Is Intimidation Necessary in Boxing? It Depends on Results

Vitali Shaposhnikov by Correspondent Written on March 27, 2009
Be058480_feature

There was a time when boxing fans rushed home from work, swerved through post-work traffic, and risked getting pulled over by the police, just to run through the door and turn on their television sets.

Why would they go through all that? The reasonable answer would be that a fight was on that day, and it was a big fight as well. But instead, it was the much-anticipated press conference that built all the excitement.

Think back to Mike Tyson press conferences, Sonny Liston, George Foreman, and even James Toney. The conferences became a full show, where viewers were able to witness their favorite boxer mentally dismantle their opponent before the fight even started.

Boxers would come up with the most unique ways of threatening each other, providing for a scuffle and a name calling ceremony.

Can you remember Tyson intimidating others with his cannibalistic words, or Sonny Liston with his murder driven promises, and even James Toney was able to embarrass his opponents by saying things that dug deep.

We watch those conferences for entertainment, to see our favorite boxers use their intimidation skills to prep the other guy. It also adds to the fight excitement. Impatiently we waited for the fight, hoping to witness those words become a reality.

But things have changed. Vulgar intimidation is no longer the standard in boxing. Being polite and professional is what is considered the right way to meet.

Sure there are some instances where boxers would throw in a few words, and might even create a scenario (Ricardo Mayorga eating chicken or smoking a cigar at a conference), but the fire in their words is missing.

When Vitali Klitschko promises to knock someone out in the ring, and to teach them a valuable lesson, this provides no extra excitement for the fight. The fight might still end up being very interesting and explosive, but the boxer's character gains no fire.

Humans are naturally attracted to violence, and we want to hear about it and see it. But most importantly, we want to expect it from our boxers. We want them to be naturally aggressive, mean, and destructive in the ring.

When Tyson made a statement, people knew that he meant what he was saying, and he would primarily try to hurt the opponent in the ring before knocking them. That’s what contrasts the fights and the fighters before, from the ones we have now: authentic expression.

That does not mean we don’t have any fighters with real skill and intimidation. One of those fighters who can still do a decent job at talking and delivering is Bernard Hopkins. He is very keen with words, and intimidates in a different way.

He can present himself in a certain way, where his opponents would think of him as more than he might actually be. Still, they are all friendly after the fight, hugging and posing for the press. This was not how things were before.

We need villains and enemies in boxing, because only they can start a fire in out hearts.

I like villains because there's something so attractive about a committed person—they have a plan, an ideology, no matter how twisted. They're motivated.

(2)
...
Share This  
Crop_45x45
or to post this comment

3 Comments

There are no comments yet. Get the conversation started by leaving the first comment

Loading more comments...
posted just now
  • Loading...
  • Nobody has liked this comment yet
Cancel

This comment and all replies have been deleted This comment has been deleted Undo delete

73
reads

3
comments

written on March 27, 2009 Opinion

The best newsletter on the web

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address


CBS Sports Official Partner
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Getty Images.
Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Getty Images is strictly prohibited.