Will DAZN's Three PPV Gamble Be Too Much For Boxing Fans?

Longtime readers know that one of the most consistent topics this observer has discussed over the many years that I have covered the sport of Boxing has been the pay-per-view model and more specifically, the increasing need for the sport, those who promote it, and networks that televise it to move away from a model that no longer benefits the sport and rarely offers value to consumers who support it. While I have at times been criticized for my stance that Boxing would be much better off in the long-term picture by adapting a reasonably priced subscription-based approach like what has already been established by digital streaming networks DAZN and ESPN+, my motivation has always been what will benefit the sport and help it grow and be more accessible to anyone who wants to see it regardless of economic scenarios one might find themselves in rather than any vested interests as I do not write or otherwise work for any other outlet or network outside of the one I own and operate here at The Boxing Truth®.

Even as my stance seems to have been increasingly validated as years have gone on as networks that have relied on the pay-per-view model have exited the sport since 2018, coincidentally the same year ESPN+ launched here in the United States and DAZN also entered the U.S. market, despite the sport being in the midst of a transition to being almost exclusively available via streaming, both in response to consumers looking to move away from traditional cable/satellite pay television, as well as general decline continuing in regard to pay-per-view buys, the model still remains more of an issue for the sport rather than a beneficial solution both for Boxing as well as consumers. Although I have been supportive of both DAZN and ESPN+ for each’s introduction of subscription-based alternatives to the model, I would not be objective if I said I have not also criticized both when they have ventured into pay-per-view, despite the evidence that it is not a profitable strategy for either in the now largely streaming-based era.

Many likely remember that when DAZN entered the U.S. market, the main pitch to consumers was pay-per-view quality Boxing events “Without The Pain of Pay-Per-View!" Their reasoning for eventually venturing into pay-per-view starting in 2022 was as a means to attract fighters and promoters who have insisted on the model to the negotiating table. It should also not be overlooked that at the time, much like many others businesses globally, DAZN was in the process of recovering from the effects of the global COVID-19 epidemic, so the move to what they insist is a “Selective/Sporadic" use of pay-per-view may have been seen and justified by some as a necessity.

As the pay-per-view model has continued to decline with the latest casualty being pay-per-view distributor InDemand preparing to cease operations by the end of 2025 ending 40 years as a primary pay-per-view distributor across cable/satellite providers in the United States and in recent years streaming via it's PPV.com platform, even as DAZN and platforms like Prime Video have continued doing periodic pay-per-view events, despite the evidence that it is not being embraced by consumers, one may be tempted to ask when will common sense enter the equation? More specifically, when will it no longer be ignored that things need to change as no doubt such stubbornness has to negatively impact the bottom line.

Perhaps the next example that will be used to illustrate the need to change will come in the coming weeks as DAZN will present three pay-per-view events in a span of one week.  First, on April 26, DAZN will air the highly anticipated grudge match between sons of Boxing legends Chris Eubank and Nigel Benn, two-time world champion Chris Eubank Jr. and Conor Benn, which will take place at Tottenham Hotspur Stadium in London, England, which will be available for $24.99 here in the United States.

While that price point on it's own is certainly budget-friendly and a throwback to a time where most Boxing pay-per-view cards were priced under $30 and were less frequent throughout the 1980’s and part of the 1990’s, one might wonder how consumer-friendly the price might be when one considers that on May 2nd and 3rd back to back pay-per-view cards will be held also on DAZN.

First on May 2nd, a card headlined by a triple header featuring Ryan Garcia facing Rolando Romero, Devin Haney facing Jose Ramirez, and WBO Jr. Welterweight world champion Teofimo Lopez defending his title against Arnold Barboza will take place outdoors in Times Square in New York City. This will be followed on May 3rd when Unified WBO/WBA/WBC Super-Middleweight world champion Saul “Canelo" Alvarez will be attempting to become a two-time Undisputed Super-Middleweight world champion when he faces undefeated IBF world champion William Scull in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Beyond the latter being the first time Alvarez has fought in the increasing hotbed of Boxing in Saudi Arabia and a significant shift in Alvarez not fighting on Cinco De Mayo weekend in Las Vegas, and the Times Square event bringing the overdue return of Hall of Fame broadcaster and longtime HBO play by play voice Jim Lampley to calling Boxing for the first time since HBO exited the sport in 2018, one would be justified in questioning if one or both of these events will be priced consumer-friendly considering that there will be a pay-per-view card just days before.

Although it should be pointed out that like any sporting event, some events will draw more eyes than others, the question here is will this gamble for DAZN be too much for Boxing fans given the state of economic conditions and whether these events will fit into one's budget. While it needs to be noted that all three of these cards are being promoted in part by the Riyadh Season group that has largely established Boxing’s footprint in Saudi Arabia and who has generally began to price their pay-per-view cards in a more consumer-friendly approach, the question that needs to be asked is how much is too much?

How much is too much not only in regard to the frequency of when these cards take place, how closely they are placed on the schedule to each other, and finally the price points to not only draw in the interest of the hardcore Boxing enthusiasts, but also the casual sports fan? For DAZN, the question should also be whether the value of a monthly or annual subscription to their network is going to be diminished by not only doing pay-per-view a bit more frequently than the pledge of “Selective/Sporadic?" Furthermore, is it a disservice to their network that is still growing to not include these events as part of a subscription to the network for existing subscribers? 

While price points for the May 3rd and 4th events have not been announced as of this writing, I do believe that if pay-per-view is going to continue to be used by networks/platforms that already have established subscription-based models that it should be used as a way to draw in consumers who may not be subscribed to try these networks. For existing subscribers, it should be either included with their subscriptions, which would be the more common sense approach, or should be offered to subscribers at a reduced price that should not exceed $30 regardless of who might be on the card. 

Under circumstances like this with three cards occuring within a week’s time, perhaps selling the three events as a package bundle with a budget-friendly price with a cap of under $60 should be something DAZN should consider. Unfortunately, numbers will continue to generally decline only with rare exceptions without adapting to the changing landscape. This includes folks who get on social media platforms and boast about how they will look for not so legal walk-arounds to access events that either do not fit within their budget or they simply have no interest in paying for.

Although I discourage such practices and pay the same fees as the average consumer to ply my trade, though I do sympathize with those who feel they have no other options to watch the sport they love, the way to reach those folks is not by continuing to rely on a model that consumers continue to reject and perhaps in spite of evidence continuing to resist change, which whether networks or promoters want to admit it or not will ultimately benefit them and the sport. Unfortunately until such realization occurs with networks having left the sport largely due to their over reliance on pay-per-view, with one network in ESPN perhaps either nearing an exit itself or a significant revamp in terms of their commitment to the spot by the end of 2025, it will be up to DAZN, who despite their growth, will have to make the decision as to how long they want to walk a tightrope by using a model that they were insisting on changing at the risk of alienating their subscribers not just here in the United States, but globally. At the risk of being unpopular, that is a gamble that may not be worth taking.

“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 

A Boxing Wishlist For 2025

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 

JAVIER "RAYITO" PEDROZA CLASHES WITH FLOYD DIAZ IN VEGAS JUNE 21ST

 Press Release: May 25, 2024 By Lewis Moss - A modern day Cinderella man story could unfold June 21st when undefeated Top Rank prospect Floyd Diaz takes on Mexico’s 29 year old 12 year fight veteran Javier "Rayito" Pedroza 18-11 at the Fontainebleau Las Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA June 21st.

 

Credit: Mike O'Hara/Dragon Fire Boxing

Pedroza opened up about his fight preparation, what the fight means to him and a final message.

 

“Preparation has been the best of my life; discipline has always characterized me but this time applying the experience throughout my 12 years as a professional. I was lucky enough to start the year sparring with Jason Moloney for his first title defense against Saul Sanchez, then straight into camp with Jonthan Rodriguez for his WBA Title Eliminator then later with Luis Nery for his Undisputed World title fight in Japan with Inoue.

 

“This fight right now represents a better future for me and my family. I am aware of what Top Rank means in the world of boxing. It is a dream come true that they have given me this opportunity and even more so being in Las Vegas. I want the world to know who I am and I'm ready to show it on June 21”

 

“I would like to thank everyone involved in organizing this fight, my advisor Tony Tolj, Matchmaker Brad Goodman and top rank for the opportunity”.

 

Pedroza delivered a final message ahead of his clash.

 

“Boxing is of times and this is mine, I don't care who you are because I have already faced the best and you are going to know what a true Mexican warrior with hunger is.”

 

Tune in June 21st on ESPN plus for all the action for another night of Top Rank non stop action in the fight capital of the World, Las Vegas.

A modern day Cinderella man story could unfold June 21st when undefeated Top Rank prospect Floyd Diaz takes on Mexico’s 29 year old 12 year fight veteran Javier "Rayito" Pedroza 18-11 at the Fontainebleau Las Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA June 21st.

 

Pedroza opened up about his fight preparation, what the fight means to him and a final message.

 

“Preparation has been the best of my life; discipline has always characterized me but this time applying the experience throughout my 12 years as a professional. I was lucky enough to start the year sparring with Jason Moloney for his first title defense against Saul Sanchez, then straight into camp with Jonthan Rodriguez for his WBA Title Eliminator then later with Luis Nery for his Undisputed World title fight in Japan with Inoue.

 

“This fight right now represents a better future for me and my family. I am aware of what Top Rank means in the world of boxing. It is a dream come true that they have given me this opportunity and even more so being in Las Vegas. I want the world to know who I am and I'm ready to show it on June 21”

 

“I would like to thank everyone involved in organizing this fight, my advisor Tony Tolj, Matchmaker Brad Goodman and top rank for the opportunity”.

 

Pedroza delivered a final message ahead of his clash.

 

“Boxing is of times and this is mine, I don't care who you are because I have already faced the best and you are going to know what a true Mexican warrior with hunger is.”

 

Tune in June 21st on ESPN plus for all the action for another night of Top Rank non stop action in the fight capital of the World, Las Vegas.

Material Courtesy of: Lewis Moss and Photo Courtesy of: Mike O’Hara/Dragon Fire Boxing  Used with permission.

The Boxing Truth®️ is a registered trademark of Beau Denison All Rights Reserved.

Franklin Stops Vargas In 6 On Big Time Boxing USA

Heavyweight contender Jermaine Franklin continued his winning ways by scoring a sixth round stoppage of veteran Devin Vargas on Thursday night at the Wayne State Fieldhouse in Detroit, MI. A fight where Franklin was able to showcase both his punching power and combination punching, he frequently had Vargas, a former Olympian in the 2004 games in Athans,Greece on the defensive. As has been a trait throughout his career, Vargas was able to withstand much of what Franklin dished out, which more often than not consisted of hard, thudding punches with both hands and did try to make a fight of it in spots throughout. 

The effects of the punishment however, gradually took its toll on Vargas who was knocked down in the fourth round and again in the sixth round. Both knockdowns were from accumulated punishment. Although Vargas was able to get up both times, after the second knockdown in round six where he was able to finish the round, he told his corner that he had, had enough and the bout was stopped at the conclusion of round six. Jermaine Franklin advances to 23-2, with 15 Knockouts. Devin Vargas falls to 22-11, with 9 Knockouts.

 Also on this card:

In a battle of unbeaten Jr. Welterweights Joshua Pagan overcame a bad cut in the opening seconds of the first round over his left eye in the first round as well as consistent pressure from his opponent Roger Hilley to earn a convincing eight round unanimous decision. Official scores were: 78-74 (On all three scorecards) in favor of Pagan. Joshua Pagan advances to 10-0, with 4 Knockouts. Roger Hilley falls to 13-1, with 8 Knockouts.

An encounter between former Middleweight sparring partners saw Josiah Shackleford pound out a four round decision over a very “Game” Ja'shar Banks, who was making his professional debut. Official scores were: 40-36 (On all three scorecards) for Shackleford. Josiah Shackleford advances to 3-1, with 2 Knockouts.  Ja'shar Banks falls to 0-1, with 0 Knockouts. 

In a Super-Middleweigh bout that began the evening, Ali Akhmedov scored the fifth win of his comeback following a loss to Carlos Gongora in December 2020, by scoring a second round knockout of Encarnacion Diaz. Akhmedov spent the first round gradually stalking Diaz and in the second round dropped him with a short left hook to the head. Diaz was able to get up, but moments later was dropped with a barrage of punches highlighted by a right hand to the head. Diaz from his knees nodded his head in resignation and took the full ten count. Official time of the stoppage was 2:14 of round two. Ali Akhmedov advances to 21-1, with 16 Knockouts. Encarnacion Diaz. falls to 18-5, with 11 Knockouts.

This card, which was promoted by former world title challenger and now promoter Dmitry Salita’s Salita Promotions as part of its recently introduced Big Time Boxing USA series broadcast globally by digital subscription sports streaming network DAZN was in many was reminiscent of the classic Tuesday and Thursday night Boxing series, which ran weekly on the USA Network here in the United States in the 1980’s and 1990’s. The series, which took it's final bow in 1998 at the legendary Blue Horizon in Philadelphia, PA has left a void in the sport in the years since its closure. Though ESPN did fill that void for several years through it's Friday Night Fights series, which eventually became seasonal due to the network’s commitments to College Football in the days that predated digital streaming, which seemed to solve the issue of scheduling conflicts while putting more options and control in the hands of the consumer, the need for series like this new Big Time Boxing USA series is still there.

Not only does a series like this allow fighters in various stages of their careers including contenders like Jermaine Franklin the opportunity to stay active, not only an opportunity for increased exposure, but also an opportunity for promoters like Salita to showcase their stable of fighters all while bringing the sport to cities and states big and small, which should open Boxing to new eyes. Something that both USA Network and ESPN accomplished with their respective series. As cable/satellite appears to be on the way out in the traditional way we know it, it is refreshing to see a series like this trying to fill the void in the era of digital streaming. It is something that should be supported.

“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  

A Boxing Wishlist For 2024

As the calendar turns to another year, that means it is time once again for what has become a tradition to start the year every year here on The Boxing Truth®️. Yours truly is referring to this observer’s annual “Boxing Wishlist" of things that I would like to see take place in the new year.

For those who may be new to this tradition, this is not a Wishlist in the sense of a numbered list from 1 to 10 as an example, but what I will do is list an item and proceed with an explanation as to why it is on the list and hopefully a brief explanation or as brief as I can make it within the context of a single column as to my feelings on the subject.  Unfortunately, to those who are loving readers,some items that have been on the list in years past will remain on the list this year, but as frustrating as that might be, it is worth revisiting and updating the various subjects that remain in the list in present context.

With what I hope is as clear an explanation of the structure/criteria both for new readers who may be reading this observer’s work for the first time as well as a refresher for longtime readers, there is only one thing left to do. Get down to business. As was the case for the 2023 edition of “A Boxing Wishlist," each item on the list will be highlighted in an effort to make it easier for readers rather than simply moving from paragraph to paragraph as one would expect in a standard column.

“A Boxing Wishlist For 2024”

To see Women's Boxing moved to three minute rounds:

In October of 2023, the Boxing world was treated to a truly historic moment when Featherweight world champion Amanda Serrano defended her unified crown against top contender Danila Ramos in Orlando, FL. What made this a truly historic event in Boxing history was it was the first world championship fight for women in the sport scheduled for twelve rounds and a three minute round length. The same distance and round length as men's world championship bouts.

As one who has long advocated for Women's Boxing through my various writings in almost three decades, this was an emotional moment for me, a man who has never competed in the ring, but one who has said for years that the sport for women needed to be held in the same regard and light as their male counterparts. While only in recent years has the United States seemingly caught up with the rest of the world in staging women's bouts as the main event on cards also featuring men's bouts, a major step towards equality that I had been yelling for, for years was to see women's bouts moved from a two minute round length to the standard of three minutes along with the adaptation of a twelve round distance for world championship fights.

Although the argument of a two minute round length has been used to push narratives regarding both the excitement of women's bouts, but more specifically to address safety concerns, it is an argument that is flawed on both subjects. Firstly, despite fights with two minute rounds having an obvious quicker pace, it does not necessarily equate to an exciting fight and the old adage of styles make fights still applies as it would for men's bouts. Secondly, even though the issue of safety should be taken with the utmost importance at all times, the argument for keeping two minute rounds loses credibility when one considers that women in the sport of Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) fight in bouts scheduled for three five minute rounds for non-title fights and five, five minute rounds for world championship fights, the same standards as what men's bouts in the sport are held. 

When one also considers that women boxers also now compete in various forms of Bareknuckle Boxing, the argument for not allowing female fighters to box under the same standards as men in traditional professional Boxing has less credibility. If one were to look for more evidence, they need look no further than the delayed 2020 Summer Olympics held in Tokyo, Japan in 2021. All women's bouts held in the Boxing tournament in every weight class were held with a three minute round length. More importantly, there were no serious injuries and the fighters who competed in the tournament showed they can do so under the same structure as their male counterparts.

As for what Serrano and Ramos were able to show on October 27, 2023, they too proved they can box in three minute rounds and what was an exciting fight from the opening bell was loudly and proudly applauded by the crowd in attendance in Orlando, FL who spent the majority of the final four rounds giving both fighters a standing ovation. This observer is not ashamed to say that as I covered the bout remotely, the emotion of both the significance of what was taking place as well as the fight itself got the better of me and I had tears in my eyes because seeing it validated everything I ever believed could be possible for Women's Boxing and also vindicated my coverage of women's bouts going back to when I started my writing journey in the mid-1990’s where people would actually say among other things,“Why do you waste your time covering women's fights, no one takes it seriously.” It may have taken almost three decades for me to both see and cover a woman's world championship bout fought for twelve three minute rounds, but I do consider it one of the highlights of my career.

The then Undisputed Featherweight champion Amanda Serrano retained her crown with a twelve round unanimous decision. Unfortunately, as there always seems to be in Boxing, it turned out to be one significant step forward towards equality, but a few steps back in the process. This was due to Serrano indicating immediately after that fight her intention to box in three minute rounds for the remainder of her career, which the World Boxing Council (WBC) has refused to sanction Women's bouts fought with three minute rounds and a twelve round distance for world championship fights. In a true display of integrity, class, and also proving she was serious, Serrano relinquished the WBC World Featherweight championship due to the sanctioning organization’s refusal to allow equality. Along with relinquishing that championship, Serrano also willingly gave up her status as an undisputed champion, putting principle over whatever financial gain she might have received as an undisputed champion.

With all due respect to the WBC, I stand with Serrano and all the other female fighters that want to be equal to their male counterparts. Although Serrano is getting ready to defend the remainder of her titles in March in a fight that will again be scheduled for twelve three minute rounds, at some point in 2024, I would like to see all the respective state athletic commissions, international regulatory boards as well as the various sanctioning organizations adapt the same standards that are used for men's bouts for women. While for the moment, it appears outside of the WBC, that such a standard has to be requested by the fighters themselves, all of those who are tasked with regulating the sport need to realize that it is 2024 and there is no longer any legitimate argument that should prevent women from being able to compete under the same format as men. 

To See Boxing Finally Realize The Time Has Come To Move Away From Pay-Per-View:

Perhaps the one subject that has been on this “Boxing Wishlist '' year after year and for a legitimate reason is to see the hold outs as I call them, who have relied on the pay-per-view model to admit it's time to change. The pay-per-view model unfortunately is something that gets a lot of coverage by yours truly, but as years have gone on, it is because it is a model that does more harm to Boxing than it benefits the sport. In addition to often asinine price points, which are no longer of value to consumers in an increasingly subscription-based streaming world, which predictably has led to an increase in declining buy returns for promoters and networks as consumers continue to reject pay-per-view, the latest casualty was the recent exit of United States premium cable network Showtime, who after thirty-seven years exited the sport after spending much of the last several years producing overpriced pay-per-view cards rather than producing consistent cards on their main network.

In responding to the criticism of the frequent use of the model in the years before Showtime's parent company Paramount Global pulled the plug not just on Showtime’s Boxing programming, but of the network’s sports division as well, then president of Showtime Sports Stephen Espinoza claimed proudly that “Pay-Per-View is a tool." While I do not intend to kick anyone who lost their jobs as a result of Paramount's decision to get out of Boxing and also sports altogether as far as Showtime was concerned, it does not take a rocket scientist to understand that while there may have been other contributing factors, which led to that decision, the primary one was the use, overuse, and insistence on an outdated model, which subsequently led to significant losses financially. 

With networks like Showtime and HBO before them having now exited Boxing due largely to the pay-per-view model, with the sport seemingly about to embark on a streaming-based future in 2024, it is imperative that the networks that remain including DAZN, ESPN/ESPN+, as well as recent newcomer Peacock, and soon to enter Amazon Prime Video realize that the time to get away from pay-per-view has arrived and the insistence of those who demand the use of such a model no longer has credibility as evidence continues to point in the direction that pay-per-view is not the answer nor is it a cure-all for the flaws in the sport, particularly on the business end of it, it is a cause of a lot of what holds Boxing back and that will not change though the distribution model seemingly has officially changed from cable/satellite to streaming.

Equally as imperative is the need for those who believe pay-per-view is the only way to make additional revenue including, but not limited to fighters purses for a given bout, to seek alternative ways to get that revenue without alienating consumers.  While major sports leagues here in the United States and internationally have what can be called premium packages marketed to consumers through cable/satellite and now streaming, the athletes in those respective sports make additional revenue through advertising and endorsement deals. The various leagues also benefit from those sources of revenue beyond their licensing rights and live gate attendance figures.

An analogy this observer has used frequently to illustrate the point that pay-per-view does more harm than good for the sport is comparing access of Boxing's biggest events, or what is thought to be via pay-per-view to the playoffs of the National Football League (NFL). Although the NFL has two separate streaming packages for consumers to watch all the league’s games, NFL Sunday Ticket, through YouTube and the league's own NFL+ streaming platform, all playoff games remain free and both of the aforementioned streaming offerings are for games that one would not see in their local market and in the case of NFL+ on demand access of every game in addition to being able to live stream games in one's local market, as big as the NFL has become, imagine if the league came out and said we're going to a pay-per-view model where consumers will have to pay $70+ per game and $85+ for playoff games and the Super Bowl. It should not take a rocket scientist to see that such a model would take the NFL or any other sports league that would attempt it from extremely profitable, popular, and a guaranteed ratings winner for any network, traditional or streaming, and turn it into something that would resemble the stock market crash in the late 1920’s which led to the great depression.

While it is an extreme analogy, it nevertheless illustrates the need to appeal to consumers and what would happen if consumers were to be alienated by what would be asinine business decisions. Despite Boxing and by extension Combat Sports being considered by some to be niche sports or products, much like other organized sports, the need to appeal to a wide audience and make your events as accessible and consumer-friendly as possible exists and for Boxing and other combat sports to continue to rely on a model that has not been consumer-friendly in decades, even as more networks have left the sport and consumers continue to reject said model, is to put it in a word asinine.

To see more fights of significant interest not placed behind expensive paywalls:

To continue with the need for Boxing to move away from pay-per-view, part of the issue, which has led Boxing to what some may feel is a crossroads moment as 2024 begins is the need for Boxing promoters and networks involved in the sport to produce fights that will be of significant interest to draw eyes to the sport, but also do so without requiring a high price tag for consumers to access said events. Originally, this was the strategy of digital subscription-based streaming network DAZN, who upon its entry into the United States in 2018 proclaimed a greater value to consumers by producing pay-per-view quality Boxing events “Without The Pain Of Pay-Per-View!"

It was a successful strategy until the global COVID-19 epidemic hit in late 2019 and 2020, which caused a ripple effect throughout all of sports and for networks like DAZN, with no live sports taking place throughout much of the world through various stages of the epidemic, significant financial losses. While the implementation of pay-per-view, which began for DAZN in 2022 was understandable to a degree in that losses needed to be recouped and the explanation of needing a pay-per-view option, which they insist will be on a selective/occasional basis that will not devalue the network’s core subscription business, was also a way to get those who insisted on such a model to the negotiating table, the time has come to go back to the original strategy and strengthen their subscription-based model as much as possible.

With another network now out of the sport because of relying too much on pay-per-view and also not holding promoters and maybe even fighters who insisted on it's use to a standard of accountability for failing to reach profitable numbers and do so on a consistent basis, which likely would have kept Showtime involved in the sport beyond 2023, it's imperative that networks like DAZN do not follow that same path and use what was working for them prior to circumstances of a global epidemic that essentially shut down the world. Although COVID-19 still exists, we are now years removed from the point where there were shutdowns across the globe and as far as sports is concerned, things are pretty much back to where they were prior to 2020.

If the argument for the continued use is to get folks to the negotiating table and those folks attempt to point to what are perceived successes of the model by selecting certain events as a means of trying to justify their case, arguably Showtime had what was perceived by some to be one of their most successful years in the sport in 2023, even though the bulk of the content produced was produced not for the main Showtime network, but for pay-per-view, it is obvious that it was not a successful strategy as they are now on the outside, looking in. Furthermore, those perceived successes fail to address the issues of refunds having to be issued for Showtime’s events due to technical problems through the now defunct Showtime streaming app, as was the case for the Gervonta Davis-Ryan Garcia event last April, which was also streamed through DAZN and had widespread problems resulting in significant refunds having to be issued. While some may omit facts like that as a means of trying to push a narrative, it does make one question just how successful the model truly was for Showtime even though by appearances they appeared to have a successful 2023.

In any case, the argument for its continued use in spite of evidence that it is no longer a successful formula for the sport is diminished further when one also considers that pay-per-view in recent years has also been contractually obligated. Meaning that a network like Showtime was obligated to produce a certain number of pay-per-view cards over the duration of a contract with a promoter, which in their case was the Premier Boxing Champions (PBC) group of promoters. The obvious flaw with such a structure is it did not matter what specific fights would be reserved for pay-per-view, which ultimately meant that most of the resources went to pay-per-view and away from Showtime's main network. This also meant that fights and cards with limited appeal that might have otherwise have aired as part of the network’s main Boxing programming were moved to pay-per-view and predictably failed to deliver a profit for all involved.

Simply put, the original concept of pay-per-view as not only providing value for consumers, but also only being reserved for rare special events no longer exists and essentially putting fights on the model simply because it can be done rather than merit and also not at a price point that appeals to consumers is a recipe for failure. As 2024 begins, there is a significant opportunity for the aforementioned networks, which operate primarily under a subscription-based model to redefine the idea of offering value through their respective subscription plans.

What this observer means by that is not only providing value in terms of the quantity of Boxing content offered, but also in an effort to re-establish the sport in the eyes of consumers, producing fights and cards of significant interest, but without the expensive price tag. While some in the sport including perhaps some fighters might turn their nose up at such an idea, the reality is it needs to happen for the long-term health of the sport, otherwise circumstances like what has happened with Showtime leaving Boxing will continue happening if the networks that remain and potential new platforms are not making a profit to make their investments in the sport viable and that will not happen by continuing to rely on an outdated model even if said model was the status quo in a previous era. Simply put, times change and the business structure of Boxing needs to evolve.

Conclusion:

As the calendar now turns to 2024, the aforementioned items on this observer’s “Boxing Wishlist” are just some of what would benefit the sport moving forward. While 2024 appears as though it will look different and perhaps feel different in terms of how the sport is presented, one should feel at least a little optimistic that there is at least the potential for Boxing to be in a better position at the conclusion of this year than was the case at the end of 2023. One item that has been on the “Wishlist” for many years that has seen progress made and thus has not been included as a highlighted item is the need for Boxing to establish one world champion per weight division. In recent years, there has been progress made towards this goal for both men and women competing in the sport, but I should not have to tell you dear reader, there is still much more that can be, and should be done. 

Although I have decided at least for this year’s list to omit this topic as a highlighted item, it does nevertheless remain relevant because it is still a work in progress. Part of that progress needs to be a commitment not only by the fighters involved, but also by the various sanctioning organizations to keep world championships unified once they become undisputed championships. This is not an easy task given that there are five recognized world sanctioning organizations, each with their own rules and mandatory defense obligations that need to be met on an annual basis, but for true progress to be made where it is not viewed as temporary, there needs to be an effort by all involved to ensure that the process of making unification bouts, which is often a long, drawn out, and complicated one due in part to the aforementioned organizations’ respective policies, once that process has been done, it needs to be preserved to ensure that all the process that took place to unify a division, does not ultimately turn into a waste of time where the primary motivation will be to start said process all over again.

Some may view that, and all of what has been discussed on this “Boxing Wishlist For 2024” as truly “Wishful Thinking,” but the reality is evidence of the need to change could not be clearer and the need for significant progress and “Legitimate Progress” remains needed for the sport to grow and thrive. Let 2024 Begin!

“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 

The End For Showtime Boxing And Showtime Sports

Back in 2018, a major shift took place in the sport of Boxing with the introduction of both ESPN+ and DAZN here in the United States. Two digital subscription sports streaming networks that vowed to change the dynamic in how not just Boxing, but sports as a whole was viewed and consumed by introducing reasonably priced subscription-based options as opposed to pay-per-view. While initially met with criticism and mocking laughter from some in the Boxing establishment and even some fans that doubted the significance of such a model, it was not long after both networks launched that one of the longtime power players in the sport HBO announced they would cease broadcasting Boxing at the conclusion of that year. 

For some this was truly an unthinkable event that truly signaled the end of an era in not just Boxing, but in sports when HBO officially took its final bow in December 2018 bringing an end to forty-five years of broadcasting Boxing, but also for a significant period of time throughout the network’s history other sports as well including, the Wimbledon tennis tournament, bowling, MLB baseball, swimming, among others throughout its decades on the air. Though primarily known for its Boxing coverage, in the years since HBO bowed out of the sport, its sports division has continued to exist with magazine style programming such as Real Sports and talk shows including ones hosted by the legendary Bob Costas. Nevertheless, it was truly an end of an era and a significant acknowledgement as to where technology was heading. A subject that this observer has written extensively about over the last decade.

Still, despite that clear evidence as well as one of the major networks in Boxing choosing to exit the sport, plus the success the streaming networks like DAZN and ESPN+ were able to have in bringing Boxing to a subscription-based model along with other sports, there were still some players in the sport, promoters, fighters, and yes networks that fought against this change rather than embrace what might have been. One of those players was premium cable network Showtime, ironically, one of HBO’s main competitors both in the premium cable/satellite network space in regard to general entertainment, but for thirty-two years of HBO’s forty-five year run as the one time “Network of Champions," it's main competitor in Boxing as well.

Showtime first entered the Boxing ring in 1986, serving as the official rebroadcast network for then Undisputed Middleweight world champion Marvelous Marvin Hagler’s title defense against John “The Beast" Mugabi from Caesars Palace in Las Vegas, NV, which was originally shown on closed circuit television and pay-per-view throughout the United States. Although its entry into the sport was in fact a taped replay using the same broadcast done by the legendary Tim Ryan and Gil Clancy, which was used for the closed circuit and pay-per-view broadcast, the March 1986 delayed broadcast served as the launching point for what became Showtime Sports.  

With Boxing as it's centerpiece not only did Showtime Boxing grow in the years that followed, but it's sports division grew to include PKA/ISKA Kickboxing, Toughman contests, and from the late 2000’s on the sport of Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) with various promotions staging events under Showtime’s banner. As far as Boxing, numerous stars of the sport from the 1980’s and 1990’s appeared on the network at one time or another including the aforementioned Marvelous Marvin Hagler, Thomas Hearns, Roberto Duran, Sugar Ray Leonard, Terry Norris, Julio Cesar Chavez Sr., Evander Holyfield, and Mike Tyson among the near four decade list of greats that have competed under Showtime’s banner.

In an ironic way the 1990’s saw both HBO and Showtime parallel each other in terms of their Boxing coverage. 1991 was one such year where each network made the move from competing for rebroadcast rights to the select few events that were broadcast on pay-per-view at the time, in addition to what each network produced in terms of their Boxing programming, both would make the move to producing the live broadcasts of what remained at the time select and occasional pay-per-view events within a month of each other in March and April of that year. While I could spend countless hours talking about the differences, what was good, what was bad, and all in between not only about price points for those events back then and the era in general, the one thing that seemed consistent at least for several years after each ventured into pay-per-view, was that it was to be reserved only for the true special events and prices points also remained reasonable for consumers, all while the bulk of each network’s Boxing coverage remained on their respective networks and also featured star fighters competing in well matched bouts on a regular basis.

Over time however, the standard of putting the best product on for subscribers of each network in terms of consistently putting on competitive fights began to change and more and more, fights thought to be of significant interest were moved away from airing live on the networks to pay-per-view. Such a change in philosophy though it may have seemed as though would be beneficial for the networks over time became the catalyst for their demise. HBO was the first to fall as in 2018 as part of a significant corporate restructuring under it's then new owner AT&T, would bow out of Boxing, but not before the budget for Boxing programming in the years prior to that decision was significantly reduced and most of what was left was saved for, you guessed it, Pay-Per-View.

As HBO’s exit took place in December 2018, now in December 2023 almost exactly five years to the day of it's rival’s farewell to the sport, now Showtime prepares for its final bow with a three fight card at the Armory in Minneapolis, MN on December 16th. Much in the same way the two networks paralleled each other during their peak in the sport, Showtime’s exit from Boxing also is similar to that of HBO’s in that gradually over time the majority of Showtime's Boxing content was moved from the network to pay-per-view and even as those events under performed in the last several years with rare exceptions, there was a refusal to adapt by the executives at Showtime Sports, similar in some ways as how those executives at HBO for years tried to put on a spin that relying heavily on the pay-per-view model would have no serious repercussions for the network. Only adding to the similarity of how the two networks exited Boxing, Showtime's exit, comes as its parent company Paramount Global has undergone a major restructuring, no doubt in response to the decline of the cable/satellite industry. This has included folding Showtime’s streaming platform into Paramount’s flagship streaming network platform Paramount+, where much of the company's resources are being focused on moving forward.

In the interest of honesty with the reader, I would be lying if I were to say that I had not heard ramblings for the better part of a year, long before Paramount officially announced their intention to discontinue Boxing programming under the Showtime banner. I will also go a step further in saying that I have spent the last several years both in private conversations as well as in my coverage of the sport, suggesting that a way to move away from the pay-per-view model at least as far as Showtime/Paramount was concerned would have been to add Boxing under the Showtime name to Paramount+ along with numerous other exclusive sports that is available on the digital streaming network.

While it appears that we will never see live Boxing on Paramount+ under the Showtime Boxing on Paramount+ name and even though there is plenty of blame to go around, and justifiably so, for the respective network executives refusing to adapt to a changing technological landscape, choosing to try and minimize the growth of digital subscription-based streaming in the sport, refusing to hold promoters who insist on the pay-per-view model to a standard to ensure the network was not only making a profit on those events, but to such a degree, where the network’s parent company would be more willing to invest in the sport long-term and continuing to go down an outdated path in terms of using a model that has been increasingly rejected by consumers, I find myself feeling saddened to see this happening yet again in our sport.

Although I have earned a reputation over almost three decades as someone who is objective, will speak out in defense of the sport, call it like I see it, and bring attention to things, which I feel do more harm to Boxing then it benefits it, like the pay-per-view model, it is never good for any sport when a network walks away from it regardless of the reasoning. Especially networks like HBO and now Showtime that each had decades of success in the sport and were also considered the industry leaders.

The sport’s detractors will certainly paint a narrative to suit their purpose/agenda that Showtime’s exit is a sign of declining interest. In reality, it is more a reflection of bad business decisions as well as lack of accountability that has led to this point. It should also serve as a wakeup call to those networks, particularly in the streaming space where Boxing television, at least in the United States appears to be heading exclusively for in 2024, that you cannot attempt to serve two masters in trying to establish a sensible subscription-based model and still try to maintain a model that is overpriced and simply outdated such as pay-per-view.

Fortunately for me, but perhaps unfortunate for some who may want to forget out of convenience, I was fortunate to be around when pay-per-view was used sparingly and I am also unfortunately old enough to remember when networks like Showtime and HBO pledged to only use the model on a case by case basis. While that may have worked for a time, particularly in decades past where price points were more consumer-friendly, gradually a shift took place in the sport where pay-per-view became a requirement for some promoters and even fighters. 

When that happened it set a trap for both networks in that the emphasis became more on the pay-per-view model and increasingly less on what each network put out for their subscribers. With the pay-per-view model being used more and more and price points only continuing to increase, it should be logical to anyone who is objective as to why both networks eventually lost money on Boxing and also why the continued use and overuse of it turns consumers off. The truly sad thing is for both Showtime and HBO before them, it did not have to end the way that it did for one and will for the other.

Nevertheless, the final Boxing telecast on Showtime will feature undefeated Super-Middleweight contender David Morrell in the final fight in the history of Showtime Boxing and final production of Showtime Sports as well. While I mean no disrespect to Morrell or his opponent Sena Agbeko as their bout does appear as though it will be competitive on paper, with all due respect, their bout is overshadowed by the significance of a chapter in Boxing history coming to an end. While Showtime will forever have an illustrious legacy for providing the Boxing fan with numerous memories through the years as well as providing a much needed platform for up and coming fighters not only on its flagship Showtime Championship Boxing series, but also their critically acclaimed ShoBox:The New Generation series, in addition to the many world championship fights that have aired on Showtime over the last thirty-seven years.

Criticism aside, there is no disputing Showtime’s place in Boxing history, unfortunately there is no positive spin one can put on this. It's truly the end of an era, and one that makes one thing crystal clear,  Boxing and to be more specific “The Business of Boxing," needs to change.

" And That's The Boxing Truth. “

Showtime Boxing: The Finale takes place on Saturday, December 16th at the Minneapolis Armory in Minneapolis, MN. The card can be seen in the United States on the Showtime cable network on cable/satellite and streaming in the Showtime tab on digital subscription streaming network Paramount+ beginning at 9PM ET/6PM PT. Check your local listings for time and channel in your area. For more information about Paramount+ and to subscribe please visit: www.ParamountPlus.com. 

(*Check your local listings internationally.*)

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