Introduction
Being the A-side or B-side fighter has quite different implications in the realm of professional boxing. These terms, although technical, signify more than just who is the more popular or well-known fighter; they represent a broader power dynamic in the sport where one side is often favored by promoters, matchmakers, and judges, while the other is used as a stepping stone or commodity. This article explores the distinctions between A-side and B-side fighters, the sociological ramifications of this dynamic, and how the system exploits B-side fighters, frequently to the advantage of the sport's power brokers.
What Are A-Side and B-Side Fighters?
In boxing, the A-side refers to the fighter who is typically the bigger draw. This is the fighter with the larger fan base, more promotional backing, and often, the one who commands a larger purse. The B-side, on the other hand, is usually the lesser-known opponent, who may not have as much promotional support and is often seen as the underdog.
The A-side fighter usually fights out of the red corner, while the B-side is assigned the blue corner. The color-coding symbolizes the advantage the A-side has in the fight, from preferential treatment in negotiations to more favorable judging. A-side fighters are the ones who sell tickets, and because of this, they wield significant power in terms of choosing the fight venue, gloves, and even sometimes the weight class.
A-Side Privileges
Being the A-side comes with numerous advantages. A-side fighters typically have control over various aspects of the bout, from the venue and ring size to the timing of the fight itself. They can demand more favorable terms, such as a larger purse split, and often dictate who gets what percentage of the pay-per-view earnings. In many cases, A-side fighters are also able to select their opponents, ensuring they are matched against fighters who may be less skilled or less experienced.
Another critical advantage for A-side fighters is preferential judging. Many observers argue that in close fights, judges tend to favor the A-side fighter, either consciously or unconsciously. This bias is often rooted in the financial incentives behind the sport, as promoters and networks stand to make more money if the A-side fighter wins and remains marketable.
The A-side's dominance also extends to the media, where they are usually the focal point of promotion and interviews. This gives them greater exposure and positions them as the "face" of the event, further solidifying their status as the one with more control and influence.
B-Side Fighters
B-side fighters, conversely, are often seen as little more than commodities. They are the opponents brought in to make the A-side look good. Many B-side fighters take fights on short notice, with little time to prepare or cut weight, putting them at a significant disadvantage before they even step into the ring.
B-side fighters are often referred to as journeymen, gatekeepers, or opponents, dehumanizing them and reducing their role to stepping stones for the A-side's career progression. Many of these fighters struggle to secure long-term promotional deals or sponsorships, and their primary income comes from taking risky fights where they are the underdog.
In sociological terms, the B-side fighter embodies Marxist theories of exploitation, where the labor (in this case, the physical and mental exertion of the fight) is exploited for the financial gain of promoters, networks, and the A-side fighter. The B-side is the expendable party, used to enhance the profile and financial standing of the A-side, with little concern for their own well-being or career trajectory.
A prime example of the B-side being used as a commodity is Andy Ruiz Jr.'s initial fight against Anthony Joshua. Ruiz was brought in as a late replacement, a relatively unknown fighter expected to lose. However, in a stunning upset, Ruiz defeated Joshua, highlighting the unpredictability of boxing and showing that the B-side can sometimes defy expectations. Despite this, Ruiz returned to a less prominent role after losing the rematch, reinforcing the cyclical nature of how B-side fighters are used and discarded by the boxing industry.
Exploitation and Economic Realities for B-Side Fighters
B-side fighters often face economic exploitation, as they are usually paid significantly less than their A-side counterparts. Even when they win, the financial disparity between A-side and B-side purses remains obvious. This inequality is especially prevalent in smaller promotions, where B-side fighters might be flown in on short notice, fight for minimal pay, and leave with little fanfare, regardless of the outcome.
Many B-side fighters come from underprivileged backgrounds, and the allure of a paycheck, however modest, drives them to take fights under less-than-ideal conditions. This reflects broader socio-economic issues within boxing, where wealth and opportunity are concentrated among the few, while the many fight for scraps. In this sense, the B-side fighter is often trapped in a cycle of short-term gain and long-term physical and financial detriment.
Sociologically, this exploitation mirrors Pierre Bourdieu's concept of social capital. Social capital is the idea that those with more connections and resources (A-side fighters, promoters) have the power to control the system, while those without (B-side fighters) are left to navigate a landscape stacked against them.
Examples of A-Side vs. B-Side Dynamics
One of the most famous examples of an A-side fighter dominating negotiations is Floyd Mayweather Jr. Mayweather’s position as the A-side in almost every fight after his rise to stardom allowed him to control every aspect of the fight, he chose opponents, dictated terms, and secured larger purses. His opponents, often well-respected champions in their own right, were relegated to B-side status simply because they did not carry the same commercial clout.
In the Mayweather-Pacquiao negotiations, for instance, Pacquiao was a global star and multiple-division champion, but Mayweather’s leverage as the A-side allowed him to secure a larger share of the fight’s earnings and control other logistical details. This power imbalance was clear, even though both fighters were of similar stature in the sport.
Another example is Canelo Álvarez, who, like Mayweather, enjoys A-side privileges in most of his fights. Fighters like Daniel Jacobs and Dimitry Bivol, while champions in their own right, were treated as B-sides in their bouts with Canelo. These fighters had to accept less favorable terms, knowing that the opportunity to fight someone of Canelo's stature was worth the trade-off.
Conclusion
The dynamic between A-side and B-side fighters reflects the larger economic and power structures within professional boxing. A-side fighters are granted advantages in negotiations, pay, and even judging, while B-side fighters are often exploited as commodities to further the careers of their more prominent counterparts. This system perpetuates inequality, where the B-side is frequently used as a stepping stone, often with little regard for their health or long-term career prospects.
In addressing the imbalance, boxing as a sport must confront the exploitation that exists at its core. While the A-side vs. B-side dynamic generates excitement and spectacle, it also raises ethical questions about fairness, equality, and the role of fighters as more than just commodities in the pursuit of profit.
References
Cover Image: The Boxing Chronicle
Comments