The latest bilking by Don King is another example of the disregard for the public by pro athletes.
DAVE BALMER, CHILLICOTHE, ILL.
Your article about Mike Tyson's comeback—and I use that term loosely—was right on target (Con Job, Aug. 28). If I had read it before the fight, I wouldn't have been one of the millions of suckers so eagerly anticipating some real boxing. One question you did not ask in the article is, Should anyone have any faith in the sport of boxing? Judging by the debacle, the answer is a resounding no.
MARK LIEBERMAN, Dundas, Ont.
Don King should be banned from boxing. There is absolutely no way that there can be a fair fight when one man promotes just about every major heavyweight champion. Whatever happened to the great rivalries such as Jack Dempsey versus Gene Tunney? What happened to great fights that go the limit, like the 1978 Larry Holmes-Ken Norton bout? I'll tell you what happened: King won't allow them.
DAVE DOTSON, Albuquerque
Just what the sport of boxing needed: another controversial and suspicious ending to a much-anticipated if not competitive match. Is it any wonder that even the most loyal boxing fans are becoming increasingly bitter and cynical?
BRIAN CONWAY, Bronx, N.Y.
While there seems to be enough blame to go around for the Tyson-McNeeley fiasco, it's clear in my mind that the blame belongs to those who pay to watch such a charade. If people refused to pay $1,500 for a ringside seat or $50 to watch on television, these mismatches would not take place.
GARTH TAGGE, Anaheim
To make boxing worthwhile, I suggest that each bout be five rounds, three minutes a round, winner take all. This means if you fight Tyson, you don't make exorbitant amounts of money just to step in the ring. If you lose, you go home and pay your medical bills. Maybe this would inject some desire into the fighters.
JOHN T. BAUER, Goldsboro, N.C.
Your SCORECARD item in the Sept. 4 issue does George Steinbrenner an injustice. At the time Steinbrenner was indicted for making illegal contributions to Richard Nixon's 1972 reelection campaign, Edward Bennett Williams and I, and our law firm, Williams, Connolly & Califano, represented Steinbrenner. Steinbrenner, Williams and I had several conversations about whether Steinbrenner should inform on other potential illegal contributors to the Nixon campaign in order to get Steinbrenner's indictment withdrawn or to obtain a lesser penalty for him.
Williams discussed this issue, and many others, with federal prosecutors. However, I remember clearly the evening on which Steinbrenner made the decision not to inform on the others. Williams laid out the possible pluses of such a course of action, and I argued against George's doing it. Steinbrenner decided not to inform on any others and to take his chances with the federal prosecutors.
JOSEPH A. CALIFANO JR., New York City
Contrary to a Sept. 4 letter, the NFL has not abandoned financial education seminars. Rather, the league has revised and improved them. The current format includes four seminars mandatory for rookies and open to all players and wives. The seminars once used professional financial advisers as instructors. Now we have finance professors from colleges and universities as the teachers, so the players can learn the basics without a sales pitch.
Director, NFL Player Programs
New York City