The Delicate Dance of Matchmaking: Are We Selling Fighters Short?
There’s a moment in every young boxer’s career when the spotlight shifts from raw talent to calculated strategy. It’s not just about winning anymore—it’s about how you win, who you beat, and what it all means for your future. This is where matchmaking becomes less of a science and more of an art, a high-stakes game where every decision shapes a fighter’s legacy. And right now, no two fighters embody this tension better than Moses Itauma and Adam Azim.
The Debate That’s Dividing Boxing Fans
Tony Bellew and Ben Shalom’s recent clash on the Fight Your Corner podcast wasn’t just a heated exchange—it was a window into the soul of modern boxing. Bellew, the former champ turned pundit, argued that Itauma and Azim are being fed “useless” opponents like Jermaine Franklin and Steve Claggett. Shalom, the Boxxer promoter, countered that these fighters are still young, still learning, and still building their commercial appeal.
Personally, I think both sides have a point—but they’re missing the bigger picture. What makes this particularly fascinating is how it exposes the inherent conflict in boxing: the tension between development and entertainment. Fighters need to grow, but they also need to sell. It’s a tightrope walk, and one misstep can derail a career.
The Problem with “Safe” Fights
Let’s be honest: no one expected Claggett to trouble Azim, just as no one thought Franklin would pose a real threat to Itauma. These were safe fights, designed to pad records and build hype. But here’s the thing—safe fights don’t always make safe careers.
In my opinion, Bellew’s critique hits home because it raises a deeper question: Are we doing these fighters a disservice by shielding them from real competition? If Azim and Itauma are as good as we think they are, shouldn’t they be tested against tougher opponents? What many people don’t realize is that the best fighters aren’t just made in the ring—they’re made in the moments when they’re pushed to their limits.
The Commercial Conundrum
Shalom’s argument, however, isn’t without merit. Boxing is a business, and promoters have to think about ticket sales, viewership, and long-term viability. A fighter who can’t draw a crowd is a fighter who won’t get the big fights. But this raises another issue: At what point does commercial viability overshadow athletic development?
From my perspective, the real challenge is finding that sweet spot—the balance between protecting a fighter’s record and pushing them to grow. It’s not just about who’s available; it’s about who’s right. And that’s where the art of matchmaking becomes so tricky.
The Psychological Angle
One thing that immediately stands out is the psychological impact of these fights. Sure, Azim and Itauma might not be learning much in the ring against opponents like Claggett and Franklin, but what about the mental game? Are they becoming complacent? Or are they using these fights as stepping stones to something bigger?
What this really suggests is that the true test of a fighter’s mettle isn’t just in the opponents they face, but in how they handle the pressure, the expectations, and the hype. If you take a step back and think about it, these “safe” fights might be doing more harm than good in the long run.
Looking Ahead: What’s Next for Azim and Itauma?
Here’s where things get interesting. Both fighters are on the cusp of something big—but will their matchmaking hold them back? If Shalom is right, they’ll continue to climb the ranks, building their brands and their skills in tandem. But if Bellew’s concerns are valid, we could see them plateau, their potential stifled by a lack of real competition.
A detail that I find especially interesting is how this debate reflects broader trends in boxing. We’re in an era where fighters are brands as much as they are athletes. But is that a good thing? Or are we losing something essential in the process?
Final Thoughts
At the end of the day, the debate between Bellew and Shalom isn’t just about two fighters—it’s about the future of boxing. It’s about how we define success, how we measure growth, and how we balance art with commerce.
Personally, I think the answer lies in embracing the uncertainty. Fighters like Azim and Itauma need to be challenged, but they also need to be supported. It’s a fine line, but one worth walking. Because if we get it right, we could be looking at the next generation of boxing legends. If we don’t, well, we might just be selling them—and the sport—short.
What’s your take? Are we coddling these fighters, or are we setting them up for greatness? The ring will tell the tale—but until then, the debate rages on.
