Buckley: hero or villain?

On Monday night, I sat down to write a blog about Peter Buckley's 300th fight and marking the end of the career of Britain's greatest boxing loser. When I finished it, I thought it was quite good so sent it in to the sports desk to see if they wanted to run it in the paper. Next time I saw it, it was being discussed on breakfast television.

The story turned into something of a media storm. Richard Maynard, Frank Warren's press officer, fielded so many queries, he said that he would add Buckley's name to the list of "stars" he has worked with. Move over Ricky!

Unfortunately, there seems to be a perception that the story was disrespectful to Buckley. That certainly wasn't the intention. I don't think anyone would want to downplay the guts it takes to get in the ring - let alone 300 times. And the disappointing thing for me is that it takes away from what is a fairly important talking point, which is, what is the point of the professional loser?

Buckley is only the most extreme example of a group of opponents in Britain that essentially only ever lose. To some, they are they guys who save the card, the ones who teach our prospects the game. But how many of them even try? And are they doing the sport any good? Has anyone gone to a show early so they can see a Buckley fight?

Undercards these days at many shows are uncompetitive and largely unwatched by anyone other than the fighter's mates. Buckley hasn't won in his last 88 fights - that takes some doing in a two-horse race. Looking through boxrec, what is most amazing is how few rounds he won in recent years.

Loyal servant? Yes, Buckley has been in the sport a long time and he has also done pretty well financially. What held fascination for a broader audience was the fact that Buckley could box for so long and never win and why would he do it? Money is the obvious answer, not ambition.

Not that I think my story did Buckley any harm. Fight number 300 and he finally has a bit of celebrity. His face was on the front of The Times, he was on radio, the television news, stories on him appeared in the United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and Spain, while Irish radio were after him for an interview too. He'll be opening supermarkets and have a book deal next. Friday night has turned into his night. I hope he enjoys it and I hope there is no comeback.

Comments

[Phill Arrowsmith]

The Buckley's of this world are hugely important to boxing. No, they're not particularly exciting. No, they don't pull in the punters. No, they don't always try to win. But the people who beat them on the way up are supposed to do these things. In fact, if they beat a few of the up and coming fighters they face they may get less fights. As a Eurosport commentator recently said about a Hungarian (I think) boxer "It makes more financial sense for him to lose while providing a test than to actually win". That says it all about the role of journeymen. If you want to blame anyone blame the TV companies and promoters who desperately seek to protect a fighter's winning record instead of actually building a fighter.

[joe]

The Harlem Globetrotters tend to tour with an opposing side whom they always beat - but the contest is good enough for the Globetrotters to showcase their skills. This isn't at the same level, but for an up-and-coming boxer it has the same purpose.