The Contender and Boxing's Appeal
As I mentioned in my Mango blog, I'm trying to become more regular (not in the bowel movement sense) with my publishing. Each weekend will welcome a Mango Thunder Political Blog. Each Wednesday will usher in a Neoprufrok blog. Well, at least thats the plan.
There's a new reality TV show that I watch that I can't get enough of: The Contender. Its about 16 boxers who come to compete for the grand prize of ONE MEEEEEILLIOOOONNN DOLLAAARRRSSSS.... and a chance to gain fame that has eluded boxing and would have eluded them had they not participated. Each episode shows the thoughts and strategy behind the boxing match and ends with a 5 round fight between 2 participants. The fights are edited, but the effect is good and it really captures the essence of the sport.
Surprisingly, it just doesn't seem to do well in the ratings. Which is wierd to me given the fact that a lot of people I know love the show. Okay, more like a lot of mancard carrying, NCAA Tourney pool participating, office/lab sport creating people I know. But hey, my wife loves the show - and she never watches sports. Which means that she just likes to watch half naked guys beating each other up, or she's just being real nice to me in the hopes that I'll watch Gilmore Girls and One Tree Hill with her (the former yes, the latter NO).
So what makes me like a boxing reality show but hate a singing reality show? What draws me to the pugilistic nature of boxing and simultaneously pull me away from the seemingly democratic nature of American Idol?
Performance versus Popularity.
American society is set up for popularity. We're told its the way things work. The most votes = the best leader. The most money = the best business. The most album sales = the best artist. The most popular high school students = student council. On and on it goes.
As far as I can tell, there's no direct correlation between popularity and performance. You don't have to look farther than Governor Schwarzenegger to see that. Popular, yes. Good leader, hell no.
What you need to succeed in the world is an ability to be popular (1), some level of compentency (2 - although becoming less important in this day and age), luck (3), and the most important - a marketing degree (4). Yes, I said it. It doesn't matter how good you are for the most part, its how you spin how bad you are or how you market yourself that determines your lot in life. Sad, but I think, true.
Sports is different, for the most part (I'll clarify later). There is a measured end result that is not affected directly by any amount of popularity or marketing. You score more points - you win. You jump the farthest, you win. You swim faster, you win. In boxing, its no different. You punch the hardest, the fastest, and the most accurate - you mostly win.
But what makes boxing more compelling to me is the level, skill, and (most importantly) bravery that is required. All other sports try hard to avoid injury (except Ultimate Fighting, Martial Arts, etc). In Boxing, you know you're going to get hurt - but you're planning to dish out the pain as well. And you do this or 8-12 rounds. Fighters routinely break ribs, bruise kidneys, or cut eyes. The level of determination in the face of physical opposition is staggering.
Like other sports, boxing is devoid of popularity contests or spin or marketing. No matter how much you hate Tyson, he's still a good boxer to watch. No matter how much McEnroe talks, Bjorn Borg still won Wimbledon. No matter what game an athlete talks, if they don't win or come in first, it doesn't count. Athletes cannot talk their way into a championship. They have to earn it.
And that's what I apprecaiate most - performance. Putting forth the best performance is a combination of inborn talent, training, effort, and heart. Nowhere is there or should there be popularity in that equation. In a sense, I feel similarly about most everything - it should only matter how well you perform - not how well you can talk yourself into or out of a situation, good or bad.
Note, I'm not saying that being polite, nice, or a good sportsperson (my good ol' politically correct mango told me to say this) doesn't count. It does. But it should have no bearing on the end result.
So watch The Contender (Sunday at 8pm Pacific Time) and see what I'm talking about. Its truly a great show and it doesn't get its due. I hope it does better in teh ratings - so they can come back next year. And even if you don't like boxing, at least you can see Sly Stallone try to act like he's a real boxer/trainer/promoter. That in itself is incidental comedy.
There's a new reality TV show that I watch that I can't get enough of: The Contender. Its about 16 boxers who come to compete for the grand prize of ONE MEEEEEILLIOOOONNN DOLLAAARRRSSSS.... and a chance to gain fame that has eluded boxing and would have eluded them had they not participated. Each episode shows the thoughts and strategy behind the boxing match and ends with a 5 round fight between 2 participants. The fights are edited, but the effect is good and it really captures the essence of the sport.
Surprisingly, it just doesn't seem to do well in the ratings. Which is wierd to me given the fact that a lot of people I know love the show. Okay, more like a lot of mancard carrying, NCAA Tourney pool participating, office/lab sport creating people I know. But hey, my wife loves the show - and she never watches sports. Which means that she just likes to watch half naked guys beating each other up, or she's just being real nice to me in the hopes that I'll watch Gilmore Girls and One Tree Hill with her (the former yes, the latter NO).
So what makes me like a boxing reality show but hate a singing reality show? What draws me to the pugilistic nature of boxing and simultaneously pull me away from the seemingly democratic nature of American Idol?
Performance versus Popularity.
American society is set up for popularity. We're told its the way things work. The most votes = the best leader. The most money = the best business. The most album sales = the best artist. The most popular high school students = student council. On and on it goes.
As far as I can tell, there's no direct correlation between popularity and performance. You don't have to look farther than Governor Schwarzenegger to see that. Popular, yes. Good leader, hell no.
What you need to succeed in the world is an ability to be popular (1), some level of compentency (2 - although becoming less important in this day and age), luck (3), and the most important - a marketing degree (4). Yes, I said it. It doesn't matter how good you are for the most part, its how you spin how bad you are or how you market yourself that determines your lot in life. Sad, but I think, true.
Sports is different, for the most part (I'll clarify later). There is a measured end result that is not affected directly by any amount of popularity or marketing. You score more points - you win. You jump the farthest, you win. You swim faster, you win. In boxing, its no different. You punch the hardest, the fastest, and the most accurate - you mostly win.
But what makes boxing more compelling to me is the level, skill, and (most importantly) bravery that is required. All other sports try hard to avoid injury (except Ultimate Fighting, Martial Arts, etc). In Boxing, you know you're going to get hurt - but you're planning to dish out the pain as well. And you do this or 8-12 rounds. Fighters routinely break ribs, bruise kidneys, or cut eyes. The level of determination in the face of physical opposition is staggering.
Like other sports, boxing is devoid of popularity contests or spin or marketing. No matter how much you hate Tyson, he's still a good boxer to watch. No matter how much McEnroe talks, Bjorn Borg still won Wimbledon. No matter what game an athlete talks, if they don't win or come in first, it doesn't count. Athletes cannot talk their way into a championship. They have to earn it.
And that's what I apprecaiate most - performance. Putting forth the best performance is a combination of inborn talent, training, effort, and heart. Nowhere is there or should there be popularity in that equation. In a sense, I feel similarly about most everything - it should only matter how well you perform - not how well you can talk yourself into or out of a situation, good or bad.
Note, I'm not saying that being polite, nice, or a good sportsperson (my good ol' politically correct mango told me to say this) doesn't count. It does. But it should have no bearing on the end result.
So watch The Contender (Sunday at 8pm Pacific Time) and see what I'm talking about. Its truly a great show and it doesn't get its due. I hope it does better in teh ratings - so they can come back next year. And even if you don't like boxing, at least you can see Sly Stallone try to act like he's a real boxer/trainer/promoter. That in itself is incidental comedy.
posted by Richard at 11:42 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home