Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The casual fans got it right, while "Hardcore fans" act like their ***** dont stink.

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #91
    Originally posted by VERSION1 (V1) View Post
    no they would still complain a lot of casual fans did not watch ward/gatti corrales vs Castillo etc because no big names was fighting and it because not big event

    ask a casual fan who is Roman Gonzalez
    Good point. Casuals will miss a lot great fights nowadays because they only turn in when Floyd and, to a lesser degree, Manny fight.

    I am hopeful more casuals tune into canelo/cotto and that fight is great.

    Comment


      #92
      Originally posted by Deevel916 View Post
      I havent watched a Wlad fight since he fought Ibragimov. I was so turned off by his jabbing/hugging/leaning display that I vowed to never watch him again, and by the sounds of things, I havent missed much.

      I also refuse to watch Lara run and prance around the ring after seeing what he did against Canelo. That was just awful.
      We can't do anything about runners bro. At least Lara doesn't hug. Fans just need to demand that he's put on the undercards and fight his fellow runners. People are more tolerant when these runners are on the undercards. Excessive hugging is the main menace to the sport. Let's all focus on it. (I don't watch Klitschko.)

      Comment


        #93
        Originally posted by The Big Dunn View Post
        Good point. Casuals will miss a lot great fights nowadays because they only turn in when Floyd and, to a lesser degree, Manny fight.

        I am hopeful more casuals tune into canelo/cotto and that fight is great.
        they will because it will be a big event

        Comment


          #94
          I have never watched Floyd fight and considered him boring. Sometimes the fights turn out boring, as he figures out a way to keep taming his opponent and prevents them from doing anything. Everything he throws though is just so text book, it is beautiful to watch.

          Lomachenko is also beautiful to watch with what he does. It is so artistic and surgical.

          I dont get as much into Rigo or Lara, their styles work for them, but it is the same thing over and over again. Rigo though I would watch anyday over Lara, as he has more "beast" to his game.

          On the other hand I do get revved up for someone like David lemieux. Someone like that so hell bent on scattering brains is must watch for me.

          What it all comes down to is personal preference.

          Comment


            #95
            Originally posted by Deevel916 View Post
            Exhibiting a superior defense is one thing and a fighter should be given credit for it. Evading such as what Lara does is something else.

            Superior defense is when a fighter can stand in front of you or in the pocket and make you miss by slipping, bobbing, weaving and blocking. Sweatpea was a master at this. Nowaday's many defensive fighters are resorting to holding and/or evading.
            Exactly. These lames think what Peterson did in the first four rounds vs Garcia was defensive boxing. No, it was running away. Finally, Danny said, "WTF is this crap man, you gonna fight me or what?". Thats why Peterson lost that fight. Because he failed to do anything. But let these nerds tell it, Peterson put on a masterclass session of everything that boxing is about. Dirrell is another example of a fighter who does everything he can to stay 4 feet away from his opponent while flicking out the occassional jab. Again, that is not boxing, thats "tag, you're it".

            Comment


              #96
              Originally posted by Deevel916 View Post
              In some cases, its almost as if they prefer actionless fights. If that's your cup of tea then cool. If an actionless chessmatch is what you prefer, how about you just go to the park and watch 2 old guys actually play chess.
              Funny thing is, you mention Floyd vs Lara to them, and "nah, it won't bring any money, it would be boring".

              "But boxing is about hit and not get hit, derp derp. I love a technical chess match".

              Except when its Lara vs Floyd. Hypocrites, the entire lot of them.

              Comment


                #97
                Originally posted by LeonSpinxMwfpce View Post
                Funny thing is, you mention Floyd vs Lara to them, and "nah, it won't bring any money, it would be boring".

                "But boxing is about hit and not get hit, derp derp. I love a technical chess match".

                Except when its Lara vs Floyd. Hypocrites, the entire lot of them.
                Yep, that's what I don't get. When Lara is mentioned when it comes to Floyd's next fight they say, "there's no money there, it would be a boring fight." I thought these idiots want chess matches. They even have the nerve to justify it not getting made by mentioning about money. Floyd is a millionaire already, ****** mofos. He can choose any fight he wants and perhaps forego his $30 million guarantee, then add meaningful fights in the undercards. Why even mention money when you're not getting a cent out of it?

                Comment


                  #98
                  Originally posted by VERSION1 (V1) View Post
                  no they would still complain a lot of casual fans did not watch ward/gatti corrales vs Castillo etc because no big names was fighting and it because not big event

                  ask a casual fan who is Roman Gonzalez
                  Yea that may be the case. Those guys are not mainstream names so casuals don't know them. What I am saying is two of the biggest names fought, one gave a shyte effort and the other was just content with coasting to victory. If Floyd would have stepped on the gas an got pacquiao out of there, because Pacquiao worse than garbage, it would have been more exciting. And in turn it would have given boxing a better boast and give the casuals reason turn in to see fights they wouldn't normally watch. The biggest fight in PPV and arguably boxing history had more of a negative effect. If the mayweather-Pacquiao fight was a spectacular fight, I guarantee the PBC series viewer numbers would be WAY bigger.

                  Comment


                    #99
                    Originally posted by ElMeroChingon View Post
                    The casual fans know what it's really about, they flick the channel, if it isn't going to entertain, they flick to the next. They wont waste their time or money on something that's boring.

                    While these Phony"hardcore boxing fans" have their heads so far up their a55e5, they act like their ***** don't stink out arenas.


                    These "Hardcore Fans" that don't stick up for the sport are to blame. We have "fans" bending over letting promoters/fighters take them for their money for stale fights.
                    Practically handing over their money, siding with the fighter's excuse for failing to entertain, and not sticking up for the boxing fans.

                    They keep lying to themselves, saying they don't get bored.

                    It's like they want people to know they enjoy watching paint dry, acting like there's some incredible stuff going on behind the scenes that will give them credibility.

                    When in reality, they're just sitting there, watching paint dry,wasting time, missing out on what the causals are doing, having fun .


                    You'll never catch the casual fan doing some dumb ***** like that, they're not that ******.


                    Stop lying to yourself, all these fights fit within two extremes
                    (Boring--------------------watchable----------------------Entertaining)

                    Where only about 5% of Phony "Hardcore Fans" would say a boring fight entertained them for what ever reason the use to justify it.

                    Now because the fake fans are not looking for the viewers best interest in "pure entertainment", fights have tipped over to the Boring side because they let fighters get away with it.



                    These fighters are now using the excuse of not getting hit, even if it cost them the fight. Fights on the line, and they wait it out, if the opportunity doesn't come as a gift-box birthday present, they're ok with it, even if it means loosing the fight.

                    As a result there's no passion from these fighters. They just come and take the pay check, no entertainment, just a dry transaction, taking you for your money and time.

                    If the "phony hardcore" make up 5% of the viewers ( I agree. I'd say it's probably less) they're not driving the match-making, which is what you're complaining about, right?

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by boxinghead530 View Post
                      Yea that may be the case. Those guys are not mainstream names so casuals don't know them. What I am saying is two of the biggest names fought, one gave a shyte effort and the other was just content with coasting to victory. If Floyd would have stepped on the gas an got pacquiao out of there, because Pacquiao worse than garbage, it would have been more exciting. And in turn it would have given boxing a better boast and give the casuals reason turn in to see fights they wouldn't normally watch. The biggest fight in PPV and arguably boxing history had more of a negative effect. If the mayweather-Pacquiao fight was a spectacular fight, I guarantee the PBC series viewer numbers would be WAY bigger.
                      that may be true but this fight was never going to live up to the hype it got causal was expecting srl/hitman type of fight or maybe plus neither Floyd or pacman has that killer instinct that would have made this fight better

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP