Introduction:
It is that time of year once again. What has become a yearly tradition here at The Boxing Truth® ️ where this observer begins the new year by sharing his “Boxing Wishlist" with the dear readers who have followed my writings over the many years I have covered Boxing and by extension combat sports. By the title of this column for those who are unfamiliar with previous editions, this is a list of things that I would like to see happen in the sport of Boxing during the course of the new year. It also should be pointed out for those who may be reading the “Boxing Wishlist" put out by yours truly for the first time that this is not a standard list in the sense of a numbered list from 1-10 for example, but rather a condensed selection of topics that will be highlighted in Bold that I will try to discuss in both a detailed as well as a condensed form as possible within the context of a single column. While I always hope to add new topics that have not been featured before in previous years, unfortunately, circumstances do warrant some things to remain on the list, but will be obviously updated for present context as is necessary.
As has also become standard over the years as this list has evolved into a yearly tradition, this year's list is being compiled in the latter days of 2024 while yours truly is recuperating after what was a busy year for the sport and also a challenging one for me personally. For the purposes of this year's list, it is being composed before the World Heavyweight championship rematch between champion Oleksandr Usyk and Tyson Fury, which was held in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on December 21st. Delayed coverage of that encounter will be covered in a separate column that will be released on Tuesday, January 7th. Without any further ado, it is time to get into this year's “Boxing Wishlist."
A " Boxing Wishlist For 2025”:
A Possible Consolidation Of Boxing’s Power Brokers (Promoters) Under One Broadcast Platform:
This is a subject that is both interesting and could be viewed as both good and bad for the sport depending on one’s perspective. One of the more consistent themes of this observer’s work over the last thirteen or so years has been the emergence of digital streaming networks and more specifically, how subscription-based streaming has the opportunity to bring Boxing into a new era that offers both better value and is more cost effective for consumers. A significant part of this particular theme since 2018 has been the inception of DAZN and ESPN+, two digital streaming networks dedicated exclusively to sports that quickly emerged as successors to previous broadcast powerhouses HBO and Showtime, two premium cable networks that have since both exited Boxing.
Although both networks have offered Boxing fans considerably more content than had previously been offered prior to the advent of streaming and have done so mostly under a subscription-based model, it has been DAZN that has grown significantly to house several promoters respective events all under their broadcast banner including Eddie Hearn’s Matchroom Boxing, Oscar De La Hoya’s Golden Boy Promotions, Universum Box Promotions, Dmitry Salita’s Salita Promotions, and most recently Frank Warren's Queensberry Promotions to name a few of what is becoming a deep and global roster of promotional entities ranging from the top of the sport to promoters on the regional level worldwide.
While it is a testament to the growth of DAZN not just in regard to their involvement in Boxing, but also their ongoing investment in securing additional sporting rights as well as continued expansion of their network around the world, the network is poised to continue building momentum in 2025 and may further add to it's Boxing roster, which could increase the likelihood of the network becoming as close to a one stop destination for all things Boxing that is frankly uncharted territory.
While this could also be seen as bad for the sport in the sense that it might limit competition if most of Boxing's major promoters and even regional promoters around the world will be openly seeking one platform, for the respective other platforms that exist in the sport, which in regard to here in the United States consist of in addition to ESPN/ESPN+, ProBox TV, Triller TV, Prime Video, and Peacock, like DAZN and ESPN, all of the above are largely streaming-based networks, but it will be interesting to see if ESPN for example, who is preparing to revamp their streaming offering to include access to the ESPN linear cable networks, without requiring a Pay-TV provider to access those feeds through the ESPN app, will be looking to either increase their involvement in the sport or potentially at minimum scale back as the network’s agreement with Hall of Fame promoter Bob Arum's Top Rank Boxing is due to conclude in the Summer of 2025, which has also fueled speculation that Arum could potentially be next to join DAZN’s roster.
Although as of this writing, the latter is speculation and yours truly does not like partaking in the practice of rumor gossip, if Arum is indeed preparing to switch platforms, it will be interesting to see what ESPN and the other networks involved in Boxing might do. Even though DAZN has built a roster of promoters and Boxing programming the sport has never seen before, there is always no shortage of promoters worldwide who will always be looking to make their footprint in the sport and it will be very interesting to see if ESPN and Arum do part ways if the network will look to a different promoter who is not currently signed to any of the aforementioned networks and give them a platform in which to try and make that footprint just as it allowed Arum to do initially beginning in 1980 when Arum’s Top Rank became the first major promoter to provide Boxing on a weekly basis on what was then a network in it's early stages in ESPN. There is also always the possibility given what has happened in the last decade with HBO and Showtime that ESPN, though sports centric, might opt to move in a different direction away from Boxing, which if that were to happen, would open a potential window of opportunity for the other networks that have been mentioned here outside of DAZN to potentially expand their involvement in the sport. How this will all play out obviously remains to be seen, but the question is how could this benefit consumers, which leads to the next and all too familiar item that remains a staple of this observer’s annual “Boxing Wishlist."
The Need For Boxing To Finally Embrace Subscription-Based Models Over Pay-Per-View:
This one admittedly is the one item on the list year over year that has seen very little change, perhaps due to the stubbornness of those in the sport who are hell-bent on sticking with what has been an outdated and overpriced model for years, as well as yours truly’s refusal to stop speaking up on something I sincerely feel needs to change, not for the benefit of myself, but for the sport I have loved all my life and have covered for most of it.
The silver-lining to a significant amount of promoters all being under one broadcast platform in DAZN, which is a global network, however, just might give the network the opportunity to get back to it's original strategy upon its inception here in the United States in 2018, which in turn would ultimately benefit consumers. Top level Boxing cards under a reasonably priced subscription-based model without the need for subscribers to pay an additional pay-per-view fee to access the sport’s major events on DAZN’s platform.
Those who are knowledgeable on the subject know that DAZN, while remaining a subscription-based network, has deviated from their original promise and has offered Boxing cards including some “Influencer Boxing" events which have required an additional pay-per-view fee, which began in 2022 as a likely response to both coming out of the global COVID-19 epidemic in an attempt to recoup losses, which began for many in the television and streaming industries when the world was brought to a standstill in 2020, as well as a way to get fighters and promoters, who have insisted, despite the significant evidence of pay-per-view being in decline, to continue to use the model, to bring them to their platform.
Those who have followed my work going back to the mid-1990’s when I began my writing journey and entered the sport as a writer, but also spent several years covering the professional wrestling industry as well as periodically also covering Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) in several online and print publications that predated The Boxing Truth®️, the outlet which I own and operate, know that I have frequently and unapologetically criticized the pay-per-view model, primarily over increasing costs as years have gone on as well as the frequency in which the model has been used in that a vast majority of pay-per-view events were put on pay-per-view as a requirement in contractual agreements and/or demands of promoters and even some fighters, more so than it being a significant event, deemed special that would draw a significant audience. Although I can be significantly more thorough, I will give a brief background into what ultimately convinced me that pay-per-view created more problems for Boxing than it solved. I came into this world in the 1980’s. Back then, pay-per-view as well as the cable/satellite industry as a whole were in its initial growing stages. In the context of Boxing and for a period of time Professional Wrestling, saw their major events shown on closed-circuit television in arenas, and theaters throughout much of the United States, but also on cable/satellite pay-per-view where it was available at that time.
While there was also a difference back then in how those events were presented in that it was presented as a special event and featured a look and feel of something one would not see on standard television broadcasts of either medium at that time, the prices also were limited to between $15-$30 depending on the market you were in and those events were occasional, which made it feel more special, though pro wrestling was the first to eventually expand on the occasional special event to something that would evolve to one event per fiscal quarter by the time the 1980’s came to an end.
With the brief trip down memory lane now also concluded, I should not have to tell those who are knowledgeable that pay-per-view is no longer the budget friendly model that it once was and in regard to Boxing the feel of the true “Special Event" is at best a rarity. Despite this fact and the continued decline of the model with very rare exceptions, promoters still continue to use pay-per-view, even as evidence of the success of reasonably priced subscription-based models exist and could help the sport significantly in the long-term.
One need look no further than the recent event featuring social media influencer, turned aspiring boxer Jake Paul and 58 year old former two-time Heavyweight world champion and Hall of Famer Mike Tyson in November of last year. A controversial event for a few reasons, but one that, despite Mike Tyson's status as once the biggest draw in the sport in the 1980’s and more specifically throughout much of the 1990’s where the latter period saw most of his fights carried on pay-per-view, the Tyson-Paul event was not a pay-per-view attraction, but was instead offered on digital subscription entertainment network Netflix.
While the event was not without its share of controversy both for what occurred inside the ring, but more specifically relating to issues with the live broadcast stream of the event, which was significant, the event, which was also archived for on-demand viewing without any of the issues that plagued the live broadcast, drew an audience of 108 million subscribers globally for the network that has recently ventured into live sports including carrying two NFL football games on Christmas Day, which thankfully did not have any issues with the live broadcasts and also drew massive numbers around the world, but also signing a deal with WWE to broadcast its flagship Monday Night Raw weekly series in the United States as of this week (January 6, 2025), as well as becoming the global distributor of WWE Network internationally including all of the company's weekly programming, library of past events, as well as live premium live events, (Previously known as pay-per-view) which will likely include the United States market when the U.S. rights become available in 2026.
Although the agreements with both WWE and the NFL are clearly part of a much broader strategy by Netflix as it ventures into live sports and sports on-demand programming in expanding its content to grow it's subscriber base even further, the success of both the Tyson-Paul event as well as the NFL’s Christmas Day games which drew 65 million viewers in the United States alone, should serve as a wake up call to those Boxing hold outs as I call them that the time to move away from pay-per-view has come. Though we do not know as of this writing as to what plans might be in the works as for as Boxing is concerned for Netflix, these kinds of numbers could only be dreamed of via pay-per-view distribution even when the model was considered a bargain and budget-friendly for consumers.
If one is looking for more evidence, longtime pay-per-view distributor InDemand, previously known as Viewer's Choice here in the United States when it launched in 1985, the leading pay-per-view distributor across cable and satellite television here in the United States as well as Canada announced last year that it will be ceasing operations by the end of 2025 ending forty years of service and for a lot of us who grew up with what was then Viewer's Choice as a pay-per-view provider, a lot of good memories of those “Special Events" as well as an alternative to movie theaters to view the blockbuster films of the day. While the distributor has said that it's streaming platform PPV.com will continue operating after the company closes, it should serve as yet another in a growing list of examples as to not only the lack of viability of the pay-per-view model in now 2025 at the time of this column's release, but of the decline of the cable/satellite industry as a whole.
Although the possibility exists that a new distributor could emerge as cable and satellite providers look to survive in both their traditional forms as well as attempting to transition into offering live TV streaming packages and services rather than traditional cable or satellite service, the odds of both the pay-per-view model as well as cable and satellite models reverting back to an era of both being consumer friendly and consumer-embraced where both models are profitable for providers, distributors, as well as networks and promoters seems unlikely with subscription-based models easily accessible and consumer friendly on the market, which tends to offer considerably more content as well for the price.
Given all of this, it would seem logical that Boxing promoters and networks, rather than waiting for the inevitable collapse of what remains of cable, satellite, and pay-per-view, get out ahead of things and finally embrace subscription-based streaming as the future. In terms of the endless pursuit of seeking additional sources of revenue, which are always hoped-for, but rarely achieved by pay-per-view, the obvious route would be to both attempt lucrative broadcast agreements with streaming networks that would offer these (Pay-Per-View Quality) bouts to their subscribers as part of their subscription, something both DAZN and ESPN have done well when neither has deviated towards pay-per-view, but to also seek sponsorship deals and endorsements, which could effectively replace the pay-per-view model without forcing consumers all promoters attempt to draw to their events to incur additional costs. The bottom line is with much of the Boxing promotional landscape now either under one broadcast banner, or soon to be joining that banner, the argument of using pay-per-view as a way to draw fighters and promoters who insist on the model to the negotiating table, no longer holds water, nor does the excuse some promoters when confronted on the subject of “Market Changes" or blaming expensive prices, which often begin at a $70 price point as something that is the way things are done in the United States. There needs to be accountability of promoters and networks when decisions that ultimately do not benefit consumers are made. With the pay-per-view model suffering yet another blow with InDemands impending closure, one can only hope that common sense on the need to move away from an outdated model will finally come into the equation. On the subject of the implementation of “Common Sense" it coincidentally leads to the final item on this year's list that is also making a return.
To See Women's Boxing Moved To Three Minute Rounds And World Championship Fights Expanded To 12 Rounds:
Perhaps one subject besides the need for Boxing to move away from pay-per-view in order to make the sport more accessible to all as well as the need to seek new revenue streams as an effective strategy to effectively replace the model, which I am also proud to be associated with is my long-standing advocacy for Women's Boxing. To be more specific, wanting to see progress made for female fighters in the sport that would put women on similar footing to their male counterparts. In taking it a step further, two critical aspects, to see women's bouts moved from two minute rounds to three minutes, the same length as Men's bouts and to see world championship bouts in Women's Boxing go from a ten round distance to a twelve round distance, the same distance as men's world championship bouts.
Much like my stance on the pay-per-view model needing to be either significantly revamped, or outright done away with, this is something I will gladly continue banging the drum on until change occurs. With regard to pay-per-view, it's looking to and wanting to see the sport grow and be made accessible to more eyes regardless of economic level, my desire here for Women's Boxing can be summed up in a word “Equality."
When Women's Boxing began to be featured on television in the mid-1990’s also coincidentally when I began my writing journey, to be frank, it was treated as an attraction more than it was regarded as the sport it was and still is. One of the main differences between women's bouts and men's bouts were that unlike men's fights,; where rounds were three minutes in duration, women were limited to two minute rounds.
Although the purpose in theory was first out of safety concerns and offered a selling point of “More Excitement" due to the quicker pace , women's combat sports has evolved and when one considers that in the sport of Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) women's bouts are contested under either three five minute rounds for non-title fights or five, five minute rounds for world championship bouts, the same standards as what men's MMA bouts are contested under, the idea that women boxers should be limited to two minute rounds has less and less credibility.
To expand on this aspect, in the last two Olympic Boxing tournaments, women's bouts were held with three, three minute rounds and there were no instances of serious injury that could have been attributed to the length of time of a round. Furthermore, the additional minute not only allowed fighters time to pace themselves, but also it seemed to solve the the conundrum that often occurs in bouts held with two minute rounds that often result in close fights being scored draws by allowing the same round length as men's bouts, which allowed for more conclusive scoring.
On the professional side of the sport, some may remember the Women's world championship bout between Amanda Serrano and Danila Ramos, where Serrano put her unified World Featherweight championship on the line, which took place in October 2023 in Orlando, FL was contested with three minute rounds and also saw the bout extended to a twelve round distance, the same as men's world championship fights. There were no issues and Serrano was able to retain her championship with a convincing twelve round unanimous decision.
Despite Serrano wanting to continue competing under what is the standard format for men's bouts, three minute rounds and a twelve round distance for world title fights, unfortunately, there has not been a bout held in Women's Boxing since under the format. Frankly, I would like to know why?
One of the benefits of Netflix' entry into Boxing with the Mike Tyson-Jake Paul event was the co-main event featured the highly anticipated rematch between Serrano and two-division world champion Katie Taylor. A delayed second encounter between two groundbreakers of the sport who made history in April 2023 when they met in Madison Square Garden for Taylor's Undisputed Lightweight championship of the world at that time. What was a great fight that brought tears to my eyes having long advocated for Women's Boxing, was the first Women's bout to main event a Boxing card in the main arena in Madison Square Garden and drew a sell out of over 20,000 people. As one who faced much criticism over the years and questions of why I covered women's bouts, it was a moment of validation not only for the two fighters, not only for the sport of Women's Boxing, but also for yours truly in a small way having long known what female fighters were capable of and holding firm in my stance that Women's Boxing needs to be under the same format as men's bouts. I will also concede that I had a similar emotional reaction during Serrano's fight with Ramos as the crowd in attendance at that fight gave the fighters one long steady standing ovation for the last several rounds of that fight, very similar to that which took place in Madison Square Garden when Taylor and Serrano met for the first time.
When I was informed that the Taylor-Serrano rematch would be taking place as the co-main event of the Tyson-Paul card, I immediately told anyone who asked me about the event or Tyson-Paul that irregardless of what happened in that fight, the Taylor-Serrano rematch would be worth the time to watch and would steal the show at AT&T Stadium in Arlington, TX. Though it did not take long for me to be proven right yet again as the two fighters met again, this time for Taylor's Undisputed Jr. Welterweight world championship, I found myself a bit disappointed because like their first fight in Madison Square Garden, I feel an opportunity was missed here by not allowing the fight to be held with three minute rounds and with a twelve round distance.
Much like their first fight, a grueling and bloody back and forth battle occurred between Taylor and Serrano for ten hard rounds with Taylor once again emerging victorious by the slimmest of margins to retain her undisputed crown. Irregardless of the outcomes of those two fights, which had my votes for Fight of the year in 2023 and 2024, not just in Women's Boxing, but in the entire sport including men's bouts, I feel that style wise Katie Taylor and Amanda Serrano could fight ten to twenty times and it would be closely fought from start to finish every single time. One should wonder, however, if the rivalry between these two trailblazers and future Hall of Famers would be even at one fight a piece or potentially even reversed with Serrano having two wins instead of Taylor if the two fighters had the benefit of three minute rounds and an extra two rounds that men who compete in world title fights are afforded. While the fights may have still ended up narrowly decided regardless of duration of round length or distance, simply based on the styles of the two fighters, they deserved three minute rounds and two extra rounds to try to determine a more conclusive outcome.
My hope for 2025 for Women's Boxing is that those who have stood in the way of progress whether they be sanctioning organizations and/or state and international athletic regulatory boards finally realize that with more women's bouts being held around the world than ever before, with more and more women's fights being positioned as main events on cards also featuring men's bouts, there is no longer a reason to deny female fighters the opportunity to fight under a three minute round or to compete in a twelve round fight in a world championship fight. The time for further steps for equality has come and if top female fighters in the sport are not going to yet be given similar pay as their male counterparts, which they also deserve and is overdue, the least the powers that be in the sport can do is take one step forward by allowing women to compete under the same format as men even if the issue of similar purses for female fighters is a bridge yet to be crossed, but one that much like three minute rounds and the same distance as men's bouts needs to be crossed sooner than later. Female fighters do take the same risks as male fighters take by getting in the ring after all.
Conclusion:
As always by definition the items on this list for now remain “Wishes", but are not ones with the benefit of this observer in mind, but of the sport of Boxing as a whole, the fighters who compete in it and put their lives on the line, and the fans who support it in good times and bad year after year. While some items have remained on the list year after year as circumstances dictate, there are several other things that have been discussed over the years in previous editions of the “Boxing Wishlist" that are as relevant today as they were when they were featured and well likely be featured again in the days, weeks, months, and indeed years when appropriate. With frankly too many of those items to list in the context of one column, it is my hope that this condensed list will not only see progress made as 2025 moves along, but also that the powers that be in the sport take a look and realize that my goal is and has always been from the moment I began my writing journey 30 years ago to benefit Boxing, to advocate for the sport, the fighters, and the fans that support the sport. It is something that has not and will not change.
With all the above now said and done, it is now time to see what 2025 has in store for the sport of Boxing.
“And That's The Boxing Truth."
The Boxing Truth® is a registered trademark of Beau Denison All Rights Reserved.
Follow Beau Denison on the following Social Media Platforms:
X: (Formerly Twitter) www.twitter.com/Beau_Denison
Facebook: www.facebook.com/BeauDenison1
Threads: www.threads.net/@BeauDenison1
Instagram: www.Instagram.com/BeauDenison1
BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/beaudenison1.bsky.social
