UFC Co-Promote Boxing?

[ZEB]

[quote]goldengloves wrote:

(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.[/quote]

I agree boxing has been on the sick list for a while now. UFC only hurts its return to better health. Oh wait that can’t be right because well, you won’t agree.

Popularity of one division shifting to another division is irrelevant, it’d only be relevant if there was no shift in popularity.

I agree it matters not that hardly anyone in the 18-39 (male) demographic knows who the heavyweight boxing champ is. It’s all really irrelevant isn’t it? It doesn’t matter that there are only about 4 or 5 active boxer that are recognized by that same demograhic. I agree with you. All that matters is that you’re an over the top boxing fan and that’s that. I think I’m on board, you’ve won me over

e 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.

One more irrelevant point. We’re talking about people (18-39)not knowing as many boxers as they used to, that’s THE POINT. But I think I know the answer don’t you?

[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.[/quote]

Good point, boxing is bigger than ever,what was I thinking? I might have been agreeing with you when you said that boxing is NOT as big as it used to be and never will be. Now let me think, where did those fans go? Hmm, could it be MMA? No that couldn’t be it because you don’t like MMA but you do like boxing. Oh I give up you’re going to have to tell me.

]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.

You’ve said this before and I responded by asking you to please post your data. I wonder why you have not done that yet? Did you forget?

[quote]
Your entire argument relies on the logical fallacy which is “if there was a demand there would be more fights”.[/quote]

I know I’m silly like that, here I am thinking that boxing is like every other business (and sport) in the world. Ha, crazy me. There’s no such thing as supply and demand in boxing all that matters is whether YOU like boxing or not, and since you do then POOF no more supply and demand. Sorry I wasn’t thinking.

Even if the UFC pulls viewers from boxing it’s a negligible amount,

What’s that? UFC pulling viewers from boxing? Shame on you that’s blasphemy! NEVER! How could that be? Hmm, is it possible because:

1. Both groups rely on the 18-39 male demographic?

2. This demographic like all others have a limited amount of disposable income?

3. MMA has excited this demographic like no other sport?

NO, that can’t be it and I apologize for posting such nonsense. I forgot, you are a huge boxing fan so none of this is real.

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.

Please don’t post any data on this I already agree with you. Why other than Gus that crazy skin head with all the tattoos and Harry that mixed up 23 year old who loves wrestling I don’t think the UFC has pulled anyone from boxing. Just the two of them, yep, only two people. Gee, I wonder if those two crazy kids would have been boxing fans had mma not come around? Oh well it’s only two people so it doesn’t really matter.

Boxing is good mma is bad. I’M WITH YA BUDDY!

[goldengloves]

OK, I’ll go with your supply and demand argument. If there’s a demand for MMA[UFC] then why is there such a small number of super fights in the UFC?

Relying entirely on sarcasm and repeating arguments I’ve refuted is just making you look ridiculous.

[ZEB]

[quote]goldengloves wrote:
OK, I’ll go with your supply and demand argument. If there’s a demand for MMA[UFC] then why is there such a small number of super fights in the UFC?[/quote]

There are about 10 major UFC shows on per year. They also have a very popular show on Sike “Ultimate Fighter”. In addition to that there are at least another 5 or 6 on from other mma competitors. Also there are amateur mma shows on occasionally. I have no idea what you’re looking for in terms of interest. Seems plenty popular to me and the rest of the world.

You know what it doesn’t matter, just go on thinking that boxing is the most popular sport on the planet and it will never die.

When you think about it what’s the difference?

[Amiright]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]goldengloves wrote:
OK, I’ll go with your supply and demand argument. If there’s a demand for MMA[UFC] then why is there such a small number of super fights in the UFC?[/quote]

There are about 10 major UFC shows on per year. They also have a very popular show on Sike “Ultimate Fighter”. In addition to that there are at least another 5 or 6 on from other mma competitors. Also there are amateur mma shows on occasionally. I have no idea what you’re looking for in terms of interest. Seems plenty popular to me and the rest of the world.

You know what it doesn’t matter, just go on thinking that boxing is the most popular sport on the planet and it will never die.

When you think about it what’s the difference?

[/quote]

I’m going to respond this this just because you ignored what he said… he said “super fights” Huge main events… something people have been dying to see. I’m not sure on the number of boxing ppvs in a year… but I sure see a bunch of commercials for this one or that one… Only a couple big fights a year though

[anon31651765]

[quote]goldengloves wrote:

Relying entirely on sarcasm and repeating arguments I’ve refuted is just making you look ridiculous.[/quote]

All Zeb has as far as debating skills are his little fuckin “(rolls eyes)” “(looks around)” etc.

If you’re looking for substance he’s not the place to go.

[goldengloves]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]goldengloves wrote:
OK, I’ll go with your supply and demand argument. If there’s a demand for MMA[UFC] then why is there such a small number of super fights in the UFC?[/quote]

There are about 10 major UFC shows on per year. They also have a very popular show on Sike “Ultimate Fighter”. In addition to that there are at least another 5 or 6 on from other mma competitors. Also there are amateur mma shows on occasionally. I have no idea what you’re looking for in terms of interest. Seems plenty popular to me and the rest of the world.

You know what it doesn’t matter, just go on thinking that boxing is the most popular sport on the planet and it will never die.

When you think about it what’s the difference?

[/quote]

No, trying to insinuate every UFC event is a super fight is dishonest. Trying to insinuate amateur bouts are super fights really makes me question your ability to comprehend the term “super fight”.

[Schwarzfahrer]

Golden Gloves, please address my main concern; what about future fighters?

Do you think, MMA changed that part of the equation?
Do you think, less future champion material will be recruited?

Again, I believe, what wrestling could never do, because it’s really different, kick/thaiboying never managed, even when it tried, and traditional McStyles are incapable of, MMA will achive: massvely draining the talentpool of boxing.

And the final nail will be olympic participation (did we have has such a thread, by the way?) .

[goldengloves]

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Golden Gloves, please address my main concern; what about future fighters?

Do you think, MMA changed that part of the equation?
Do you think, less future champion material will be recruited?

Again, I believe, what wrestling could never do, because it’s really different, kick/thaiboying never managed, even when it tried, and traditional McStyles are incapable of, MMA will achive: massvely draining the talentpool of boxing.

And the final nail will be olympic participation (did we have has such a thread, by the way?) .[/quote]

That’s assuming that people will no longer prefer one sport over another. For the time being I’d say boxing has secured more future champions with PAL gyms, the Olympics, a good amateur program, and how lucrative boxing is.

[BulletproofTiger]

Now that we’ve clearly established the fact that both boxing and MMA are secure as sports of public interest, at least in the immediate future, the question remains, will the two sports simply coexist independently or will they develop a symbiotic relationship? Given that the majority of fans, apparently, do not have a high degree of crossover (my incorrect assumption when starting this thread is that there could exist a decent amount of crossover of fans such as myself – but at least as of now, that does not exist to a high degree of crossover as I thought), I must hypothesize that the sports will coexist independently. I do however still hold hope for a time when an MMA/Boxing co-promotion (event or tournament format) can be held that displays the virtues and beauty of both sports in simultaneous harmony.

Each sport has a strong foundation to build future champs and the foundation for MMA is improving (and the money will follow as talent continues to increase); however the foundation for boxing is arguably not weakening, and may see a resurgence.

I don’t think there’s much else to say about the topic, at least not from me.

[ZEB]

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]goldengloves wrote:

Relying entirely on sarcasm and repeating arguments I’ve refuted is just making you look ridiculous.[/quote]

All Zeb has as far as debating skills are his little fuckin “(rolls eyes)” “(looks around)” etc.

If you’re looking for substance he’s not the place to go. [/quote]

That’s funny stuff coming from someone who has been owned by just about everyone on the political threads.

[ZEB]

[quote]goldengloves wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]goldengloves wrote:
OK, I’ll go with your supply and demand argument. If there’s a demand for MMA[UFC] then why is there such a small number of super fights in the UFC?[/quote]

There are about 10 major UFC shows on per year. They also have a very popular show on Sike “Ultimate Fighter”. In addition to that there are at least another 5 or 6 on from other mma competitors. Also there are amateur mma shows on occasionally. I have no idea what you’re looking for in terms of interest. Seems plenty popular to me and the rest of the world.

You know what it doesn’t matter, just go on thinking that boxing is the most popular sport on the planet and it will never die.

When you think about it what’s the difference?

[/quote]

No, trying to insinuate every UFC event is a super fight is dishonest. Trying to insinuate amateur bouts are super fights really makes me question your ability to comprehend the term “super fight”.
[/quote]

I’m sorry if you can’t understand what I was posting, but I don’t know how to make it any clearer. I was pointing out the popularity of mma by showing you how many fights, both amateur and professional that there are per year on TV.

If they had two or three mma fights on per year they’d see even more ppv buys because there is a very big demand for…oops, I said “demand”. I’m sorry I forgot, supply and demand have nothing to do with how well the business of combat sports works in your world you’re too busy loving boxing to accept the actual reality of things. And too busy as well to read any of the articles that I posted from BOXING WRITERS.

It’s interesting how you don’t allow the facts to cloud your opinion of reality. Well, probably less stress that way.

Yep.

[anon31651765]

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Golden Gloves, please address my main concern; what about future fighters?

Do you think, MMA changed that part of the equation?
Do you think, less future champion material will be recruited?

Again, I believe, what wrestling could never do, because it’s really different, kick/thaiboying never managed, even when it tried, and traditional McStyles are incapable of, MMA will achive: massvely draining the talentpool of boxing.

And the final nail will be olympic participation (did we have has such a thread, by the way?) .[/quote]

Swarz- you’re ignoring the fact that the massive amount of talent in boxing comes from 1) ghettos 2) hispanics in the US or 3) other nationalities entirely.

This is something I’ve said over and over- there still is a race factor in both sports. Blacks and hispanics are going to gravitate towards boxing- an MMA match in North Philly is going to draw about as many people as a city council meeting. However, put a boxing match there, and it packs the house.

When I meet a white guy, I don’t even bother to mention boxing unless I’m referencing a fight I’m going to watch that night. But if I meet a black guy or a boricua, I’m going to ask him quickly if he likes boxing. If I meet any hispanic that is off the boat from another country, especially a Cuban or a Mexican, it’s almost gauranteed that they’re going to watch it.

There is still a cultural element in those hispanic countries that will keep them going to boxing as well- that Roberto Duran, excessively macho attitude that says real men fight with their fists, not on their backs.

When you add to this the fact that MMA gyms are WAY more expensive and far more exclusive in terms of those that can afford them as compared to boxing gyms, you’re not going to pull that talent out of the ghetto like boxing will. What corner kid from the projects can spend $100 a month on an MMA gym? But everyone can come up with $25 for the boxing gym.

If you compound this with the recent emergence of the Eastern Bloc countries as a pool for heavyweights, and countries like the Philipines (Which, because of Pac’s success, will inundate boxing with Filipinos in about 15 years), you’ve got a lot of countries with plenty of talent. That’s not even counting Britain, who have had some decent fighters, and Australia, which is slowly catching up to Britain. That alone will keep boxing loaded with good talent from around the world.

I’ve said it before- MMA is still a predominantly white sport watched by mostly white males of a certain type. This hasn’t been boxing’s target audience since the friggin 50’s.

[anon31651765]

[quote]BulletproofTiger wrote:
Now that we’ve clearly established the fact that both boxing and MMA are secure as sports of public interest, at least in the immediate future, the question remains, will the two sports simply coexist independently or will they develop a symbiotic relationship? Given that the majority of fans, apparently, do not have a high degree of crossover (my incorrect assumption when starting this thread is that there could exist a decent amount of crossover of fans such as myself – but at least as of now, that does not exist to a high degree of crossover as I thought), I must hypothesize that the sports will coexist independently. I do however still hold hope for a time when an MMA/Boxing co-promotion (event or tournament format) can be held that displays the virtues and beauty of both sports in simultaneous harmony.

Each sport has a strong foundation to build future champs and the foundation for MMA is improving (and the money will follow as talent continues to increase); however the foundation for boxing is arguably not weakening, and may see a resurgence.

I don’t think there’s much else to say about the topic, at least not from me.[/quote]

Right.

And there actually are a good bit of crossover fans.

[goldengloves]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]goldengloves wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]goldengloves wrote:
OK, I’ll go with your supply and demand argument. If there’s a demand for MMA[UFC] then why is there such a small number of super fights in the UFC?[/quote]

There are about 10 major UFC shows on per year. They also have a very popular show on Sike “Ultimate Fighter”. In addition to that there are at least another 5 or 6 on from other mma competitors. Also there are amateur mma shows on occasionally. I have no idea what you’re looking for in terms of interest. Seems plenty popular to me and the rest of the world.

You know what it doesn’t matter, just go on thinking that boxing is the most popular sport on the planet and it will never die.

When you think about it what’s the difference?

[/quote]

No, trying to insinuate every UFC event is a super fight is dishonest. Trying to insinuate amateur bouts are super fights really makes me question your ability to comprehend the term “super fight”.
[/quote]

I’m sorry if you can’t understand what I was posting, but I don’t know how to make it any clearer. I was pointing out the popularity of mma by showing you how many fights, both amateur and professional that there are per year on TV.

If they had two or three mma fights on per year they’d see even more ppv buys because there is a very big demand for…oops, I said “demand”. I’m sorry I forgot, supply and demand have nothing to do with how well the business of combat sports works in your world you’re too busy loving boxing to accept the actual reality of things. And too busy as well to read any of the articles that I posted from BOXING WRITERS.

It’s interesting how you don’t allow the facts to cloud your opinion of reality. Well, probably less stress that way.

Yep.

[/quote]

What? I asked how many super fights there were per year, you proceeded to deem every UFC event and every MMA event a super fight. There are plenty of boxing matches on per year; ESPN fights, Showtime, various PPVs, HBO, and HBO PPV. Maybe you should quit studying economics and brush up on reading comprehension? It could help you understand the difference between “super fights” and “fights”.

[quote]BulletproofTiger wrote:
Now that we’ve clearly established the fact that both boxing and MMA are secure as sports of public interest, at least in the immediate future, the question remains, will the two sports simply coexist independently or will they develop a symbiotic relationship? Given that the majority of fans, apparently, do not have a high degree of crossover (my incorrect assumption when starting this thread is that there could exist a decent amount of crossover of fans such as myself – but at least as of now, that does not exist to a high degree of crossover as I thought), I must hypothesize that the sports will coexist independently. I do however still hold hope for a time when an MMA/Boxing co-promotion (event or tournament format) can be held that displays the virtues and beauty of both sports in simultaneous harmony.

Each sport has a strong foundation to build future champs and the foundation for MMA is improving (and the money will follow as talent continues to increase); however the foundation for boxing is arguably not weakening, and may see a resurgence.

I don’t think there’s much else to say about the topic, at least not from me.[/quote]

I’d say their are crossover fans, they’re casual fans. They probably go out with their friends to watch HBO PPVs and UFC PPVs at bars.

I don’t see MMA/boxing matches happening at a high level, it’d be too difficult to set up two rings. I don’t see an octagon being used for a boxing match and can’t see a ring being used for a UFC fight.

[goldengloves]

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Golden Gloves, please address my main concern; what about future fighters?

Do you think, MMA changed that part of the equation?
Do you think, less future champion material will be recruited?

Again, I believe, what wrestling could never do, because it’s really different, kick/thaiboying never managed, even when it tried, and traditional McStyles are incapable of, MMA will achive: massvely draining the talentpool of boxing.

And the final nail will be olympic participation (did we have has such a thread, by the way?) .[/quote]

Swarz- you’re ignoring the fact that the massive amount of talent in boxing comes from 1) ghettos 2) hispanics in the US or 3) other nationalities entirely.

This is something I’ve said over and over- there still is a race factor in both sports. Blacks and hispanics are going to gravitate towards boxing- an MMA match in North Philly is going to draw about as many people as a city council meeting. However, put a boxing match there, and it packs the house.

When I meet a white guy, I don’t even bother to mention boxing unless I’m referencing a fight I’m going to watch that night. But if I meet a black guy or a boricua, I’m going to ask him quickly if he likes boxing. If I meet any hispanic that is off the boat from another country, especially a Cuban or a Mexican, it’s almost gauranteed that they’re going to watch it.

There is still a cultural element in those hispanic countries that will keep them going to boxing as well- that Roberto Duran, excessively macho attitude that says real men fight with their fists, not on their backs.

When you add to this the fact that MMA gyms are WAY more expensive and far more exclusive in terms of those that can afford them as compared to boxing gyms, you’re not going to pull that talent out of the ghetto like boxing will. What corner kid from the projects can spend $100 a month on an MMA gym? But everyone can come up with $25 for the boxing gym.

If you compound this with the recent emergence of the Eastern Bloc countries as a pool for heavyweights, and countries like the Philipines (Which, because of Pac’s success, will inundate boxing with Filipinos in about 15 years), you’ve got a lot of countries with plenty of talent. That’s not even counting Britain, who have had some decent fighters, and Australia, which is slowly catching up to Britain. That alone will keep boxing loaded with good talent from around the world.

I’ve said it before- MMA is still a predominantly white sport watched by mostly white males of a certain type. This hasn’t been boxing’s target audience since the friggin 50’s. [/quote]

People underestimate the international popularity of boxing. In the Spanish speaking world boxing is still very popular, you can watch it on TV quite often too. Whenever I visit Puerto Rico people don’t even seem to pay MMA much mind, Juan Manuel Lopez is probably as popular as Mike Tyson once was as well. I can’t say whether boxing has retained its popularity throughout Europe but I happen to know it’s in both the UK and eastern Europe.

[ZEB]

[quote]goldengloves wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]goldengloves wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]goldengloves wrote:
OK, I’ll go with your supply and demand argument. If there’s a demand for MMA[UFC] then why is there such a small number of super fights in the UFC?[/quote]

There are about 10 major UFC shows on per year. They also have a very popular show on Sike “Ultimate Fighter”. In addition to that there are at least another 5 or 6 on from other mma competitors. Also there are amateur mma shows on occasionally. I have no idea what you’re looking for in terms of interest. Seems plenty popular to me and the rest of the world.

You know what it doesn’t matter, just go on thinking that boxing is the most popular sport on the planet and it will never die.

When you think about it what’s the difference?

[/quote]

No, trying to insinuate every UFC event is a super fight is dishonest. Trying to insinuate amateur bouts are super fights really makes me question your ability to comprehend the term “super fight”.
[/quote]

I’m sorry if you can’t understand what I was posting, but I don’t know how to make it any clearer. I was pointing out the popularity of mma by showing you how many fights, both amateur and professional that there are per year on TV.

If they had two or three mma fights on per year they’d see even more ppv buys because there is a very big demand for…oops, I said “demand”. I’m sorry I forgot, supply and demand have nothing to do with how well the business of combat sports works in your world you’re too busy loving boxing to accept the actual reality of things. And too busy as well to read any of the articles that I posted from BOXING WRITERS.

It’s interesting how you don’t allow the facts to cloud your opinion of reality. Well, probably less stress that way.

Yep.
[/quote]

What? I asked how many super fights there were per year, you proceeded to deem every UFC event and every MMA event a super fight.[/quote]

That’s not at all what I did, as I’ve already explained. But, If you think I said those words then it will be easy for you to copy and paste them on your next post. Why don’t you do that?

There are plenty of boxing matches on per year; ESPN fights, Showtime, various PPVs, HBO, and HBO PPV.

Once again you’re confused (which is no surprise to me at this point). Please copy and paste where I said that there wasn’t boxing matches shown in these places. It should be easy for you to find this right?

Maybe you should quit studying economics and brush up on reading comprehension?

Ah yes, the peak of irony, thank you, this fits in very well with your bizarre thought process when it comes to this topic. The king of misquoting, the person who cannot comprehend the basic points. The person who seems unable to even read the links that I’ve posted, the person who pulls things out of thin air and attributes them to me. The person who runs around the room with his fingers in his ears screaming “la la la la” because he doesn’t want to hear reality. That person wants ME to have better reading comprehension.

By the way, it doesn’t take a degree in economics to understand how mma has grown and boxing is stagnating. However, it does take a firm grasp on reality, that’s why I’ve given up trying to convince you of how wrong you are on this topic. I’m in it now purely for the laughs and you my friend supply them with each and every post. I can’t wait for your response. I’ve shared your opinion (and how you’ve expressed it) with a few other combat sports fans and they are laughing heartily at you too. Oh and don’t forget to copy and paste the topics that you spoke of at the beginning of your post. It should easy for you to fing them if I said it right?

Talk to you soon, don’t let me down now.

[goldengloves]

My mistake, you only insinuated that there are 10 major UFC events per year. That’s false, there aren’t 10 super fights per year in the UFC or any other organization.

You say that you were showing the popularity of MMA by listing televised events, right? If televised events constitute popularity then you cannot begin to say MMA is more popular than boxing or vice versa.

Bizarre thought process? I’ve based my conclusions off of the available data, you’ve based yours off of wild speculation and conjecture. Not only that but you’ve also relied on intellectual dishonesty and logical fallacies as well. Stating that you and your friends are laughing at me, if you even have friends, just shows how weak your position is.

Want me to explain why your supply and demand argument is irrelevant? I’ll: HBO PPV is a business venture, HBO doesn’t depend on PPV entirely. After all, HBO generates billions of dollars in revenue a year. The UFC isn’t a cable network, it depends primarily on PPV to generate revenue. Naturally the UFC will have more PPV fights, it depends on them. The UFC has a minimum of 10 PPV fights a year, most of them have mediocre sells[500,000]. HBO is faced with a decision; please the consumers and air fights for free or make a fight a PPV event. To have a PPV fight one of the fighters will most likely have a large draw and transcend the sport to some degree, otherwise it’d probably be better for the company just to air the fight. The UFC doesn’t make that decision, generally they make every fight a PPV fight.

[ZEB]

[quote]goldengloves wrote:
My mistake, you only insinuated that there are 10 major UFC events per year.[/quote]

No big deal the point was that any UFC show on ppv draws pretty well.

there aren’t 10 super fights per year in the UFC or any other organization.

Let’s not nit pick, keep in mind I said about that reading problem of yours is popping up again. I also talked about other mma organizations having fights as well.

You say that you were showing the popularity of MMA by listing televised events, right? If televised events constitute popularity then you cannot begin to say MMA is more popular than boxing or vice versa.

Do you know what you’re arguing about? Why don’t you go look at my first few posts and come back to me.

Bizarre thought process?

Yes, that’s what you have when it comes to the topic of boxing and its popularity or lack there of.

I’ve based my conclusions off of the available data,

No you have not. Not only don’t you base your conclusions off of any data when I ask you to post where you got a certain piece of information your next post is off running in a different direction, it’s almost like you’re bipolar (on this topic).

you’ve based yours off of wild speculation and conjecture.

That’s total nonsense, which I should be used to coming from you by now (and I am pretty much). I’ve posted boxing writers thoughts, ppv dollars for given years and actually touched on facts regarding what sports bars are now playing. You disregard it all.

And why?

Because you are a boxing fan and facts are just not that important.

Not only that but you’ve also relied on intellectual dishonesty and logical fallacies as well.

Still confused I see, why don’t you name all of my falsifications, or shut up. Either way, I’m happy.

Stating that you and your friends are laughing at me, if you even have friends, just shows how weak your position is.

We are laughing at you, sorry, but on this topic you’re one very confused, forgetful, rambling accusing nut case.

. The UFC has a minimum of 10 PPV fights a year,

You said that they didn’t have 10 above.

most of them have mediocre sells[500,000].

I know you will ignore this as that’s what you do best, but I’m going to ask you anyway. Where did you get that 500,00 figure I believe that you are low as an average. However, I’m not making any wild claims, I just want to know your source for the information you posted.

[quote] HBO is faced with a decision; please the consumers and air fights for free or make a fight a PPV event. To have a PPV fight one of the fighters will most likely have a large draw and transcend the sport to some degree, otherwise it’d probably be better for the company just to air the fight. The UFC doesn’t make that decision, generally they make every fight a PPV fight.
[/quote]

None of what you’ve said negates the basic law of supply and demand which is in effect in all business situations. If there is ZERO (or very little) demand for a fight whether it be boxing or mma then there will be no supply. Why you cannot understand used to befuddle me before I realized that I am debating someone who throws logic to the wind. And why? Because YOU LOVE BOXING and facts matter little in your world.

[anon31651765]

[quote]goldengloves wrote:
My mistake, you only insinuated that there are 10 major UFC events per year. That’s false, there aren’t 10 super fights per year in the UFC or any other organization.

You say that you were showing the popularity of MMA by listing televised events, right? If televised events constitute popularity then you cannot begin to say MMA is more popular than boxing or vice versa.

Bizarre thought process? I’ve based my conclusions off of the available data, you’ve based yours off of wild speculation and conjecture. Not only that but you’ve also relied on intellectual dishonesty and logical fallacies as well. Stating that you and your friends are laughing at me, if you even have friends, just shows how weak your position is.

Want me to explain why your supply and demand argument is irrelevant? I’ll: HBO PPV is a business venture, HBO doesn’t depend on PPV entirely. After all, HBO generates billions of dollars in revenue a year. The UFC isn’t a cable network, it depends primarily on PPV to generate revenue. Naturally the UFC will have more PPV fights, it depends on them. The UFC has a minimum of 10 PPV fights a year, most of them have mediocre sells[500,000]. HBO is faced with a decision; please the consumers and air fights for free or make a fight a PPV event. To have a PPV fight one of the fighters will most likely have a large draw and transcend the sport to some degree, otherwise it’d probably be better for the company just to air the fight. The UFC doesn’t make that decision, generally they make every fight a PPV fight.
[/quote]

Please stop goldengloves. There really isn’t anyone on these forums who disagrees with you- we’ve all stated at one time or another that there’s room for both sports.

But I don’t want to see dipshit turn this into one his “Praise jeebus” threads that go on for 435 pages… and if he can go on for that long slurring the gays, he can certainly do it slurring boxing.

For the sake of the forum, huh?

[jtrinsey]

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
This is something I’ve said over and over- there still is a race factor in both sports. Blacks and hispanics are going to gravitate towards boxing- an MMA match in North Philly is going to draw about as many people as a city council meeting. However, put a boxing match there, and it packs the house.

When I meet a white guy, I don’t even bother to mention boxing unless I’m referencing a fight I’m going to watch that night. But if I meet a black guy or a boricua, I’m going to ask him quickly if he likes boxing. If I meet any hispanic that is off the boat from another country, especially a Cuban or a Mexican, it’s almost gauranteed that they’re going to watch it.

There is still a cultural element in those hispanic countries that will keep them going to boxing as well- that Roberto Duran, excessively macho attitude that says real men fight with their fists, not on their backs. [/quote]

Agreed.

The only thing that I think, in relation to the race issue, is that boxing’s popularity in the black community is fading a little bit. This is coming from the, “white guy talking to his black friends” perspective, so take it with a grain of salt, but it seems like boxing is shifting to be even more Hispanic.

I will also say that my group of 4 showed up at the local Hooters to watch the May-Pac fight, only to be told, they weren’t showing it and they had the UFC (the free Couture-Vera card) on instead. Could have been because the UFC card was cheaper to show, but I did find that interesting.

Also, at the youth center I volunteer at (which is 90% black), just about all of the kids (8-12 years old for the most part) know who Brock Lesnar is, but most don’t know who Floyd Mayweather is. I suspect that’s because he was a pro wrestler though, which is more popular with younger kids than boxing or MMA.

I think everybody knows that boxing is not at it’s heyday right now, but to say that it’s dying is a little silly. Right now, the UFC has a very strong brand and many people (like me) will watch any card, just because they trust the brand. There’s no law that suggests that will continue though. Considering the rapid influx of Hispanics into America (George Lopez already has a cable talk show, how much longer until Hispanics have enough buying power that a netowrk puts somebody of Mexican descent on The Late Show?) and Pac’s insane popularity in the Philipine’s, it’s possible that boxing could be set up for a huge resurgence in 10 years or so.

Right now, American white people aren’t too big on boxing, and American white people tend to be very dismissive of what isn’t popular with them. But we also heard how baseball was dying 15 years or so and the NBA (in it’s Jordan heyday) was exploding, and now baseball is bigger than ever and basketball is in trouble. It’s all cyclical.

One thing that helps MMA is that it is easier to transition from another sport into a grappling art then it is to boxing. Boxing is so reliant on hand speed, that almost every dominant champ was training at a very young age. The strength-dominant wrestling aspect of MMA means that it is possible (although obviously highly difficult) for a high-visibility crossover star (like Lesnar) to go into MMA, where it seems pretty much impossible with boxing. Imagine a Mike Vick-esque star defensive end who gets suspended or kicked out of the NFL and decides he’s done with football and wants to pick up MMA. It’s not unreasonable that he could be good enough to fight in the UFC within two years and that would certainly capture the general public’s eye.

Any combat sport is probably going to be somewhat niche. MMA took off when they got a crossover star who captured the public’s eye for a bit. It will fade when interest in Lesnar dies down a bit. Do you think that a boxing champ can still capture the general public for an extended period of time?

Just some food for thought.