Most entertaining & least entertaining (boring) champions of last 20 years?

[IronDanHamza]

Entertainment is subjective.

[The Big Dunn]

Some fighters can provide great entertainment even in matches that aren't evenly matched. Marquez is a fighter than was so much more skilled than his opponents and he fought responsibly and with the exception of Pacquaio IV really didn't put himself in a position to be KO'd but he entertained and often put something onto his punches. Lomachenko and Crawford are very dominant but they still make a point to entertain and usually don't coast.

PPV is often to do with marketability and appealing to casuals. I know most people were bored by Floy'd fights but would buy it anyway to see him lose. For me it was just not enough commitment to his shots, a little too much lateral movement and too much clinching. That's why I often didn't bother to watch him.

Well, with all due respect, then you are putting Floyd as non entertaining based on a small portion of his career where he was facing opponents bigger than him. What you described in the 1st paragraph is exactly what he did for most of his career.

Respectfully, you have no idea why they purchased the fight or what outcome they wanted. That is purely speculative.

The only subjective measure of entertainment is tickets/PPV's sold. While there are a small number of exceptions, people tend to purchase sporting events because they are entertained. You are suggesting that guys that sold less were more entertaining. I think you can see how that logic is troublesome.

Ok, I have no problem with you deciding not to watch Floyd for whatever reasons. My problem is it appears you you are projecting that reasoning onto other fans despite the subjective data-tickets/PPV's sold-indicating that he is entertaining.

Again, to each his own. I just wish you used subjective data. This way you can check your opinion against something tangible.

[chrisJS]

Well, with all due respect, then you are putting Floyd as non entertaining based on a small portion of his career where he was facing opponents bigger than him. What you described in the 1st paragraph is exactly what he did for most of his career.

Respectfully, you have no idea why they purchased the fight or what outcome they wanted. That is purely speculative.

The only subjective measure of entertainment is tickets/PPV's sold. While there are a small number of exceptions, people tend to purchase sporting events because they are entertained. You are suggesting that guys that sold less were more entertaining. I think you can see how that logic is troublesome.

Ok, I have no problem with you deciding not to watch Floyd for whatever reasons. My problem is it appears you you are projecting that reasoning onto other fans despite the subjective data-tickets/PPV's sold-indicating that he is entertaining.

Again, to each his own. I just wish you used subjective data. This way you can check your opinion against something tangible.

A lot of the eyeballs tuning in has to do with marketing. His fights were marketed very well as were Oscar's but Oscar was nowhere near as entertaining in the ring as Morales, Marquez, Barrera, Trinidad for example. More people tuned in for Klitshcko fights than Chocolatito fights but come on what would you rather watch?

Is the World Cup final the most entertaining thing in sports? No. It's always boring but it gets more eyeballs than any sporting events.

I get it you think Floyd is the most entertaining boxer to come along but more often than not people were bored by his fights. The average man on the street if you ask were they thoroughly entertained by his fights he'd probably say no. Dumbass bought it again though because of great marketing.

[boliodogs]

I come here to relax. Making an accurate, well thought out list of who I think were the ten most entertaining and the ten most boring boxers of the last 20 years is too much work for me. Trinidad was my favorite when he was fighting. Today I love to watch Spence, GGG and Canelo fight. Pacquiao at his best was very exciting as was Marquez. Wilder isn't all that good in my opinion but it's fun to watch the windmill of doom who has KOed everyone he ever fought. Lots of boxers fighting now are very entertaining to me. Loma, Crawford, Mikey Garcia, Kovalev, AJ, Stivenson, Benevides, Santa Cruz and many more are great to watch in most of their fights.

[TheCell8]

Miguel Vaszquez should be no1 on everyones list.

[boliodogs]

Sorry if I didn't spell any boxer's names correctly.

[GhostofDempsey]

Entertaining:

Pac
Barrera
Morales
Marquez
De La Hoya
Trinidad
Mayorga
Roy Jones
Holyfield
Loma
Cotto
Gatti

Most Boring:

Ward
Mayweather
Hopkins
Klitschko
Fury
Andrade
Lara
Rigo
Ruiz
Cory Spinks
Ottke
Winky
Tarver
Byrd

[The Big Dunn]

A lot of the eyeballs tuning in has to do with marketing. His fights were marketed very well as were Oscar's but Oscar was nowhere near as entertaining in the ring as Morales, Marquez, Barrera, Trinidad for example. More people tuned in for Klitshcko fights than Chocolatito fights but come on what would you rather watch?

Is the World Cup final the most entertaining thing in sports? No. It's always boring but it gets more eyeballs than any sporting events.

I get it you think Floyd is the most entertaining boxer to come along but more often than not people were bored by his fights. The average man on the street if you ask were they thoroughly entertained by his fights he'd probably say no. Dumbass bought it again though because of great marketing.

Well if it was just marketing then everyone who is marketed that way would do Floyd's numbers. We know that isn't the case.

Again, respectfully, when your opinion on who is more entertaining isn't supported by ticket/PPV's sold, you can't just write it off. At some point, if you are being fair, you need to be honest that your preference is not in line with everyone else. You may find it boring, other do not.

Now you are contradicting yourself. You said drama was a criteria for entertainment. The world cup final has TONS of drama, which makes it exciting. Again, I am ok with your opinion, it just is unfair to suggest everyone shares that same opinion when the numbers say otherwise.

No, I do not think that about Floyd. I am simply asking that you factor in ticket/PPV sales since every measure of "entertaining" in sport/music/movies/tv is based on how many paying customers one draws. It appears as if you are discounting this because it contradicts your opinion.

We will never know why someone purchased a ticket/ppv but They most likely bought it because they like watching Floyd fight, not because of the way it was marketed. If people are not entertained, they will not purchase, regardless of the marketing.

[SensFullViolenc]

I agree with everyone on the list EXCEPT Hatton & Porter -- as many have pointed out, they brought action & pressure. Sure, they wrestled a bit too, but it didnt stop the flow.

Also, while I would absolutely include old BHop on the boring list, in his early career, he wasnt that boring.

I also wouldnt include Floyd on the boring list. Not the most exciting, but not among the "champs" of boring.

Good entertainer list.

[club fighter]

Entertaining:

Pac
Barrera
Morales
Marquez
De La Hoya
Trinidad
Mayorga
Roy Jones
Holyfield
Loma
Cotto
Gatti

Most Boring:

Ward
Mayweather
Hopkins
Klitschko
Fury
Andrade
Lara
Rigo
Ruiz
Cory Spinks
Ottke
Winky
Tarver
Byrd

I totally agree with this list, except for Tarver, he was fun to watch in the mid 2000s, his KO of Jones just happened too quick.