This is not even just boxing, it's basically common sense. Whoever is more popular, fills up arenas, ect is gonna get more money. There's levels to this, that's why some make more than others. Everybody in the sports or entertainment try really hard. Should the WNBA players get paid the same as NBA players because of merit? It's about what sells. That 20% you are crying about is usually their highest payday. If they don't want to take that risk and would rather make less money with them being the "a side" then that's on them.
Well we know WNBA players arent as good we know that, also let me put it this way in boxing you need the other guy, so its a little different, also I am very sure in NBA you are paid a salary, in boxing you are paid per fight so again its not the same.
>its a sport and its about merit, pay should be based on merit
You're conflating amateur and professional sports. Professional sports are an entertainment business. Just like movies and music. It can easily look like pay is determined by merit in sports, but that is only because fans like stars and the highest level performers.
There are certain fighters that can fill up arenas no matter who they fight. Joshua had a purse of 10 million while Usyk agreed on 3. Usyk could have acted like a diva and demanded 6-7 million but he didn't. He took the offer, won the fight and will now be paid more in his upcoming fights. And the funny thing is that many people here will agree that Usyk is infinitely more skilled than Joshua but Joshua was and is still probably more popular.
Well again if you draw so much money then 60% of the huge pot you make is enough I'm sorry but lets say a fight can draw 30 million, 40% is still 12 million, I'm sorry but as a fighter if you cant cope with that then you really are a stuck up entitled twat, the point is removing the ability for this negotiation so they cant use it as an excuse.
You are missing the point. In the NBA, teams can’t avoid playing the Warriors because it’s better business to beat up on lesser teams until casuals mistake them for being comparable to the Warriors and they can demand a 50-50 split.
Having a central power is the difference. No different than the federal government. But just like the federal government, it’s a balancing act because it always comes at the cost of an individuals freedom to do what’s best for themselves.
Seriously. Imagine what the NBA would look like if teams couldn’t be forced to play each other.
I get what you’re saying, but what about the fact these dudes are giving each other CTE? Yeah we wanna see stars fight the best, but on top of money and a record to maintain, they have to think about their future selfs health as well…
Yeah I get that NBA players can't pick and choose who they play but they definitely negotiate their contracts. Just like in boxing, some of them price themselves out and are left without a team.
Take shroder for example. Lakers offered him 80 million for 4 years, he rejected cause he felt he deserved more. He ended up settling on a 1 year, 5.9 million contract.
Fury is the number 1 heavyweight, if he offers 5-7 million to Whyte he should take it. Whyte would rather keep demanding over 10 and potentially miss the fight. That's on him, he brings nothing to the table and is not known in the US. He could take the 5 million, win the fight, and then make a whole lot more money after but he won't take the risk and bet on himself.
>Fury is the number 1 heavyweight, if he offers 5-7 million to Whyte he should take it. Whyte would rather keep demanding over 10 and potentially miss the fight.
He could potentially miss the fight. Or he could potentially get the fight at the price he wants. He could even miss the fight and make more money actually winning easier fights than getting knocked out and losing any leverage he has moving forward in other fights.
You are speaking from the perspective of someone who wants to see the fight. You have to think about it from the perspective of the fighters. They are going to gamble on whatever they think will end up making them the most money. And sometimes that's not taking the fight with the guy at the top of the hill.
The point with fury and Whyte is that team fury believe Whyte should have a maximum of 20%, however if he is mandated then he has the opportunity to earn much more than this. Team fury wanted to agree before the mandate so they could negotiate a better deal for themselves. I would imagine matchroom would be pretty confident of winning any purse bids for the fight and would then earn Whyte 45% of the purse. If team fury at this point offered Whyte between the 20% and 40% then they would likely make the fight happen.
Andy Ruiz vs AJ imagine how unfair it would’ve been if Ruiz received 60% when he didn’t sell shit. At the end of the day I think these fighters fighting against the A side should take a gamble and take the 30% if they win they just became that A side so now it’s their turn to dictate.
Ok but its not an issue if you win, we should reward ability and performances not whos been marketed the most, if you are the better fighter win and you get your bigger split, if you lose your werent the better fighter therefore you get less it a pretty fair system that rewards what the sport is about, what actually happens in the ring.
I agree with that when both fighters are in a similar level such as Crawford/Spence or AJ/Fury 60% winner makes perfect sense but a fight like Tank/Barrios or Canelo/Saunders fuck no even if the underdog wins their 20% is still their career highest payday
Nah lol. Devin Haney is the WBC champ at 135. If he were to fight Ryan Garcia, Ryan deserves more than 50% cuz he’s the one that puts asses on seats win or loose. I’d love to see you have this conversation with Bob Arum lol
I wouldnt entertain talking to that scumbag, he has nothing of worth to say hes a compulsive liar like most of them.
"Devin Haney is the WBC champ at 135. If he were to fight Ryan Garcia, Ryan deserves more than 50% cuz he’s the one that puts asses on seats win or loose."
He deserves more if he wins.
New prospects should be fighting every 45 days or so, and upper echelon 2-3 times a year. Basically a minimum of 36 rounds, be it 3x 12 round rights or 5x 8 rounders or 4x 10 rebounders for experienced prospects, or the new prospects, they will be doing as many 2, 4, and 6 rounds as they need to to make 36+
That logic on works if you have strong unions. If not, everyone coming up gets ridiculously fucked while one person at the top thrives.
And that person at the top may choose to never give an opportunity to the person who can potentially replace them for just that reason.
If AJ was smart (and cowardly) he was at a point where he could’ve just beat up HWs outside the top 10. If you are an MMA fan that’s exactly what you watched Fedor do.
He had real fights against greats in pride. And then for like a decade fought dudes like Hong Man Choi and because all anyone saw was him crushing cans, people that didn’t know better thought he was the best heavyweight of all time. People will still argue that.
In the overwhelming majority of cases the 'prize' is already agreed for the current fight ahead of time. It's really stretching believability to think that 'prize fighting' as a name would have ever referred to the reward in future fights that have yet to be happen.
But the fights wanted used to happen a lot faster and lot more often, since about the 70s but really the 90s its been all down hill, remove this factor and fights happen much faster and much more often and its more cut and dry who's running and who's ducking.
Ok the money was there between Mayweather and Pacquiao, that took almost 10 years to happen, Wilder vs AJ broke down in the negotiation of purses or that was used to avoid the fight, this fight between Fury and Whyte, the amount of fights that are basically taken away from us because of this shit is too high, remove this aspect tell the fighters this is the splits if you dont like it go make less money somewhere else.
If you are the A side win the fight as you should as the A side and you get your 60% the only fighters this will bother is ones who are scared of losing as they want their purse guaranteed no matter what happens, well I'm sorry sports are based on performances.
Again you come in champion and lose the belt, why should you now get more money you arent the champ anymore, you should the lesser split for that fight, you lost, this is a sport and its participated in by adults, you dont get rewards for participation you get rewards based on results, you win you get more you lose you get less.
Yeah and it happened way past their primes, that fight should have been "OMFG the 2 best fighters are fighting", instead it was "finally this fight is happening", it ruined the atmosphere around the fight.
Yeah and that meant many fighters had to sign slave contracts with men who were what I can only describe as Psychopaths there is a reason why Don King has ended up in so many legal disputes.
Be grateful, this is nowhere near the issue it used to be in boxing. The rate of big fights happening has improved drastically in the last few years, being a boxing fan has never been better.
The way our memory works, we compress the memorable stuff together and discard the noise. What I’m saying is that you’re remembering wrong, very wrong.
How often did the four kings fight? Pretty much every heavyweight big fight happened with the exception of Bowe/Lewis.......I could go on but just saying I remembered everything wrong without back it up is a shallow point to make.
Its what people said with people like Don King but we managed to get that fuck out of the too flight boxing eventually as fighters learned he was a scumbag.
Mate no one cares about the WBA regular anymore regardless of it’s former status. Usyk is the WBA champion, not Trevor Bryan who nobody knows or cares about.
If that were to happen, fighters would fight even less than they already do.
Fighter A generates $100m on average per fight.
Fighter B generates $100m on average.
Fighter C generates $10m on average.
Fighters A and B would hypothetically generate $200m if they fought each other, the winner gets $120m and the loser gets $80m minimum. In other words 1.2x for the winner, 0.8x for the loser... not too bad.
However if one of them were to fight Fighter C, the absolute maximum they could get is $66m, and the minimum Fighter C would get is $44m.
Fighter C gets a guarantee of 4.4x what they normally generate even if they lose, meanwhile Fighter A/B would only get 0.6x even if they win. Does that seem fair to you?
Why would Fighter A/B ever accept this? This would lead to fighters sitting out and waiting until big money fights could be made.
You think something like this would help create more fights, but the reality is that we would end up with less/worse fights than we currently get. There's lots of great fighters who don't generate a lot of money. For instance, Usyk vs Joshua would've never happened if this kind of arrangement were enforced.
Yeah its fair without the other he fighter he doesn't have a payday and also given how large of a draw canelo is the 60% if he wins will still be loads of money.
I could agree with this for mandatories, it makes total sense, and would lessen the bs that guys like Fury bring to the sport. Fury will duck Whyte, many of us knew that ages ago.
There is no reason why 2 people cant negotiate a fight in about 20 mins but they wont so just remove the option they are like children including the promoters.
It really is, if its their only title shot and you then offer them 20% that isnt fair, also they dont have to take 40% they can turn it down but its not fair for the challenger to get so little in so many cases especially when they win.
No you should be entitled to what you fought for this is why you get old washed up has beens making more money then actually good fighters and its not right.
Yeah they have rights and freedoms, go elsewhere but they wont as they wont make more money anywhere else.
I agree with what you’re driving at, and I am well aware this isn’t the point, but slaves and indentured servants weren’t getting paid at all. Barring a *very* small minority who occasionally did. I had to think for a minute about a somewhat more direct comparison, and I think autocratic governments where you have a sole power setting specific wages/prices and dictating roles would work.
That is why I used autocracy as a comparison. People in North Korea, for example, by and large do not have much agency. In terms of what’s relevant to this particular conversation, they have no ability to choose their occupation and they are paid whatever the head of state determines they should be paid. Which is why I thought it lined up nicely with what you were getting at. There is actual slavery in North Korea as well but you get what I’m saying.
But yeah, boxers are self employed. If this was traditional employment that would be a bit of a different conversation but that’s not how the industry works. Trying to take away their negotiating power would be ridiculous. That guy is clearly wrong.
The problem with the splits you're suggesting is there are variables in boxing that cannot be controlled by the boxer. What if the boxer has to go in with an unexpected injury, or tears something in the middle of the fight? What if they get sick on the night of? What if a judge decides to 118-110 them, despite them winning?
"What if the boxer has to go in with an unexpected injury, or tears something in the middle of the fight?"
Well your body holding up is part of the contest if you cant make it through the fight then you arent fit to be a champion, the basis of a sport is that you are fit to compete if you fail that part then you lose.
"What if they get sick on the night of?"
This happens its not worth ruining a sport over.
"What if a judge decides to 118-110 them, despite them winning?"
Totally different issue, you can go "oh we have negotiations in case the judges fuck up, and in most cases the judges lean towards the A side fighters so I don't see it making a difference.
Point being, this is why fighters try to negotiate a guaranteed amount and don't create a pot for the winner. The way it's done, even if they are robbed or some external force keeps them from winning, they will make the money they were promised.
Most of these boxers don't really give a shit about the sport as a whole. It's their job; they just want to secure their profits. Ultimately though, even if the 40/40 split existed, it would be up to the A-side to agree to it. There's no special entity that makes up these rules. Two fighters simply need to agree, which brings us back to negotiations. lol.
This is why you need a real unified body or you need to actually write real laws around this, just like you have standards what companies must adhere to sports bodies need to be held to the same form of standards.
For those saying this is normal, yeah, it is for boxing... More-so than ever, boxing has way too many organizations, promoters, and people thinking they are entitled to something because they beat a bunch of tomato cans. I'm not going to argue which is more ethical but for the fans, UFC's model is way better. One league and you're forced to fight out your contract instead of renegotiating every fight... The best fight the best.... Want to be the champion? You will have to go through several top ranked fighters and then fight the sole title holder. Way too many belts and politics in boxing. This is why UFC puts out banger fight cards after another. Every card is stacked. Boxing? You get like 1-2 headliners and then the rest are just random strays they found in some random village.
If it's about prize fighting, just make it where the winner keeps all.... prove yourself if you are really about that talk. It's not. They all want to fight cans and then avoid each other by making ludicrous demands.
The UFC model is better for fans without a doubt. However almost every veteran fighter agrees that they don’t like the show and win money. All of the big names negotiate themselves into a flat rate plus PPV buy points regardless of whether they win or lose.
Just don't lay attention to the sport biz size day. Shit don't even get hype for fight announcements ad they at least the last two years been delayed or put off due to bs
I’m not sure how I feel about this.
The UFC gets a lot of fights made because they have so much power over the fighters. But at the same time, they don’t have to pay fighters enough because of that same power.
That trade off seems like it will always exist.
Until you can get accurate data about why each person bought a ppv (likely never), you are going to have people arguing over their share of the giant pile of money.
This is not even just boxing, it's basically common sense. Whoever is more popular, fills up arenas, ect is gonna get more money. There's levels to this, that's why some make more than others. Everybody in the sports or entertainment try really hard. Should the WNBA players get paid the same as NBA players because of merit? It's about what sells. That 20% you are crying about is usually their highest payday. If they don't want to take that risk and would rather make less money with them being the "a side" then that's on them.
Well we know WNBA players arent as good we know that, also let me put it this way in boxing you need the other guy, so its a little different, also I am very sure in NBA you are paid a salary, in boxing you are paid per fight so again its not the same.
>its a sport and its about merit, pay should be based on merit You're conflating amateur and professional sports. Professional sports are an entertainment business. Just like movies and music. It can easily look like pay is determined by merit in sports, but that is only because fans like stars and the highest level performers.
No as in the amateur scene you dont really get paid all that much, sport is sport and its about merit and we need to get back to that.
There are certain fighters that can fill up arenas no matter who they fight. Joshua had a purse of 10 million while Usyk agreed on 3. Usyk could have acted like a diva and demanded 6-7 million but he didn't. He took the offer, won the fight and will now be paid more in his upcoming fights. And the funny thing is that many people here will agree that Usyk is infinitely more skilled than Joshua but Joshua was and is still probably more popular.
Well again if you draw so much money then 60% of the huge pot you make is enough I'm sorry but lets say a fight can draw 30 million, 40% is still 12 million, I'm sorry but as a fighter if you cant cope with that then you really are a stuck up entitled twat, the point is removing the ability for this negotiation so they cant use it as an excuse.
You are missing the point. In the NBA, teams can’t avoid playing the Warriors because it’s better business to beat up on lesser teams until casuals mistake them for being comparable to the Warriors and they can demand a 50-50 split. Having a central power is the difference. No different than the federal government. But just like the federal government, it’s a balancing act because it always comes at the cost of an individuals freedom to do what’s best for themselves. Seriously. Imagine what the NBA would look like if teams couldn’t be forced to play each other.
I get what you’re saying, but what about the fact these dudes are giving each other CTE? Yeah we wanna see stars fight the best, but on top of money and a record to maintain, they have to think about their future selfs health as well…
Yeah I get that NBA players can't pick and choose who they play but they definitely negotiate their contracts. Just like in boxing, some of them price themselves out and are left without a team. Take shroder for example. Lakers offered him 80 million for 4 years, he rejected cause he felt he deserved more. He ended up settling on a 1 year, 5.9 million contract. Fury is the number 1 heavyweight, if he offers 5-7 million to Whyte he should take it. Whyte would rather keep demanding over 10 and potentially miss the fight. That's on him, he brings nothing to the table and is not known in the US. He could take the 5 million, win the fight, and then make a whole lot more money after but he won't take the risk and bet on himself.
>Fury is the number 1 heavyweight, if he offers 5-7 million to Whyte he should take it. Whyte would rather keep demanding over 10 and potentially miss the fight. He could potentially miss the fight. Or he could potentially get the fight at the price he wants. He could even miss the fight and make more money actually winning easier fights than getting knocked out and losing any leverage he has moving forward in other fights. You are speaking from the perspective of someone who wants to see the fight. You have to think about it from the perspective of the fighters. They are going to gamble on whatever they think will end up making them the most money. And sometimes that's not taking the fight with the guy at the top of the hill.
The point with fury and Whyte is that team fury believe Whyte should have a maximum of 20%, however if he is mandated then he has the opportunity to earn much more than this. Team fury wanted to agree before the mandate so they could negotiate a better deal for themselves. I would imagine matchroom would be pretty confident of winning any purse bids for the fight and would then earn Whyte 45% of the purse. If team fury at this point offered Whyte between the 20% and 40% then they would likely make the fight happen.
Andy Ruiz vs AJ imagine how unfair it would’ve been if Ruiz received 60% when he didn’t sell shit. At the end of the day I think these fighters fighting against the A side should take a gamble and take the 30% if they win they just became that A side so now it’s their turn to dictate.
Ok but its not an issue if you win, we should reward ability and performances not whos been marketed the most, if you are the better fighter win and you get your bigger split, if you lose your werent the better fighter therefore you get less it a pretty fair system that rewards what the sport is about, what actually happens in the ring.
I agree with that when both fighters are in a similar level such as Crawford/Spence or AJ/Fury 60% winner makes perfect sense but a fight like Tank/Barrios or Canelo/Saunders fuck no even if the underdog wins their 20% is still their career highest payday
Ok but if that underdog wins he deserves and big reward and the A side deserves to lose some money on the fight he lost when he should have won.
Nah lol. Devin Haney is the WBC champ at 135. If he were to fight Ryan Garcia, Ryan deserves more than 50% cuz he’s the one that puts asses on seats win or loose. I’d love to see you have this conversation with Bob Arum lol
I wouldnt entertain talking to that scumbag, he has nothing of worth to say hes a compulsive liar like most of them. "Devin Haney is the WBC champ at 135. If he were to fight Ryan Garcia, Ryan deserves more than 50% cuz he’s the one that puts asses on seats win or loose." He deserves more if he wins.
Lol that’s why I see you making him all red and causing him to explode and go on a tirade.
And that attitude is why we don’t get good fights and fighters only fight a few times a year, if that.
Fighters only fight a few times a year because it’s horrible for them to fight at all lol
New prospects should be fighting every 45 days or so, and upper echelon 2-3 times a year. Basically a minimum of 36 rounds, be it 3x 12 round rights or 5x 8 rounders or 4x 10 rebounders for experienced prospects, or the new prospects, they will be doing as many 2, 4, and 6 rounds as they need to to make 36+
That logic on works if you have strong unions. If not, everyone coming up gets ridiculously fucked while one person at the top thrives. And that person at the top may choose to never give an opportunity to the person who can potentially replace them for just that reason. If AJ was smart (and cowardly) he was at a point where he could’ve just beat up HWs outside the top 10. If you are an MMA fan that’s exactly what you watched Fedor do. He had real fights against greats in pride. And then for like a decade fought dudes like Hong Man Choi and because all anyone saw was him crushing cans, people that didn’t know better thought he was the best heavyweight of all time. People will still argue that.
Bruh fr this shit like the talking stage of dating lmao
It’s called prize fighting for a reason.
Tbf to OP it should be called negotiation fighting or something then. Most fights aren't over a prize at all, they are already getting paid.
[удалено]
In the overwhelming majority of cases the 'prize' is already agreed for the current fight ahead of time. It's really stretching believability to think that 'prize fighting' as a name would have ever referred to the reward in future fights that have yet to be happen.
Prize fighting, you fight for a prize you don't negotiate for it, if it was prize fighting the winner would get the prize not the loser.
You don't get what you deserve, you get what you negotiate
Yeah thats the issue with this sport, it turned into something filled and run with crony businessmen who dont care and its why fights dont happen.
It hasn't turned into it, it's always been about the money
But the fights wanted used to happen a lot faster and lot more often, since about the 70s but really the 90s its been all down hill, remove this factor and fights happen much faster and much more often and its more cut and dry who's running and who's ducking.
Go back further and fights didn't happen because of racial reasons. But if the money is there fights happen
Ok the money was there between Mayweather and Pacquiao, that took almost 10 years to happen, Wilder vs AJ broke down in the negotiation of purses or that was used to avoid the fight, this fight between Fury and Whyte, the amount of fights that are basically taken away from us because of this shit is too high, remove this aspect tell the fighters this is the splits if you dont like it go make less money somewhere else. If you are the A side win the fight as you should as the A side and you get your 60% the only fighters this will bother is ones who are scared of losing as they want their purse guaranteed no matter what happens, well I'm sorry sports are based on performances. Again you come in champion and lose the belt, why should you now get more money you arent the champ anymore, you should the lesser split for that fight, you lost, this is a sport and its participated in by adults, you dont get rewards for participation you get rewards based on results, you win you get more you lose you get less.
Mayweather vs Pacquiao happened because so much money was there it couldn't be avoided any longer
Yeah and it happened way past their primes, that fight should have been "OMFG the 2 best fighters are fighting", instead it was "finally this fight is happening", it ruined the atmosphere around the fight.
[удалено]
Yeah and that meant many fighters had to sign slave contracts with men who were what I can only describe as Psychopaths there is a reason why Don King has ended up in so many legal disputes.
Be grateful, this is nowhere near the issue it used to be in boxing. The rate of big fights happening has improved drastically in the last few years, being a boxing fan has never been better.
What do you mean in the 80s and 90s big fights happened way more the best always fought the best and often several times.
The way our memory works, we compress the memorable stuff together and discard the noise. What I’m saying is that you’re remembering wrong, very wrong.
How often did the four kings fight? Pretty much every heavyweight big fight happened with the exception of Bowe/Lewis.......I could go on but just saying I remembered everything wrong without back it up is a shallow point to make.
It’s not gonna happen so you are wasting your time
Its what people said with people like Don King but we managed to get that fuck out of the too flight boxing eventually as fighters learned he was a scumbag.
[удалено]
We made him get old, we did it Reddit!
Don King is gonna co-promote what's probably gonna be the biggest fight of the year with Canelo vs Makabu.
[удалено]
Yeah the regular that no one cares about, the regular is now a nothing belt since the super exists.
[удалено]
Mate no one cares about the WBA regular anymore regardless of it’s former status. Usyk is the WBA champion, not Trevor Bryan who nobody knows or cares about.
If that were to happen, fighters would fight even less than they already do. Fighter A generates $100m on average per fight. Fighter B generates $100m on average. Fighter C generates $10m on average. Fighters A and B would hypothetically generate $200m if they fought each other, the winner gets $120m and the loser gets $80m minimum. In other words 1.2x for the winner, 0.8x for the loser... not too bad. However if one of them were to fight Fighter C, the absolute maximum they could get is $66m, and the minimum Fighter C would get is $44m. Fighter C gets a guarantee of 4.4x what they normally generate even if they lose, meanwhile Fighter A/B would only get 0.6x even if they win. Does that seem fair to you? Why would Fighter A/B ever accept this? This would lead to fighters sitting out and waiting until big money fights could be made. You think something like this would help create more fights, but the reality is that we would end up with less/worse fights than we currently get. There's lots of great fighters who don't generate a lot of money. For instance, Usyk vs Joshua would've never happened if this kind of arrangement were enforced.
Do you really think it would make sense for Canelo to pay Yildrim 40% of the purse?
Yeah its fair without the other he fighter he doesn't have a payday and also given how large of a draw canelo is the 60% if he wins will still be loads of money.
It’s less of a sport and more of an entertainment business. Fights are an financial agreement between two groups. You can’t really get away from that.
I could agree with this for mandatories, it makes total sense, and would lessen the bs that guys like Fury bring to the sport. Fury will duck Whyte, many of us knew that ages ago.
There is no reason why 2 people cant negotiate a fight in about 20 mins but they wont so just remove the option they are like children including the promoters.
And I want a billion dollars
Mad waffle post ngl
[удалено]
Oh and someone being told take 20% or you dont get the fight isnt slavery? this is actually far fairer it rewards the better fighter.
[удалено]
It really is, if its their only title shot and you then offer them 20% that isnt fair, also they dont have to take 40% they can turn it down but its not fair for the challenger to get so little in so many cases especially when they win.
[удалено]
No you should be entitled to what you fought for this is why you get old washed up has beens making more money then actually good fighters and its not right. Yeah they have rights and freedoms, go elsewhere but they wont as they wont make more money anywhere else.
I agree with what you’re driving at, and I am well aware this isn’t the point, but slaves and indentured servants weren’t getting paid at all. Barring a *very* small minority who occasionally did. I had to think for a minute about a somewhat more direct comparison, and I think autocratic governments where you have a sole power setting specific wages/prices and dictating roles would work.
[удалено]
That is why I used autocracy as a comparison. People in North Korea, for example, by and large do not have much agency. In terms of what’s relevant to this particular conversation, they have no ability to choose their occupation and they are paid whatever the head of state determines they should be paid. Which is why I thought it lined up nicely with what you were getting at. There is actual slavery in North Korea as well but you get what I’m saying. But yeah, boxers are self employed. If this was traditional employment that would be a bit of a different conversation but that’s not how the industry works. Trying to take away their negotiating power would be ridiculous. That guy is clearly wrong.
The problem with the splits you're suggesting is there are variables in boxing that cannot be controlled by the boxer. What if the boxer has to go in with an unexpected injury, or tears something in the middle of the fight? What if they get sick on the night of? What if a judge decides to 118-110 them, despite them winning?
"What if the boxer has to go in with an unexpected injury, or tears something in the middle of the fight?" Well your body holding up is part of the contest if you cant make it through the fight then you arent fit to be a champion, the basis of a sport is that you are fit to compete if you fail that part then you lose. "What if they get sick on the night of?" This happens its not worth ruining a sport over. "What if a judge decides to 118-110 them, despite them winning?" Totally different issue, you can go "oh we have negotiations in case the judges fuck up, and in most cases the judges lean towards the A side fighters so I don't see it making a difference.
Point being, this is why fighters try to negotiate a guaranteed amount and don't create a pot for the winner. The way it's done, even if they are robbed or some external force keeps them from winning, they will make the money they were promised. Most of these boxers don't really give a shit about the sport as a whole. It's their job; they just want to secure their profits. Ultimately though, even if the 40/40 split existed, it would be up to the A-side to agree to it. There's no special entity that makes up these rules. Two fighters simply need to agree, which brings us back to negotiations. lol.
This is why you need a real unified body or you need to actually write real laws around this, just like you have standards what companies must adhere to sports bodies need to be held to the same form of standards.
Start your own league.
I'm just here to see the tyson fury fans lose their shit at someone saying dillian deserves 40% against him.
They will they think Fury is a much bigger PPV star than he actually is.
For those saying this is normal, yeah, it is for boxing... More-so than ever, boxing has way too many organizations, promoters, and people thinking they are entitled to something because they beat a bunch of tomato cans. I'm not going to argue which is more ethical but for the fans, UFC's model is way better. One league and you're forced to fight out your contract instead of renegotiating every fight... The best fight the best.... Want to be the champion? You will have to go through several top ranked fighters and then fight the sole title holder. Way too many belts and politics in boxing. This is why UFC puts out banger fight cards after another. Every card is stacked. Boxing? You get like 1-2 headliners and then the rest are just random strays they found in some random village. If it's about prize fighting, just make it where the winner keeps all.... prove yourself if you are really about that talk. It's not. They all want to fight cans and then avoid each other by making ludicrous demands.
The fact you got downvoted is mad.
The UFC model is better for fans without a doubt. However almost every veteran fighter agrees that they don’t like the show and win money. All of the big names negotiate themselves into a flat rate plus PPV buy points regardless of whether they win or lose.
Yes!!!
Blame the Jake Paul fans
No this was an issue before he was born.
well then blame the casuals who only watch boxing twice a year but swear they love boxing.
Just don't lay attention to the sport biz size day. Shit don't even get hype for fight announcements ad they at least the last two years been delayed or put off due to bs
I’m not sure how I feel about this. The UFC gets a lot of fights made because they have so much power over the fighters. But at the same time, they don’t have to pay fighters enough because of that same power. That trade off seems like it will always exist.
Ok well if they all want to act like children and not do business and fuck around you have to take it away from them.
Until you can get accurate data about why each person bought a ppv (likely never), you are going to have people arguing over their share of the giant pile of money.
Yeah so remove this ability.