When is money an excuse in boxing?
In the business of boxing, money is the reason for everything. Fights aren’t made because they’re expected to be good fights or because the fans want to see them. Fights are made for profit, which just so happens to usually align with what the fans want. But it would be naive to think that the game is about anything other than economic opportunity. As a viable business, boxing has to do what it has to do to survive and stay competitive. And that means, above all, bringing in revenue.
But while money is always the reason in boxing, it is often also the excuse. Excuses, of course, are bids at reason; but whether or not they hold up as the "Real McCoy" is ultimately for outside parties to judge.
The problem is that more and more today, fans are being subjected to critically assess whether or not this or that financial 'excuse' is legit. And this isn’t what boxing fans should be doing. They should be watching and enjoying the sport that they love. But as boxing has evolved into a full-fledged business in which every fighter, promoter, commissioner and broadcaster has a business stake in the pie, it’s increasingly impossible to sweep these factors under the boxing ring.
In the last decade, fighters themselves have become increasingly aware of their other alter-ego as businessmen, and today it shows. But that isn’t always a good thing, and it means, as businessmen, they’re salesmen, and as salesmen they’re potentially selling fans products that may be c**p (or generally untrue).
Take the recent dispute between WBA junior welterweight titlist Amir Khan and interim titlist Marcos Maidana. These two guys have been trying to get it on for over a month now, and by all rights Maidana should have an opportunity to challenge Khan for his title. He’s the interim champ, he’s earned it. But of course there’s been trouble on the negotiating table. Khan has repeatedly said Maidana is “overpricing” himself for a fight with him. In other words, Khan and his team seem to feel Maidana should be asking for less in the fight since Maidana would be the challenger. Khan is effectively telling Maidana he isn’t “worth” what he claims to be worth financially, something Maidana obviously disagrees with. But if Khan wants Maidana to ask for less, to “underprice” himself according to Maidana’s standards, isn’t that just a roundabout way for Khan to say he wants to “overprice” himself? After all, if Maidana gets less, he gets more.
What’s more, though, is that until now Khan has said that negotiations with Maidana have essentially failed because of financial discord. Unfortunately, there is no way to confirm this. It could just be Khan is scared of fighting Maidana, who has knocked out 27 of his 29 opponents. But because Khan is a boxer and a businessman, he can shift the blame onto finance, and “sell” us a story that relieves him of blame. This is a perfect example of money being used as an excuse in boxing for a fight not happening, when it may be because of other factors altogether.
Two more examples are variations on the same theme. The failed negotiations between David Haye and Wladimir Klitschko and those between Floyd Mayweather Jr. and Manny Pacquiao. Haye has gone on the record and said that he didn’t like the amounts Klitschko was offering him for a fight, so he refused them. But what does that even mean? Is it true? How do we know? What seems entirely more viable is that Haye calculated that being WBA champ and getting smaller pay days is optimal to losing his title and getting one big pay day against Klitschko. Why did he calculate this? Because in boxing, money is always the reason.
Tags: