Mailbag: The effects of declining newspapers

My column last week on the dwindling newspaper coverage of boxing prompted a flood of reader response.

Many wrote in with things they think are wrong with boxing above and beyond the lack of newspaper coverage. These points included too many champions, unreliable rankings and corruption.

But the response got me thinking about the many good things in boxing. And so, before I delve into the reader mailbag and give you your turn, I thought I’d list some of the things that still make boxing such a compelling sport.

1. Toe-to-toe slugfests: It may not exhibit the most skilled side of the sport, but there is something enthralling about watching two fighters stand face to face and fire away without apparent concern for their own safety. The will to win in these men is incredible.

2. Technical brilliance: Watching a boxer use his legs, his hands and his head is a sight to behold. Wading into another man’s power zone, making him miss and then countering with a solid blow, is a very unappreciated art.

3. Conditioning: For every fighter like Chris Arreola who comes in looking like he was a reject from a Weight Watchers meeting, there are dozens who have clearly sacrificed to get themselves into the best possible conditioning for the battle. If you think it’s easy to be a fighter, shadow-box in front of the mirror for three minutes without stopping. Then, even though you haven’t had to worry about anyone punching you, you’ll have a greater appreciation for what these men are able to do.

4. Rags to riches: Few sports have better rags-to-riches stories than boxing, in which fighters save themselves by using boxing as a means to a better life. Oscar De La Hoya carries a food stamp in his wallet to remind him of his days as a youth in East Los Angeles, where his family barely had enough money to survive.

5. Passion: It’s hard not to be caught up in the passion these men bring to their jobs.

6. Compassion: Trainers such as Freddie Roach and Eddie Mustafa Muhammad are among the best at what they do – not only because of their technical brilliance but because they also care so much for the fighters they train that they’ll stop a fight.

7. Conversation: There are few athletes like boxers, who are apt to say anything about anyone at any time.

8. Electricity: I’ve covered nearly every major sports championship, but few of them match the feeling in a crowd before a truly huge fight.

9. Sportsmanship: If there are better sportsmen than fighters, I haven’t met them.

10. The KO: When you see a knockout in a major fighter, there is nothing like it.

With that, it’s time to get into the mailbag and see what the Yahoo! Sports readers have to say. My answers to your questions and comments, as always, are in italics.

PLEASE INSPIRE ME

I just read your article on the decline of boxing. And I agree that boxing isn’t dying, but I do have some issues. What do I want when watching a fight? I want to be inspired. I still get goose bumps when I watch the first Muhammad Ali-Joe Frazier fight when Ali got up from that devastating punch on the jaw. They were true warriors and it’s fair to say they gave their lives to the sport. I could go on and on about those kind of fighters, but let’s talk about what we have today. Guys make many, many millions per fight and one of them quits in the corner? I see a lot of skill out there, but where’s the heart? How many millions of dollars does it take for a fighter to dig deep inside like the old guys did and prove they showed up to fight? Just once, I’d like to hear a fighter say, “I don’t care about the money. I just want to fight.” Manny Pacquiao demanded more money to fight Ricky Hatton. Are you kidding me? Just when I thought, “We’ve got a fighter here,” the greed comes out and here we go all over again. I wont be watching that night, for that sole reason. All I’m asking for is a little integrity. That’s what inspires me. It’s OK to talk the talk. Just get off your knees when it’s time to walk the walk.

Mike S.

Louisiana

I understand your point, Mike, though I think there have been a lot of the kinds of fights you would want to see. And no one should begrudge a fighter the money he makes, because it’s a dangerous sport. All we ask is that the fighters earn that money. That means cooperating with the media to promote the fight, entering the ring in shape and fighting as hard as you can for three minutes of every round. To suggest guys don’t dig deep and sacrifice anymore is wrong.

MISSING THE BOAT

To say boxing is dying because of lack of newspaper coverage is wrong. You had part of it in saying there aren’t many star fighters. Never have there been fewer big names. What’s worse is the lack of interesting fights. And what about the lack of a quality heavyweight division? When’s the last heavyweight fight that was even interesting, Tyson-Lewis? And when’s the last good heavyweight fight you recall? As for newspaper coverage, mixed martial arts, which is popular, gets as much print as boxing, so newspapers have nothing to do with it. You need two things to succeed: One is to create a spectacle and the other is to follow up on the spectacle with something to see.

Phil

Minneapolis

The notion that there aren’t enough interesting fights is flat wrong. There are many, many thrilling bouts a year. There are many reasons for boxing’s decline in popularity, and the lack of regular newspaper coverage is one of them. By no means is it the only reason. While I’d agree that there aren’t a lot of good heavyweight fights, there still are some. Adam “The Swamp Donkey” Richards and Chazz Witherspoon engaged in a very entertaining bout last year. There have been some. The point is, it’s not for a lack of quality bouts that boxing is struggling.

BLAME THE NETWORKS

Two words why boxing is dying: HBO, Showtime.

Rodel

St. Charles, Ill.

I’ve been a big critic of both networks in the past, Rodel, and I’ll agree that they have to take their share of the blame for some things that went on in the past. But this year, so far, they’ve done a good job. They’ve put on quality fights. Hopefully, it keeps up, but they deserve kudos at this point, which hasn’t always been the case.

PAPER INTERESTED HIM IN BOXING

I became a hardcore boxing fan about three-and-a-half years ago, due in part to the

Duluth, Minn., News Tribune’s coverage of a local fighter by the name of Zach Walters. My friends and I started following the “Jungle Boy” religiously. We went to all of his local fights, even driving as far as Fargo, N.D., to watch him. By going to the shows, we also developed a liking for another fighter from Zach’s stable, Andy “Kaos” Kolle. Eventually, we were going to shows headlined only by “Kaos.” From there, we started following guys like Matt Vanda, Tony Bonsante, and Jason Litzau. The next thing you know, I’m paying for HBO and Showtime every month strictly for their boxing coverage. I understand that the local fighters that first sold me on the dream of following an eventual world champion probably will grind out respectable purses as long as they can and nothing more. But the point is, it starts with steady coverage and good local promotion. Without the Duluth News Tribune, I’d probably only see lackluster fights like Oscar vs. Manny. Great story, Kevin. You are a fantastic reporter and I fear for the days when boxing columns with your type of fanfare are no more.

Mike M.

Denver

Thanks, Mike. That’s much appreciated. It’s a great story you shared and one I wish sports editors would see. There are so many terrific stories to be told if an editor took the time to assign a reporter to write them.

CRAVING THE SPOTLIGHT

I found it very desperate when I watched Juan Manuel Marquez calling out Floyd Mayweather Jr. after his victory over Juan Diaz on Feb. 28. Ricky Hatton wants a rematch with Floyd and a Mayweather-Manny Pacquiao might be possible as well. It looks to me like Marquez is trying to grab some attention because he knows the spotlight is on those three fighters.

Jeffrey B.

Philippines

Jeffrey, you’re way, way off base. Marquez is a great fighter and wants to test himself against the best in the world. You should commend him for that, not criticize him. If only we had more fighters who wanted to challenge themselves. Plus, it’s his job, and he’ll make more by fighting Mayweather, Pacquiao or Hatton than he would a Juan Diaz.

NOT BUYING THE HYPE

I will not jump on this bandwagon. I’m a true boxing fan, but I am tired of the unfairness I see in it. Amir Khan fought a great fight defeating the smaller and faded Marco Antonio Barrera. However, I cannot feel convinced that all of a sudden Khan is the greatest thing since sliced bread. After the fight, Freddie Roach said he had no doubt that Khan would become the next world champion. I don’t have any doubts about that, either. Kahn has the youth, athleticism, potential, not to mention a solid fan base. He’s marketable. What bothers me is that boxing is no longer about merit. Promoters hype the big names regardless of whether they deserve a title shot or not. I cannot get over the fact that Khan was destroyed by Breidis Prescott in less than one minute, and now I’m supposed to believe that he is the next great champion? I didn’t hear Amir Kahn say anything about a rematch with Prescott. I know boxing is a business, and financially it probably doesn’t make sense. Try to convince me Khan would win in rematch with him. Prescott remains undefeated; shouldn’t he get credit for defeating such a great fighter like Khan? Why doesn’t he get a title shot? I don’t hear any promoters fighting over Prescott’s next fight. Is it because he is not as marketable as Khan? Of course, and that is not fair. I know life is not fair, but I would like to see someone get rewarded for their efforts for a change.

Raul M.

New York

Khan looked good against Barrera, though the cut Barrera sustained in the first round undoubtedly played a role. I think Khan will fight for a title; whether he wins one is entirely another story, but I think he’s a skilled guy. He’s also charming and, as you point out, a ticket seller. Those are the kinds of guys you want to see fight for titles. Yes, he lost to Prescott, but it was one fight. I’m not suggesting Prescott isn’t a good fighter, because I told people before that fight that Prescott was a live underdog. But let’s not make too much of one loss, either. The greatest fighter of them all, Sugar Ray Robinson, lost 19 times and drew six times.

THOUGHTS ON JOHN-JUAREZ

I just saw the replay of the Chris John-Rocky Juarez fight and one thing I noticed was the fact that every time John clinched, referee Laurence Cole would step in and swat away his left arm, causing him to lose his balance. That’s when Juarez would capitalize by shooting a left hook to the head. Is this sort of intervention allowed? Also, when John faded out in the last two rounds of the fight, would you say that this was a miss on his part, a la Oscar De La Hoya against Felix Trinidad?

Dominic

To answer the last part of your question first, this situation was nothing like De La Hoya’s decision to run the last four rounds against Trinidad. John was suffering from the flu and simply weakened as the fight wore on. De La Hoya ran because he thought he had the fight won and didn’t want to risk getting caught with a big punch. As for the first part, the referee has the right to break the fighters and stop them from clinching, but he shouldn’t interfere to an extent that he causes one fighter to be hit while unprotected. I didn’t notice John being knocked off balance and I was at ringside. If Cole did indeed hit John hard enough that he caused him to lose his balance, then he was being far too aggressive with the fighters. A quality referee should be able to control the action with his voice.

AP WRITER OFF HIS ROCKER

Marco Antonio Barrera, a legend who has been in more wars than one can count, deserves a little more respect than he received from Associated Press writer Rob Harris, who covered Barrera’s fight Saturday in Manchester, England, against Amir Khan. Harris wrote, “The 22-year-old Brit won on a technical decision after a disciplined battering of the outclassed Mexican, who was covered in blood after sustaining a cut to his forehead in the first round.” Is Rob Harris English or does he just not know much about boxing, describing a legend as the “outclassed Mexican” and no mention of how the cut came to be. Despite his age, Barrera had almost no chance with that massive cut in the first round.

Paul

Boston

I don’t think Harris meant to insult Barrera with what he wrote. He was simply referring to the way the fight went. Clearly, no one who knows boxing could ever suggest that Khan has had anything even remotely approaching the kind of career Barrera has had. A prime Barrera would have destroyed Khan. That wasn’t a prime Barrera on Saturday, though, and cut or no cut, I believe Khan would have won the fight. The cut, though, did make it easier. And it was more than a little suspicious that the fight wasn’t stopped in the fourth, when it would have been ruled a no contest, but then was stopped in the fifth, when Khan would win by TKO.

Label: Sport