A note to Fight Freaks Unite readers: I created Fight Freaks Unite in January 2021 and eight months later it also became available for paid subscriptions for additional content — and as a way to help keep this newsletter going and for readers to support independent journalism. If you haven’t upgraded to a paid subscription please consider it. If you have already, I truly appreciate it! Also, consider a gift subscription for the Fight Freak in your life.
Dan — I am so glad you started this newsletter, and follow you and your articles closely. ESPN’s loss is our gain.
Perhaps the only issue where I have not agreed with you is the Jake Paul thing. While his sideshow does put ‘boxing’ in front of a larger audience, I believe he and his ilk cheapen and dilute the product. I do not argue with the issue of him doing well against his chosen opponents, but this is such rudimentary stuff that many dedicated technicians who train for years might never reach the level of exposure which they more appropriately deserve; and to me, the sideshow and circus atmosphere surrounding the Paul brothers purports to give legitimacy to that which is not truly professionally legitimate.
As perhaps the most important journalist covering boxing, you, through your endorsement, further legitimize the not-legitimate stage upon which these guys dance. We can all see amateur fights and tough man contests, but that is not the professional rank which most of us wish to support. I find these social media antics tiresome and distracting, having to wade through media and listings only to find spotlights on the Paul’s as much as, or more than, on top level talent. I boxed amateur for years, and while super dedicated, I acknowledge that only friends, family, and teammates actually would want to see my fights. They were not TV worthy, and I am confident that many of my amateur peers were far more skilled than the Paul’s. Spotlighting the Pauls makes no sense when we have the professional talent in the ring who actually captivate committed boxing cognoscenti. I welcome your thoughts.
Otherwise, you are on my regular reading list and I thank you for your commitment to our sport.
Dan — I am so glad you started this newsletter, and follow you and your articles closely. ESPN’s loss is our gain.
Perhaps the only issue where I have not agreed with you is the Jake Paul thing. While his sideshow does put ‘boxing’ in front of a larger audience, I believe he and his ilk cheapen and dilute the product. I do not argue with the issue of him doing well against his chosen opponents, but this is such rudimentary stuff that many dedicated technicians who train for years might never reach the level of exposure which they more appropriately deserve; and to me, the sideshow and circus atmosphere surrounding the Paul brothers purports to give legitimacy to that which is not truly professionally legitimate.
As perhaps the most important journalist covering boxing, you, through your endorsement, further legitimize the not-legitimate stage upon which these guys dance. We can all see amateur fights and tough man contests, but that is not the professional rank which most of us wish to support. I find these social media antics tiresome and distracting, having to wade through media and listings only to find spotlights on the Paul’s as much as, or more than, on top level talent. I boxed amateur for years, and while super dedicated, I acknowledge that only friends, family, and teammates actually would want to see my fights. They were not TV worthy, and I am confident that many of my amateur peers were far more skilled than the Paul’s. Spotlighting the Pauls makes no sense when we have the professional talent in the ring who actually captivate committed boxing cognoscenti. I welcome your thoughts.
Otherwise, you are on my regular reading list and I thank you for your commitment to our sport.
Dan - enough with the Jake Paull crap. Nobody cares. Do you think people who are boxing fans that pay for your newsletter give a shit about jake paul?