Every Thursday here at FightHype, boxing fans gather around my bulbous, bulging sack in anticipation of an Ol’ Faithful money shot of gooey, salty truth. This Thursday is no different. So, put your goggles on and cinch up your plastic poncho, here it comes. This week, we have comments/questions regarding pound-for-pound, the Haney-Loma controversy, Danny Garcia, and ProBox TV,
Pound-for-Pound Revisited
Hi Paul,
Thanks for all your hard work and putting your opinions out there even when the established boxing press has a vested interest in minimizing your voice.
Regarding your pound-for-pound article, I couldn't agree more. I remember one of Wladimir Klitschko's strategies was to lean on his opponents as much as possible to tire them out for later rounds. I have a sneaking suspicion that such a technique wouldn't work as well for Naoya Inoue or Gervonta Davis.
I have a fair bit of knowledge of Olympic-style wrestling. Right now, there is an American heavyweight, Gable Steveson (Gold medalist in Tokyo in one of the coolest matches ever) who is the most athletic heavyweight of all time. He can do things no heavyweight has ever been able to do. But, many smaller guys have the same elite level, or even high level, of athleticism. Does that diminish his incredible gifts? Does that mean that pound-for-pound, he's a worse wrestler? No! Of course not.
I think what pound-for-pound ratings do is distract from thinking about greatness properly. The boxing skill and movement that Tyson Fury has is incredible precisely because he is a massive man. By using pound-for-pound terminology, I think it diminishes what some of our great fighters do and abstracts very real concrete discussions we could have on technique and ability. Personally, I just focus on which fighters are great and use my own biased and subjective approach to think about who is the greatest at the moment.
Just my rambling thoughts on a good topic.
Keep up the amazing work and know that there are tons of people who really appreciate what you do.
Best,
– Jeremiah
Hey Jeremiah.
Thanks for the kind words. It’s nice to be reminded that even if self-important swamp-assed bloggers and the convenient idiots in the mainstream media refuse to speak my name, my work DOES get out there.
You’re right, pound-for-pound is just a big distraction. I’m not necessarily against rankings, but any rankings based on the subjective opinions of boxing media-- a group of people filled with biases, blind spots, and odd agendas-- is worthless. This media of ours, sorely lacking in self-awareness when it comes to their own awfulness, always insists on putting their sloppy fingerprints on everything. So, what we always get in these media rankings are lists of names put in order via consensus of non-expert experts, based on the whims, fancies, and often faulty opinions of the media members allowed into whatever clique is doing the rankings.
The only fair and intellectually legitimate way to do rankings, whether they be divisional or pound-for-pound, is to develop some sort of fair formulaic method that ranks fighters on their actual merit via accomplishment, activity, and level of opposition. The fingerprint of the media must be removed. None of this can be like the opinion polls passing as rankings right now. In a sport full of sleight of hand and guided by a terribly inept and biased media, the only fair rankings can be those that use the least amount of human involvement possible.
And, by that standard, pound-for-pound can never be a thing because there are no real, concrete criteria by which fighters can be fairly ranked. Maybe it would be better to make rankings that rate fighters based on activity, success, and level of opposition within a certain period of time. Then, that way, we’d get rankings that aren’t “mythical” and stained by the biases of the nerds compiling them.
But, then again, if opinion was removed from the equation, how would media members get their ego boost from being on an “expert panel?”
Circling Back on Haney-Loma
I'd like to circle back with you regarding the Haney-Loma aftermath. I understand there's corrupt judges in boxing. But theres no incentive on behalf of Top Rank to lure the judges in favor of Haney. Haneys a free agent with all 4 belts in a division that’s Top Rank’s bread and butter. What's the incentive for being corrupt in Haney’s favor?
The uproar is despicable and the reaction had me scratching my head wondering what did I miss! Did Loma outclass this guy and I was completely oblivious to the fact? So I watched the fight again without the volume or anyone around. I couldn't find 7 rounds for Haney or Loma. I found 5 rounds for each guy and 2 rounds that could've gone either way. But it goes back to my original theory. The bodywork, glove touching and jabbing gave the close rounds to Haney.
Loma is probably one of the biggest sore losers in boxing. He lost against Teo Lopez and blamed it on his shoulder. He lost a close fight last week and he went to the locker room in tears claiming robbery When Andre Ward stopped Kovalev in their second fight, he was ringside claiming corruption and bad referring. I mean this guy gets a pass at just being an all-around Diva.
Bernard Hopkins is calling for government regulation. Oscar De LA Hoya says this is the biggest robbery since he was robbed against Floyd. Paulie Malinaggi says "Loma deserves better" as if he had the back of his neck stepped on. Not to mention the Nevada State Athletic Commision is fining Haney 400K for shoving Loma. The bottom line is that at the age of just 24, Haney successfully defended his undisputed status twice. Once in Australia and once against the so called "Greatest Amateur of All Time." Everyone else can kick rocks and go watch MMA or WWE if boxing is so corrupt!
– Nail Rahman
Hey Nail.
I don't think corruption in boxing is like it used to be in the old days. It’s institutionalized, built into the fabric of standard operating procedure. Nobody told the judges to cheat for the house fighter, nobody had to tell them to lean the way they did. For them, both Haney and Lomachenko were house fighters because nobody at the time knew Haney's status when it came to promotional companies. Arum’s not going to tell them, “this is my guy...give him the close rounds.” As a fresher, younger fighter with the four belts and all that future ahead of him, it was safe to say that if both guys were Top Rank, the money was behind Haney, so he got the benefit of the doubt.
Mistakes happen, biases in judging criteria exist, but you have to admit that it's pretty damning that all of these mistakes seem to happen to the benefit of the house fighter or the "money" fighter. In all my time watching the sport, I can count on one hand-- maybe even two fingers-- the times a judging or scoring controversy didn't work to the benefit of the house or money fighter.
Again, it’s not far-fetched at all. The judges all come from a list of pre-approved names (essentially pre-approved by the promoters). The pay/privilege/etc. for the judges also comes from the same promoters “selecting” them via commission/sanctioning body proxy. It’s a real stretch to think that the judges wouldn’t be swayed into leaning, even subconsciously, towards those making their high-profile gigs possible.
"If you think it's so corrupt, stop watching" is the wrong attitude to take. We have to put pressure on the powers that be to make the necessary reforms. One possible answer is to prevent promoters from signing fighters to long-term deals and make them bid on events on a fight by fight basis. In this business model, there would be no "house" fighter and the promoter's only worry would be in making quality fights that had a fair, satisfactory ending to make sure the fans walk away not feeling swindled or cheated. The emphasis for the promoters would be on making good fights and not on protecting their investments.
A lot of this post-Haney fight uproar is coming from hardcore Lomachenko fan boys in the media and beyond. That's not my motivation. I picked Haney to win solidly. It doesn’t matter to me whether I like a fighter or not, I’m interested in fairness. I hate to see fans talking about degrees of robbery, like if a fight is close, judges are allowed to get it wrong. As I said before, if "boxing logic were applied to the NBA, poor officiating would be more tolerated in a close game because, well, it was close anyway and shit happens." For me, if the wrong man is declared the winner, that's a robbery. And, while the fight was close, there was a lot of odd logic from the judges' side that doesn't gel with what I saw in there, especially from Dave Moretti's card. I’d be railing about a shitty decision whether it was Haney-Lomachenko or not. In this particular case, there’s been extra drama all around because of Lomachenko’s “favorite son” status in some quarters of the online Universo Pugilistico.
Danny Garcia, ProBox TV
Hi Paul,
A few things I'd like to get your take on:
1) I've always been a Danny Garcia fan but I gotta be honest, I think he peaked after the Matthysse fight and has been sort of "meh" ever since. Where does he go from here? Retirement? Also, why in the world would he even think about getting in the ring with Erislandy Lara? I mean, it is, literally, the worst possible match-up for him. Canelo had a terrible time with Lara and I would say Canelo is stronger and pretty much better at everything than Danny. Help me understand because I can't get there on my own.
2) I may have missed it, but I don't think I've seen you write anything about ProBox TV. It seems that the Founder/CEO, Gary Jonas, is throwing around a little bit of coin trying to get it off the ground and Paul Malignaggi seems to be playing a major role in their productions. Is there a future for a cheap all-boxing app with low to mid-level fights?
Best.
– Will
Hey Will.
1) I don’t think Danny Garcia’s head has been fully in boxing for awhile. Last I checked, his social media timelines were full of his assorted non-boxing side gigs, like his fashion line and hip-hop endeavors. He certainly hasn’t fought with any sense of urgency in a very long time, although I get that he’s more of a cool-headed counter-puncher that a fiery battler. But, however, I do get the sense that he’s not burning with boxing passion anymore and may just be fighting to pad the nest egg. I also don’t get the choice of Lara as an opponent, unless Team Garcia is counting on Lara being a shell of his former self (which could be the case). Given the current realities of the middleweight division, it also may just be easier to grab at a Lara fight than try for another title outside of the PBC family.
2) I haven’t talked about it, but I do enjoy ProBoxTV and I watch as regularly as possible. They are what they are-- low-to-mid-level fights that, for the most part, are well-booked and as competitive as realistically possible. I think there’s a place for something like ProBoxTV, as long as they’re smart with their financials and work to keep the product entertaining. Unfortunately, the reality is that these lower-level shows rarely make any sort of significant money. For promoters, they’re considered more of an investment in building their fighters’ brand so they can turn a profit later on. It’s questionable whether something like this can exist on its own and turn enough of a profit to stay afloat. I hope they do stick around.
I liken this to minor league baseball, which is quaint and fun (and cheap) in comparison to the big league product. It won’t be major league quality, but nobody’s expecting the best of the best. They’re just expecting to be entertained.
Got a question (or hate mail) for Magno’s Bulging Mail Sack? The best of the best gets included in the weekly mailbag segment right here at FightHype. Send your stuff here: paulmagno@theboxingtribune.com.