Thomas Hauser inspires thought with latest HBO critique
Every year critical boxing reporter Thomas Hauser unleashes an article on the state of the game under the clutches of media mogul HBO. This year is no different, with him offering his insights in the form of a three part series entitled “HBO and the State
of Boxing.”
For starters, there is no denying that Hauser should be praised for these efforts. Hauser is a gifted reporter with a knack at analyzing the closed-door policies of the sport, even if sometimes his sources seem less than credible or even altogether unverifiable.
What really separates him from most is his ability to be critical, as opposed to merely news worthy. In a sport that receives no shortage of breaking news stories, many of which are completely trite and meaningless, it is refreshing to get weighty analysis
and speculation.
Hauser’s mission is simple: to expose how HBO has come to dominate the sport of boxing and largely impact it negatively. This is due to idiots operating the helm, though very well-funded idiots, who are able to make all the important moves because of funds
and sacred control of broadcasting dates.
Aside from the claim to ‘idiocy,’ that much is undeniably true. In the last decade HBO has risen like a titan in boxing, now having the biggest boxing budget in the world. Indeed, HBO’s broadcasting power has more or less become synonymous with success
in the sport. As a promoter or fighter in North America, you could have all the talent and luck in the world, but it won’t get you anywhere unless HBO chooses to televise your fights.
The crux of the matter, though, is that HBO has routinely (especially this year) shown a complete ineptness at putting on great boxing events. As an all-powerful force, the paradox is that fights on HBO ought to de facto become the biggest fights. Which
is true, in a sense, if we go by amounts dished out to promoters and fighters. Trouble is that doesn’t make them the best fights, and more and more insiders are willing to expose this painful distinction.
Hauser also accuses HBO of inflating fighters’ egos disproportionate to their skills in the ring. Examples: Andre Berto and Alfredo Angulo. Hall-of-fame promoter Russell Peltz puts it this way: “The problem is that HBO is more interested in guys with good
records than they are in guys who are good fighters. They think they’re building stars, and they aren’t. Fighters become stars when they win exciting fights.”
According to recent numbers, Andre Berto, who has fought essentially no one of worth in the boxing world (save for Carlos Quintana) will make over $1.5-million alone for his next bout. That’s what HBO is willing to pay him, which is a figure hugely outside
of the range of what other networks pay fighters. But Berto has not established himself at all in boxing. Notwithstanding, getting him in the ring with real competitors has become incredibly hard since he is used to such outrageous paydays. In fact a negotiations
for him and “Sugar” Shane Mosley fell through when he demanded financial parity (Mosley is a future hall-of-famer).
The bottom line, Hauser adds, is that HBO essentially doesn’t know boxing. As a broadcasting company, indeed, they can’t. For them fights are all about how they packaged, because packaging equals marketability and profit. But from a boxing standpoint,
this mentality is completely bogus, because it doesn’t imply the best fights at all.
To honour the sport, what HBO would really have to do is just simply put on the best fights. And maybe that entails funding an independent panel to evaluate the best fighters. Or maybe it just means looking at something like Ring Magazine rankings. Either
way, as Hauser suggests, things don’t look imminent to change for the better in the near future.
Tags: