[quote]ZEB wrote:
A bunch of mindless crap
[/quote]
Yes, wonderful Zeb. You win. Now kindly go back to gay-bashing on the politics forum. Thanks.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
A bunch of mindless crap
[/quote]
Yes, wonderful Zeb. You win. Now kindly go back to gay-bashing on the politics forum. Thanks.
[/quote]
Only if you promise to go on man-lusting after Obama.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
Zeb, your response wont really require me responding to every statement. Here’s my rebuttal:
Essentially your posts are just one huge fallacious argument.[/quote]
I can understand you giving up, but on the way out the door I don’t think it’s appropriate to lie. I’ve stated nothing that is false.
Here they are again, which one is false?
"1. The Heavy Weight Boxing Division is a joke. Most people don’t know who the champ is and couldn’t care less. There are only a small handful of recognizable names in the entire sport.
-
MMA is growing, as in taking in more ppv dollars each year, as boxing has been taking in less over the past 10-12 years. You say mma money is coming from wrestling, I think it’s obviously coming from boxing as well as other places. Is it just a coincidence that as mma has gained in popularity boxing has been losing?
-
Boxing fans are typically older (that isn’t to say boxing is void of younger fans). The most important demographic group to combat sports is the all important (male) 18-39 age group. Most of this group (those interested in combat sports) have been attracted to mma. Boxing fans are older and as they die out the interest in boxing may die with it, unless boxing does something different to rise again.
-
I’ve posted links to prove that nation wide in sports bars the new combat sport is mma. Where they used to show boxing to attract their young patrons they now show mma fights."
[quote]I can see why people liken you to a brick wall.
[/quote]
One boxing fan stated that, but, good use of hyperbole and very much expected. When you can’t refute the facts move to a personal attack.
[/quote]
Lol. You’re too much for me, I’ll admit that I’ve lost it ever since you tried to apply supply and demand to setting up super fights. The fact you’ve remained so condescending throughout this entire discussion has also humored me, but it’s a pity you can’t even logically debate any argument I make, especially since I spend maybe five minutes at most typing these up. Anyway, since you’re so dense I’ll break this down for you:
The heavyweight division isn’t the entire sport of boxing, a lack of people knowing who the champion is doesn’t mean anything. It’d be like me saying since 20 Americans can’t name one of the top 20 scorers in the English Premier League Futbol has no international appeal.
A lack of fights doesn’t prove anything either, insinuating it does is a fallacious argument. Not only is it a fallacious argument but it also shows how little you know about the business of boxing. The UFC and any other MMA organization will be dominated by a handful of elite athletes, that goes for just about every sport. There are a lot of bouts scheduled throughout the year and PPVs besides HBO but a lot goes into an HBO PPV bout: A fighter will usually have a 2-3 month training camp and 2-3 month rest period, that’s about half a year when combining the two periods of time. Let’s say a fighter could fight twice a year. The fighter’s promoter will then have to negotiate the split, venue, gloves, ring size, officials, PPV split, and date with the fighters opponent. It’s not an organization setting everything up for you.
Your constant arguments on demographics mean absolutely nothing either. UFC PPV could have two good selling cards per year and eight mediocre selling cards, the greater quantity makes it easier to outsell HBO… But that doesn’t mean that the UFC pulling fans away from boxing and there’s no data to support your claim. If your statement was true there would be a greater disparity between conflicting events. You know, since MMA appeals to the demographics and all… But to my knowledge boxing has either been equal to or outselling conflicting UFC events.
Your conclusions don’t correlate with any objective information or statistics.
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
Zeb, your response wont really require me responding to every statement. Here’s my rebuttal:
Essentially your posts are just one huge fallacious argument.[/quote]
I can understand you giving up, but on the way out the door I don’t think it’s appropriate to lie. I’ve stated nothing that is false.
Here they are again, which one is false?
"1. The Heavy Weight Boxing Division is a joke. Most people don’t know who the champ is and couldn’t care less. There are only a small handful of recognizable names in the entire sport.
-
MMA is growing, as in taking in more ppv dollars each year, as boxing has been taking in less over the past 10-12 years. You say mma money is coming from wrestling, I think it’s obviously coming from boxing as well as other places. Is it just a coincidence that as mma has gained in popularity boxing has been losing?
-
Boxing fans are typically older (that isn’t to say boxing is void of younger fans). The most important demographic group to combat sports is the all important (male) 18-39 age group. Most of this group (those interested in combat sports) have been attracted to mma. Boxing fans are older and as they die out the interest in boxing may die with it, unless boxing does something different to rise again.
-
I’ve posted links to prove that nation wide in sports bars the new combat sport is mma. Where they used to show boxing to attract their young patrons they now show mma fights."
[quote]I can see why people liken you to a brick wall.
[/quote]
One boxing fan stated that, but, good use of hyperbole and very much expected. When you can’t refute the facts move to a personal attack.
Lol. You’re too much for me, I’ll admit that I’ve lost it ever since you tried to apply supply and demand to setting up super fights.[/quote]
I stated that boxing, like any other business is predicated on supply and demand. The fact that you are laughing at this is shows your lack of understanding of business basics. Keep in mind that a freshman in High School who takes the most basic business course would learn about this stuff (shaking head).
Glad you were “humored”. However, as I just pointed out, it’s difficult to have a reasonable discussion with someone about boxing when they don’t even understand that boxing, like any other business is impacted by supply and demand. I’ve actually been kind to you, very kind.
That might be your problem, maybe you should spend perhaps 10 minutes and actually make some sense. No, better yet, don’t post anymore go read a book.
Yes, I’m so dense I had to explain point by point to you why boxing is not quite what it used to be. Your retort has basically been “nu uh”. You should just go be a fan, I’m sure you do that well.
I never said it was. Did you go to the school of Straw man arguments taught by your pea brained friend Irish?
That’s quite a statement right there. It doesn’t mean anything? Nothing at all? Huh, that’s odd because as I’ve said multiple times most people through the ages beginning with John L. himself have known who the Heavy Weight Boxing Champion of the world is. But, not many know who he is right now, but that means nothing huh? This is more of your “I say so and I’m a big fan of boxing so I must be right” logic. AND, it’s funny 
No? Huh, now I wonder how anyone would get the idea that since there were less boxing on ppv and TV in general that it is not as popular as it used to be. Oh I get it, I think I know where you’re going with this. The less a sport is on TV the MORE popular it is. Is that it? (nods head) I see, I see. Thanks again
Thank you for explaining why boxing is not doing as well as it should. Very nice explanation. You left out a few things about money hungry promotors. You also left out the lack of talent in boxing and how 47 year old Evander Holyfield and other’s in their 40’s or fast approaching that age are the only big names left. But you still did a good job. I agree boxing is dying because of this stuff and more.
But wait, business looks to demographics to determine market share and…oh wait that’s right you don’t care about business, supply and demand, market share, it’s all greek to you. Sorry I forgot. Silly me, I forgot you’re a boxing fan so you have the right to not look at facts and just believe in your heart that boxing is stronger than ever click your heels together and there you are. Yep.
Once again, if there are two or three HUGE boxing events with big names per year and let’s say 12 UFC fights and another 12-15 free mma fights on per year it would make sense that the rare boxing card with the big names would do well, and they do. But in over all dollars mma is kicking butt AND you must know that.
Every one of my original points is spot, you’ve said nothing of substance that contracts them. You didn’t even address most of them in this post. Did you avoid them because you don’t have an answer, or you couldn’t fit it all in your usual 5 minute post? Which is it? Ah never mind.
Man ZEB the average person is going to loose interest in a post if its the length of an article… I can’t even convince myself to read that.
I thought of a solution… “wait and see” I have 100 bucks saying boxing/mma will thrive in their own respects… neither is going to die…
[quote]Amiright wrote:
Man ZEB the average person is going to loose interest in a post if its the length of an article… I can’t even convince myself to read that.[/quote]
I think you’re right, but this is a multifaceted issue, also I’ve always been long winded, sorry.
As I stated, and restated several times, I actually like the sport of boxing and always have. I hope that boxing does thrive, eventually, somehow.
Why are you trying to apply supply and demand to boxing? It’s not a practical business, it’s a sport. Besides that there are many bouts per year but you’re only focusing on super fights. It’d be like me saying that since the Super Bowl is the most profitable NFL game a lack of Super Bowls shows the NFL isn’t doing well.
I’m really enjoying your posts. You imply that people[Americans] not knowing who the heavyweight champion is equates to boxing being a dead sport, then when I point out the absurdity of it you say I’m trying to strawman. You could always just ignore the vast majority of my post[s] and continue to make demographics arguments even thought there’s no data to support your conclusion/theory. So what, your main argument is a intellectually dishonest argument?
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
Why are you trying to apply supply and demand to boxing? It’s not a practical business, it’s a sport.[/quote]
It’s the “business” of boxing that is interesting I think. Supply and demand effects every single thing that is offered to the public. If there is no demand to see the sport bad enough to pay for it at some level then there will be no supply of that sport. The same thing goes for every product sold. Who wouldn’t you want to be around 1900? The owner of a buggy whip company. Once the automobile became popular there was no demand for buggy whips were there?
With boxing I think there is still demand, great demand, just not as great as it once was for the myriad of reasons which I have already given.
I agree boxing is far from dead and I never said it was. But the demand is NOT as great as it used to be.
No, no I stated much more than that. People not knowing (most not caring) who the HW champ is is only symptomatic of a deeper problem that boxing must wrestle with. Be clear though it was only one point. ONE.
No, actually I am correct in every single point that I’ve presented. It is you who have not been able to give any legitimate answers to my final points. Shall I restate them? No, I’m sure no one wants to read anymore about this. I’m even getting a little sick of it myself and I have pretty good posting stamina.
I’ll change the subject since we’re never going to agree.
How long have you been a boxing fan?
Do you ever watch mma?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
Why are you trying to apply supply and demand to boxing? It’s not a practical business, it’s a sport.[/quote]
It’s the “business” of boxing that is interesting I think. Supply and demand effects every single thing that is offered to the public. If there is no demand to see the sport bad enough to pay for it at some level then there will be no supply of that sport. The same thing goes for every product sold. Who wouldn’t you want to be around 1900? The owner of a buggy whip company. Once the automobile became popular there was no demand for buggy whips were there?
With boxing I think there is still demand, great demand, just not as great as it once was for the myriad of reasons which I have already given.
I agree boxing is far from dead and I never said it was. But the demand is NOT as great as it used to be.
No, no I stated much more than that. People not knowing (most not caring) who the HW champ is is only symptomatic of a deeper problem that boxing must wrestle with. Be clear though it was only one point. ONE.
No, actually I am correct in every single point that I’ve presented. It is you who have not been able to give any legitimate answers to my final points. Shall I restate them? No, I’m sure no one wants to read anymore about this. I’m even getting a little sick of it myself and I have pretty good posting stamina.
I’ll change the subject since we’re never going to agree.
How long have you been a boxing fan?
Do you ever watch mma?
[/quote]
I figured you’d feel everything you’ve posted is correct, that’s exactly why I posted “I can see how people liken you to a brick wall.”. I’ve stated it before and I’ll state it again; what you’re insinuating doesn’t correlate with any data, it’s only correlating with your subjective opinion. Essentially you just want me to debate with you on whether your opinion is correct, that defeats the whole purpose of debating. You’ve no interests in objectivity which is exactly why you rely on intellectual dishonesty and arbitrary arguments.
Absolutely not, there are super fights and they usually happen once or twice per year[these days]. You’re trying to insinuate that since there are a lack of super fights there’s no demand, that’s a intellectually dishonest statement. How many is that from you? To think that demand for the UFC is constant is intellectually dishonest as well, if that was the case Mayweather/Marquez wouldn’t have outsold the conflicting UFC event by such a large margin. The only real argument you can make is that the UFC is gaining popularity and “stealing” fans from wrestling, against boxing you can only say the UFC competes with them while there’s conflicting PPVs.
I’ve been a boxing fan and boxing my entire life. I don’t really care for MMA fights that much, they’re not that attractive to me. I think many of them have poor striking and I don’t really care for grappling. I watch WEC fights on occasion as well as current UFC PPVs if I can find one streaming, before that I went out to watch UFC PPVs sometimes[2005-2006].
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
I’ve stated it before and I’ll state it again; what you’re insinuating doesn’t correlate with any data, it’s only correlating with your subjective opinion.[/quote]
It’s actually kind of funny that anyone has to try to convince you that boxing is in trouble. Just about every one who knows anything about boxing, mma combat sports in general knows that boxing is in what could be called a down swing.
You have men well into their 40’s climbing in the ring. The majority of people don’t know who the heavyweight champ is. You have only 2 or 3 big fights per year. You have sports writers claiming that the HW division went to hell after 2002 after Lewis ko’s Tyson. It seems just before any big fight the writers are claiming that “this is the fight that may save boxing”.
The writer below had this to say:
“With De La Hoya now retired, this leaves Mayweather and Pacquiao as boxingâ??s saviors going into the next decade”.
www.mb.com.ph/node/236507/pacquiao-
I wonder why boxing needs to be “saved” if there is nothing wrong with it? Hmm…maybe that writer should talk to you right here on T Nation and you can straighten him out.
Here’s another writer who wants to tell the world why boxing is dying:
“Ten Reasons Why Boxing Is Dying”
One of his reasons is gambling and coruption. Can you imagine the audacity? Accusing boxing of courruption when you have such dignitaries as Don King and Bob Arum involved. I guess you’re going to have to give this writer a call and straighten him out. But I caution you, not to use the same lack of logic that you brought to our little debate. If you do he’ll laugh and hang up on you.
http://www.sportingo.com/boxing/a9820_ten-reasons-why-boxing-dying-how-we-can-bring-it-back-life
This writer says that “Boxing Is Dying A Slow Death”. Dam these guys just don’t understand the sport do they? All they really have to their credit other than experience are good logical conclusions. Yea, I think this guy should talk to you too. You can call him a brick wall and everything, it will help (nods head) uh huh.
Really? Somehow I was going to guess that. It’s very obvious that your love of boxing blurs your vision as to what is happening in the world of combat sports.
My background is in wrestling High School and College. In addition to that I’ve studied Jiu-Jitsu so I like the grappling part of the fights. But I also enjoy a good stand-up match as well. I love boxing and got to meet Ali once, it was a major thrill. But my favorite fighter is without a doubt Rocky Marciano. The Rock who went out on top without a loss on his record. Only one other heavyweight boxer retired undefeated. I’ve also visited the Boxing Hall of Fame once. It was actually smaller than I imagined it would be. Anyway there’s certainly room for both combat sports if the fans are willing. But, as I stated many posts ago, I’m concerned that boxing won’t be around someday unless they change how they’re doing things.
Boxing will never regain its previous popularity, it wasn’t uncommon for 10,000+ crowds to watch big amateur fights at one time. To say boxing is dying is a broad statement. Has it lost popularity? Yes, it has. But has the loss been enough to suggest that the sport wont last? Not at all. People have been saying boxing is dying for 50 years. Also, I’ve never said boxing wasn’t in trouble, I’ve said there’s nothing to suggest it’ll be dead in the future.
It’s blurring my vision so much I use intellectual dishonesty to support my claims, right? Am I relying almost entirely on conjecture or skewing what others are saying too?
I’d like to point this out to you too: The entire course of this discussion you’ve been insinuating that boxing will reach its end because it wont be able to compete with the UFC or MMA by losing consumers[demographic audience], you’ve never once argued that boxing simply isn’t as popular as it once was or was in some trouble that wouldn’t be responsible for its demise. To say you’ve been arguing that boxing is simply in a “down swing” is blatantly false.
Hmm, maybe I shouldn’t do this…ah the pain…but ZEB is right.
Dempsey’s quote is what we call in Germany “jammern auf hohem Niveau”, meaning roughly “lamenting with high standards”.
Today a guy like him wouldn’t even lament, because a young Dempsey would go to test his mettle in the UFC.
And that’s my main argument, really:
Boxing is dying out because MMA is closer to fighting and attracts more young hotheads + the UFC (and Japan’s shows) played a tremdous role as a beacon of quality.
As someone here already stated, nothing’s etched in stone, contact sports can fall out of popularity.
Fin de siecle Germany was crazy for…Jiu Jitsu - a fact practically no one remembers today. Boxing was verboten. Too brutal, uncough. Luckily for us that the youth was so crazy after boxing that in no time it was culturally fine to bash your opponents head for 15 rounds. And nobody cares for 19th Century Jiu Jitsu exhibitions anymore.
Boxing was THE manly sports and the heavyweight champ was THE legitimate alpha of the world.
Wrestling was never a contender, because of it’s ritulistic pace (ever seen a single folk style fight going over hours with both guys imitating a hibernating reptile?) and the lack of KO danger, in a nutshell.
Kick/Thaiboxing had a shot, but ultimately failed. (No UFC, no olympic representation, no big names, no comparative fights like Boxing-Jiu Jitsu in Germany or like within early UFC etc)
MMA looks legit to the young hothead.
He doesn’t really care that even semi-professional Boxing would make him richer then anything but a top MMA organization title.
He wants to kick ass.
Boxing will dry out from the bottom (fans & fighters), the top will slowly follow (establishment, athletic comission functionaries, refs etc)
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
Boxing will never regain its previous popularity, it wasn’t uncommon for 10,000+ crowds to watch big amateur fights at one time. To say boxing is dying is a broad statement. Has it lost popularity? Yes, it has. But has the loss been enough to suggest that the sport wont last? Not at all. People have been saying boxing is dying for 50 years. Also, I’ve never said boxing wasn’t in trouble, I’ve said there’s nothing to suggest it’ll be dead in the future.
[/quote]
OK, to be more precise, it won’t die as in: no singly person will box.
There will be a huge drop in popularity, exposure and generated money.
Let’s just say that in about 15 years, there will be absolutely no questions about which one is the top dog.
And how exactly should boxing have vanished before, (see my previous “jammern auf hohem Niveau”) without anyone to claim the throne?
There was no real contender, today there is.
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
Boxing will never regain its previous popularity, it wasn’t uncommon for 10,000+ crowds to watch big amateur fights at one time. To say boxing is dying is a broad statement. Has it lost popularity? Yes, it has. But has the loss been enough to suggest that the sport wont last? Not at all. People have been saying boxing is dying for 50 years. Also, I’ve never said boxing wasn’t in trouble, I’ve said there’s nothing to suggest it’ll be dead in the future.
It’s blurring my vision so much I use intellectual dishonesty to support my claims, right? Am I relying almost entirely on conjecture or skewing what others are saying too?
I’d like to point this out to you too: The entire course of this discussion you’ve been insinuating that boxing will reach its end because it wont be able to compete with the UFC or MMA by losing consumers[demographic audience], you’ve never once argued that boxing simply isn’t as popular as it once was or was in some trouble that wouldn’t be responsible for its demise. To say you’ve been arguing that boxing is simply in a “down swing” is blatantly false.[/quote]
This is what I said during my very first post on this thread:
“…we are not living during boxings golden age…”
That one line is what sparked your original response. Apparently you didn’t like it, but it doesn’t look so bad now huh?
Glad that you finally agree with me and just about every sports writer and boxing historian. No one can say that you came to this conclusion easily, but at least you’re there.
I further contended in my following posts that boxing was in fact losing fans and participants to mma, and is only one reason why boxing is not where it once was, and I am correct in that analysis.
[quote]This is what I said during my very first post on this thread:
“…we are not living during boxings golden age…”[/quote]
Yes, to which I responded “People have been saying boxing is dying as long as I’ve been alive. We see how that has worked out though.”.
Not quite, nice attempt at trying to insinuate that I feel the need to argue with you because of my preferences though. Let me guess, you’re psych analyzing me with the knowledge you acquired in psychology 101?
I’ve never even attempted to say that boxing isn’t as popular as it once was, I stated that people have been saying “boxing is dying!” for decades while continuing to exist and be popular.
No, you’re not. There’s no data to support that assumption, you only supported that position with conjecture, intellectual dishonesty, and logical fallacies.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Hmm, maybe I shouldn’t do this…ah the pain…but ZEB is right.
Dempsey’s quote is what we call in Germany “jammern auf hohem Niveau”, meaning roughly “lamenting with high standards”.
Today a guy like him wouldn’t even lament, because a young Dempsey would go to test his mettle in the UFC.
And that’s my main argument, really:
Boxing is dying out because MMA is closer to fighting and attracts more young hotheads + the UFC (and Japan’s shows) played a tremdous role as a beacon of quality.
As someone here already stated, nothing’s etched in stone, contact sports can fall out of popularity.
Fin de siecle Germany was crazy for…Jiu Jitsu - a fact practically no one remembers today. Boxing was verboten. Too brutal, uncough. Luckily for us that the youth was so crazy after boxing that in no time it was culturally fine to bash your opponents head for 15 rounds. And nobody cares for 19th Century Jiu Jitsu exhibitions anymore.
Boxing was THE manly sports and the heavyweight champ was THE legitimate alpha of the world.
Wrestling was never a contender, because of it’s ritulistic pace (ever seen a single folk style fight going over hours with both guys imitating a hibernating reptile?) and the lack of KO danger, in a nutshell.
Kick/Thaiboxing had a shot, but ultimately failed. (No UFC, no olympic representation, no big names, no comparative fights like Boxing-Jiu Jitsu in Germany or like within early UFC etc)
MMA looks legit to the young hothead.
He doesn’t really care that even semi-professional Boxing would make him richer then anything but a top MMA organization title.
He wants to kick ass.
Boxing will dry out from the bottom (fans & fighters), the top will slowly follow (establishment, athletic comission functionaries, refs etc)
[/quote]
The UFC is scheduling UFC 113 to avoid conflicting with the next Mayweather fight, Floyd Mayweather isn’t scheduling his fight so it wont conflict with UFC 113. It looks like the UFC is really appealing to the hotheads.
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
No, you’re not. There’s no data to support that assumption, you only supported that position with conjecture, intellectual dishonesty, and logical fallacies. [/quote]
Good point, mma is getting all of its fans from um, the basket weaving club that meets every other thursday. Of course they’re drawing from boxing, pro wrestling and probably a few other sports as well. I’ve already explained the important male 18-39 age group to you. How much money do you think those folks have? It’s also been explained to you by other posters and boxing writers (did you read any of the articles that I linked?). I’ve even explained the economics to you. That you don’t get it is not my fault. You’ll have to look inside yourself and ask yourself some tough questions about your inability to understand what just about every other human being who follows combat sports understands.
You’re actually funny, I’d like you to keep this up I’m starting to get into the spirit of this nonsense.
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Hmm, maybe I shouldn’t do this…ah the pain…but ZEB is right.
Dempsey’s quote is what we call in Germany “jammern auf hohem Niveau”, meaning roughly “lamenting with high standards”.
Today a guy like him wouldn’t even lament, because a young Dempsey would go to test his mettle in the UFC.
And that’s my main argument, really:
Boxing is dying out because MMA is closer to fighting and attracts more young hotheads + the UFC (and Japan’s shows) played a tremdous role as a beacon of quality.
As someone here already stated, nothing’s etched in stone, contact sports can fall out of popularity.
Fin de siecle Germany was crazy for…Jiu Jitsu - a fact practically no one remembers today. Boxing was verboten. Too brutal, uncough. Luckily for us that the youth was so crazy after boxing that in no time it was culturally fine to bash your opponents head for 15 rounds. And nobody cares for 19th Century Jiu Jitsu exhibitions anymore.
Boxing was THE manly sports and the heavyweight champ was THE legitimate alpha of the world.
Wrestling was never a contender, because of it’s ritulistic pace (ever seen a single folk style fight going over hours with both guys imitating a hibernating reptile?) and the lack of KO danger, in a nutshell.
Kick/Thaiboxing had a shot, but ultimately failed. (No UFC, no olympic representation, no big names, no comparative fights like Boxing-Jiu Jitsu in Germany or like within early UFC etc)
MMA looks legit to the young hothead.
He doesn’t really care that even semi-professional Boxing would make him richer then anything but a top MMA organization title.
He wants to kick ass.
Boxing will dry out from the bottom (fans & fighters), the top will slowly follow (establishment, athletic comission functionaries, refs etc)
[/quote]
The UFC is scheduling UFC 113 to avoid conflicting with the next Mayweather fight, Floyd Mayweather isn’t scheduling his fight so it wont conflict with UFC 113. It looks like the UFC is really appealing to the hotheads.
http://www.mmafighting.com/2010/01/21/ufc-113-moves-to-may-8-avoiding-mayweather-conflict/[/quote]
(eye roll) Boxing puts up their single biggest attraction and you wonder why UFC does not want a conflict? We all love to watch Mayweather, I’ll be buying that fight too. But you have to have more than Mayweather and a few others to have a growing thriving sport. How about a popular Heavy Weight division? Oh that’s right we’ve covered that boxing doesn’t have one. Most people don’t know who the heavyweight boxing champ is, and couldn’t care less. But you keep telling yourself that 3 big ppv’s per year mean that boxing is thriving. Hey whatever helps you sleep at night is good by me.
For one thing there’s been a handful of big PPVs per year for quite awhile now, even before the UFC gained popularity. To insinuate the UFC is responsible for it’s intellectual dishonesty. Popularity of one division shifting to another division is irrelevant, it’d only be relevant if there was no shift in popularity.
I’d like for you to name super stars from the UFC, ones casual fans can name. Anderson Silva and Brock Lesnar are the only people I can think of, unless you want to count Rampage too. Rampage is retiring soon though isn’t he? Wow, that’s truly amazing.
[quote]Good point, mma is getting all of its fans from um, the basket weaving club that meets every other thursday. Of course they’re drawing from boxing, pro wrestling and probably a few other sports as well. I’ve already explained the important male 18-39 age group to you. How much money do you think those folks have? It’s also been explained to you by other posters and boxing writers (did you read any of the articles that I linked?). I’ve even explained the economics to you. That you don’t get it is not my fault. You’ll have to look inside yourself and ask yourself some tough questions about your inability to understand what just about every other human being who follows combat sports understands.
You’re actually funny, I’d like you to keep this up I’m starting to get into the spirit of this nonsense.
[/quote]
I don’t really know what you can’t comprehend about this. Need me to explain this to you? There’s absolutely no data to support your claim. There’s data to show the UFC audience overlaps with wrestling audience and the UFC has pulled viewers from the wrestling audience, there’s no data to support your statements on the UFC pulling viewers from boxing. Your entire argument relies on the logical fallacy which is “if there was a demand there would be more fights”. Even if the UFC pulls viewers from boxing it’s a negligible amount, an amount so minute it can’t even negatively impact HBO PPV when conflicting with UFC PPV. You’re grossly exaggerating the amount of viewers.
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
I don’t really know what you can’t comprehend about this. Need me to explain this to you? There’s absolutely no data to support your claim. There’s data to show the UFC audience overlaps with wrestling audience and the UFC has pulled viewers from the wrestling audience, there’s no data to support your statements on the UFC pulling viewers from boxing.
Your entire argument relies on the logical fallacy which is “if there was a demand there would be more fights”. Even if the UFC pulls viewers from boxing it’s a negligible amount, an amount so minute it can’t even negatively impact HBO PPV when conflicting with UFC PPV. You’re grossly exaggerating the amount of viewers.
[/quote]
QFT
MMA doesn’t pull boxing ppv buys and that’s all that matters… that’s the only thing that has mattered in this entire thread since its been hijacked 
But every time its been stated its overlooked… boxing and mma pretty much have completely opposite fans. Then there are the weird ones that like both.