The recent uproar regarding world champions Lamont Peterson and Danny Garcia’s recent opponents has sparked a large amount of friction between the promoters, fighters, journalists and fans.
Fans, and journalists, who must be considered the most dedicated versions of fans, have displayed their frustrations with the recent choices of opponents for the top fighters in the sport. Generally speaking of course, those watching and writing about the sport are expecting to see the best fight the best, or seeing the best fight those that could be the best.
They are not receiving these particular fights, which results in the uproar we are experiencing. However, choosing less than stellar opponents will yield its positive results, which is something a majority of viewers fail to realize.
Its been documented that exciting bouts, and big knockouts put butts in seats and brings in the views from homes around the world. Promoters realize this and are attempting to build as much hype around a single fight as possible.
Promoters are making the decisions to build up excitement for fights by allowing fighters to maximize their fanbase while not risking the chances of taking a loss. Does that mean the promoters are wrong? Absolutely Not. Would you blame a business man for trying to keep his assets as valuable as possible? Absolutely Not. So why is it different when Promoters try to look out for the fighters that they promote? How is this any different from a student taking numerous practice tests before the final exam?
If anyone in this community can give accurate examples on why building up a fight by having two fighters face off against different opponents before they themselves step in the ring, I am all ears. Until then stop advocating that in order for something to be great, it must happen as soon as possible. We have all heard the mantra “Good things come to those who wait”, well how about taking a seat and waiting for once.