I'm a big fan of Fight Club (the book, not the movie so much), and I still feel the way I've been saying I feel here. And I absolutely do not see the beauty in two human beings being willing to risk 'everything,' as you say, for an increasingly irrelevant, Neanderthal sport.

And I absolutely do not see the beauty in two human beings being willing to risk 'everything,' as you say, for an increasingly irrelevant, Neanderthal sport. Not as increasingly irrelevant as you would like to hope or claim. The fight in question set the record for PPV buys for a boxing match.

There is a big difference in saying that you yourself do not like boxing because you find it to be violent, but calling it a neanderthal sport for one, is basically criticizing all those who do like it as neanderthals and calling for us a culture to move on is calling us who do like boxing uncultured. Get it?! You are free to not like boxing all you want, but it is here to stay, whether you like it or not, it is a sport, and if you say that again about my sport, I will knock your ass out, so then you will know how cultured it truly is to be rendered unconscious. Obviously the last part was a joke.

I'm just saying that there are lots of people who don't like boxing and who share your opinions of it. Obviously there are MILLIONS of people who share my love of boxing. Ridiculing us is really counter productive to your point. I don't particularly like to watch tennis or golf, but if you did, I wouldn't ridicule you as a boring old dolt, and say that we as a society should move past this sleep inducing idea of a sport.

And you are the one that started this whole argument about certain cable channels not being in the vast majority of homes. You found proof that ESPN is in 92%, I exagerated and said 99, sue me. By my calculations, that is STILL in any one's vocabulary considered the vast majority of homes.

And as far as neanderthal, tell that to the Klitzchko brothers, Vitali and Vladimir, both from the Ukraine, both speak half a dozen languages and both possess PhD's.

From wikipedia,

Klitschko began campaigning for mayor of Kyiv shortly after his retirement. Klitschko lost the election to Leonid Chernovetsky but placed second with 26% of the vote, ahead of the incumbent Oleksandr Omelchenko. Klitschko campaigned on an anti-corruption platform associated with Pora party. Analysts stated his relatively late entry into the campaign might have cost him votes. Still, he was was elected as a people's deputy to Kiev City Council.

Both Vitali and his brother are avid chess players, along with former champ Lennox Lewis. Vitali is a friend of former chess champ Garry Kasparov and the two have played. His quote on chess: "Chess is similar to boxing. You need to develop a strategy, and you need to think two or three steps ahead about what your opponent is doing. You have to be smart. But what's the difference between chess and boxing? In chess, nobody is an expert, but everybody plays. In boxing everybody is an expert, but nobody fights."

Does this sound like a neanderthal to you?

George Foreman is an ordained minister as well, and would highly disagree and would take umbrage at your notion that Jesus would not approve of boxing.

Just have to jump into the ring again here. I am truly a huge boxing fan and think that boxing is THE most beautiful sport there is. I have always thought that the mark of a true man, is the one that take punishment, not the one that can dish it out. Boxing is so much more than just two guys getting into the ring, and nowadays you even have women in the ring, with the goal of bashing each other's face in and/or rendering the other guy/gal unconscious. It truly is a sweet science, and you have to be a fan I guess to appreciate that aspect. What Mayweather was able to do Oscar was a part of that sweet science. Can anyone in their right minds claim that he beat Oscar's face in? No, he boxed and he won. That's what boxing is. Boxing is actually very rarely the knockouts that become the fact of boxing to the layman or what you see in Rocky. Boxing is about hitting the other opponent and scoring points without being hit in return. You have to anticipate what your opponent is going to do before he does it. It is a very spiritual sport in that and many other regards. Many boxers consult with spiritualists and relaxation experts before fights. I took Tae Kwan Do as a child and we were taught to always watch your opponents eyes, because in the eyes, you can anticipate what the other is going to do a few micro seconds before he does. In boxing you basically have two very different kinds and styles of fighter. You have the Mike Tyson types, who are very strong and with lethal knock out power. These are the ones that sell massive amounts of tickets to mostly laymen, those who otherwise would never watch a fight. I contend it is the non boxing fan who is the true neanderthal, because just as in this past Saturday's fight, they are the ones that came in droves, hoping to see blood. Us true boxing fans are happy to watch a fight turn into a chess match, which this one pretty much was. Boxing is beautiful and you have to watch it to understand it. I consider myself cultured and I love boxing. I would not enjoy watching lions rip people to shreds in a coliseum and I take offense, major umbrage, at being called uncultured or a neanderthal.

There is a big difference in saying that you yourself do not like boxing because you find it to be violent, but calling it a neanderthal sport for one, is basically criticizing all those who do like it as neanderthals and calling for us a culture to move on is calling us who do like boxing uncultured. Get it?!

Yeah. I'm the one who said it. I am glad that you understood what I meant, though.

I exagerated and said 99, sue me. By my calculations, that is STILL in any one's vocabulary considered the vast majority of homes.

Right, except that you said 99% of people had two of those channels. My point was that 99% of people don't even have one of those channels, and it's barely one in four that have two of them. I'll say that again: One in four. That's fewer people than still approve of the job that Bush is doing. That's quite a bit fewer than 99 out of 100, methinks.

And as far as neanderthal, tell that to the Klitzchko brothers, Vitali and Vladimir, both from the Ukraine, both speak half a dozen languages and both possess PhD's.

I didn't say that boxers are Neanderthals. I said it's a Neanderthal sport. The word is an adjective as well.

Here's the point: You're watching two people fight. As entertainment. Enough said.

————

And by the way, a lot of the stuff you said there wasn't a response to anything I said. You might want to indicate to whom you're responding, just in the interest of clarity.

Not as increasingly irrelevant as you would like to hope or claim. The fight in question set the record for PPV buys for a boxing match.

It's a blip. The trendline is certainly headed downward, hence the title and subject of this article.

Here's the point: You're watching two people fight. As entertainment. Enough said.Saying that boxing is just fighting is like saying that a classical ballet is just dancing.

I didn't say that boxers are Neanderthals. I said it's a Neanderthal sport.To your opinion that boxing is a Neanderthal sport, but the participant are not; please explain why non-Neanderthals would choose to participate in a Neanderthal activity. If an activity was truly Neanderthal, by making it my primary focus I should then be considered Neanderthal.

It's a blip. The trendline is certainly headed downward, hence the title and subject of this article.May I have some proof that this is true. Don't believe everything you read. I have been hearing of boxing's imminent demise for the last 10 years. When HBO and Showtime stop airing matches I will begin to believe. Sure boxing is not as popular as baseball like it once was, but it is very far from dying.

grey, why don't you stop contradicting yourself, first you imply that I am correct in assuming that you are calling boxing fans neanderthals:

I am glad that you understood what I meant, though.

And then in the very self same comment you say thus:

didn't say that boxers are Neanderthals. I said it's a Neanderthal sport. The word is an adjective as well.

So which is it grey? Or are you saying that boxers themselves are not neanderthals but the fans are?

You are arguing a silly argument about how many people in America have HBO. I merely made the point that there are several other alternatives to watching huge PPV events on PPV, namely HBO, Showtime and ESPN.

And for you blanket assessment that the trendline is heading downward, do you have any proof of this or are you just throwing @!$%# to see if some of it will stick? Even if you were to prove that viewership is down, is that supposed to make me stop watching myself?

Saying that boxing is just fighting is like saying that a classical ballet is just dancing.

I don't disagree with that. I also didn't say that boxing is just fighting. My point is that it is fighting.

please explain why non-Neanderthals would choose to participate in a Neanderthal activity.

I have no idea. Having said that, no one should ever want to inflict pain on anther individual. Period. Still, though, I'm not about to call an individual that I don't know a Neanderthal. I am, however, comfortable calling a group of people barbaric in this one respect.

May I have some proof that this is true.

Sure.

Sure boxing is not as popular as baseball like it once was,

That's what one would call a downward trendline. I don't, though, remember characterizing boxing as 'dying.'

Or are you saying that boxers themselves are not neanderthals but the fans are?

Yes. Well, more specifically, I'm saying that fans are and that the Klizchtko brothers aren't—necessarily. I've never met them.

You are arguing a silly argument about how many people in America have HBO.

Let's go over this again.

I merely made the point that there are several other alternatives to watching huge PPV events on PPV, namely HBO, Showtime and ESPN.

No you didn't. You said:

It is hardly fair to complain about boxing not being on network tv anymore when I just mentioned two channels that it is on that 99% of the people out there have.

And then I said:

[Am] I missing something, or are the three channels that you mentioned in your comment HBO, Showtime, and ESPN? Are you seriously claiming that 99% of people have two of those three channels? Seriously??

just to make sure that you weren't writing hyperbolically. And then you said:

And yes, I'm claiming that the vast majority of people in the US today have either Satellite television or cable, ESPN comes standard and HBO is pretty much ubiquitous.

Which just isn't right. All you have to do here is accept that you were wrong in saying that 99% of people have two channels to watch boxing on. Go with 'the vast majority of people have access to boxing on TV' or on a channel or something like that, and you'll be all set.

Even if you were to prove that viewership is down, is that supposed to make me stop watching myself?

Nope. You can do whatever you want, Phaedrus, and you can be as barbaric as you want to be. I do, though, hope that our society moves away from this sort of thing as a source of entertainment. Sadly, I think a big part of the reason boxing has lost a lot of its popularity is because it isn't a barbaric enough sport. I think the resurgence of wrestling and the big growth in popularity of Ultimate Fighting (and even the popularity of things like Jackass, Bumfights, Backyard Wrestling—even Faces of Death) are related to the declining popularity of boxing and are indicative of the turn our culture is actually taking.

All you have to do here is accept that you were wrong in saying that 99% of people have two channels to watch boxing on. Go with 'the vast majority of people have access to boxing on TV' or on a channel or something like that, and you'll be all set.

Actually, I did just that. All you have to do is accept that that is what I was trying to say and what I did say.

You found proof that ESPN is in 92%, I exagerated and said 99, sue me. By my calculations, that is STILL in any one's vocabulary considered the vast majority of homes.

Having said that, no one should ever want to inflict pain on anther individual. Period.The goal of boxing is not to inflict pain upon your opponent, although it is often an end result. That being said, many other sports have pain as an end result, are you against those sports as well?

That's what one would call a downward trendline. I don't, though, remember characterizing boxing as 'dying.'Yes, you are correct, your characterized it as increasing irrelevant, and success of the fight in question to be a blip. In your opinion then, it has been on a downward trend since the 1920s. Unfortunately that does not constitute proof. I am looking for proof that boxing is increasingly irrelevant and that the success of this fight was an anomaly.

Actually, Oscar and Mayweather weighed 154. Just to be a stickler. And have you ever actually watched a boxing match between 135 pound fighters? Those little buggers pack a punch.

At the official weigh-in Oscar weighed 154, and PBF 150. Fight night PBF had dropped 2bls to 148 and Oscar looked like had rehydrated to around +160.

There are millions of fans who would beg to differ with you. Just because it is dead in your mind, does not make it so in reality.

For a sport that is allegedly dead it is generating a whole lot of money.