Re-hashing over-the-hill stars could destroy boxing

THERE’S a tale, probably apocryphal, that has long done the rounds of the boxing fraternity which is intended to highlight the depth of rivalry between Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier.

The story goes that long after the pair had retired from the ring they met at the opening of a gym in Los Angeles, where Frazier, still burned by Ali’s Uncle Tom jibes of over a decade previously, saw a chance to settle the score.

Frazier challenged Ali to a punch contest on the heavy bag, conscious that Ali, beset by the onset of Parkinsons, could not hope to match him, thus supposedly declaring Frazier the long-term winner of their duel.

Much to the horror of his handlers and watching journalists who feared acute embarrassment, Ali agreed to the challenge and watched as Frazier stripped to his shirt and hammered the bag for all his was worth.

When it was Ali’s turn, he simply shuffled forward, froze for a moment, then turned to Frazier and the watching crowd and declared: “There, it was so fast you didn’t even see it”. Once again, Frazier had been vanquished.

What that story illustrates is the depth of rivalry a sport like boxing engenders: an almost pathological fear of letting someone get the better of you, of leaving the sport with questions unanswered and jibes ringing in your ears.

It is what propelled Bernard Hopkins to pursue a re-match with the ailing, failing Roy Jones last month 17 years after their first fight ended in victory for Jones. Hopkins won a predictably dreadful encounter which did nothing but satisfy his ego.

Now it is no surprise to find Hopkins and his handlers propelled into trying to chide Joe Calzaghe out of retirement and settle scores arising from the Welshman’s split decision victory in Las Vegas in 2008.

What Hopkins fails to realise is that such a re-match could not re-write history. It would come with the asterisk attached of Calzaghe shrugging out of a long lay-off and Hopkins himself much further past his best than he was two years ago.

A re-match win for Hopkins would not erase the fact that when the pair met if not in their prime, but certainly as the undisputed two best light-heavyweights on the planet (a mantle now inherited by Chad Dawson), it mattered a whole lot more.

Boxing history is full of re-matches that never happened, and is probably all the better for it. Vitali Klitschko never got a chance to prove that it was only cuts that prevented him beating Lennox Lewis in Los Angeles in 2003.

As it happens, the result allowed Lewis to head into retirement with his honour intact and Klitschko to inherit the mantle of linear world number one heavyweight by virtue of his fine performance and moral success.

Marvin Hagler walked away from the sport for good after his controversial split decision loss to Sugar Ray Leonard in 1987, yet the lack of clarity over who was the better of the two can hardly be said to have hampered their status as all-time greats.

Golden Boy chief Richard Schaefer, who has mooted the possibility of a re-match between Hopkins and Calzaghe, has done some good things for boxing but seeking to dredge up old and finished enmities is not one of them.

Indeed, it is pertinent to note that after a long period of success promoting the likes of Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao the first obvious flop for Golden Boy was the Hopkins-Jones re-match, rabbit-punched out in front of rows of empty seats.

It is a fanciful notion but it would be wonderful if those at the top of the sport could put profit aside and use their positions to support boxers who have come to the painful but proud realisation that their fighting careers are over.

Calzaghe’s post-ring career has not gone entirely to plan but he can always boast a virtually unique unbeaten record and a future Hall of Fame place, all of which he would put in serious jeopardy if he laced the gloves back on.

Besides, there is no future for a sport which continually seeks its biggest pay-days in re-hashing its over-the-hill stars. Brace yourselves for De La Hoya-Mayweather II a handful of years down the line.

Promoters like Schaefer ought to be putting their energies into building the next generation of talent into tomorrow’s pay-per-view stars and not returning time and again to the past .