AIBA wants to add pro boxers at 2016 Olympics

[slickvik69]

LAUSANNE, Switzerland -- The International boxing association wants to change Olympic eligibility rules and allow professional fighters to compete at the 2016 Rio Games.

AIBA President Wu Ching-Kuo says it aims to launch and market a global professional program in 2013.

Wu says pro boxers could join in the first year and regain Olympic eligibility. He also says better financial prospects and potential Olympic medals would help "enlightening the lives and dreams of many boxers."

AIBA relaxed strict rules last year by creating the 12-city World Series Boxing competition, which paid amateur fighters.

AIBA's plans could clash with world-title sanctioning bodies including the WBC and WBA.

[slickvik69]

This is great news, like when basketball allowed pros in 1992. Nobody cares about Olympic boxing really but with some names it will draw more attention. Will suck for amateurs but in this country at least USA Boxing is a total joke as it is so I don't feel sorry for it. Only hope the scoring will be pro-like.

[rampage]

Yay! Let's screw over amateur boxing even more! That will really help boxing's current situation--give amateur fighters even less incentive to stay amateur and hone their skills, flooding the pro ranks with fighters who have less business being pro than much of the current crop. Now we can 1) make pro boxing suck more; 2) endanger many of the fighters who shouldn't be pro but will turn pro earlier than they would have; and 3) make amateur boxing worse than it already is by removing many fighters prematurely, all in one fell swoop.

While we're at it, let's make pro boxing that much more confusing and add a whole new league!

Idiots.

[box_NYC]

slickvick69 must be some bum pro with a losing record...there are many amatuers who are better then alot of pros but dont turn pro cus they want to try to make the olympics...plus this is called olympic style boxing..theres a difference

[JMac]

Yay! Let's screw over amateur boxing even more! That will really help boxing's current situation--give amateur fighters even less incentive to stay amateur and hone their skills, flooding the pro ranks with fighters who have less business being pro than much of the current crop. Now we can 1) make pro boxing suck more; 2) endanger many of the fighters who shouldn't be pro but will turn pro earlier than they would have; and 3) make amateur boxing worse than it already is by removing many fighters prematurely, all in one fell swoop.

While we're at it, let's make pro boxing that much more confusing and add a whole new league!

Idiots.

Agreed

[slickvik69]

Yay! Let's screw over amateur boxing even more! That will really help boxing's current situation--give amateur fighters even less incentive to stay amateur and hone their skills, flooding the pro ranks with fighters who have less business being pro than much of the current crop. Now we can 1) make pro boxing suck more; 2) endanger many of the fighters who shouldn't be pro but will turn pro earlier than they would have; and 3) make amateur boxing worse than it already is by removing many fighters prematurely, all in one fell swoop.

While we're at it, let's make pro boxing that much more confusing and add a whole new league!

Idiots.

This is great news.

When is the last time, since 1976, that any casual fan has really cared about Olympic boxing?

Putting names fans are familiar with will help ratings and interest. The final change needs to be the scoring system. The scoring sucks now, encourages one hit at a time, and holding or getting out of the way. That's not boxing. And amateur boxing will improve, because people won't overstay and burn out in the hopes of making the Olympics, but won't turn pro early either since they don't want to wait 4 more years. They will use the amateurs for what they are meant for, to gain experience and seasoning, and turn pro when ready.

I can't comment on AIBA's involvment with a new league in pro boxing, don't know enough about it.

[JMac]

Yay! Let's screw over amateur boxing even more! That will really help boxing's current situation--give amateur fighters even less incentive to stay amateur and hone their skills, flooding the pro ranks with fighters who have less business being pro than much of the current crop. Now we can 1) make pro boxing suck more; 2) endanger many of the fighters who shouldn't be pro but will turn pro earlier than they would have; and 3) make amateur boxing worse than it already is by removing many fighters prematurely, all in one fell swoop.

While we're at it, let's make pro boxing that much more confusing and add a whole new league!

Idiots.

This is great news.

When is the last time, since 1976, that any casual fan has really cared about Olympic boxing?

Putting names fans are familiar with will help ratings and interest. The final change needs to be the scoring system. The scoring sucks now, encourages one hit at a time, and holding or getting out of the way. That's not boxing. And amateur boxing will improve, because people won't overstay and burn out in the hopes of making the Olympics, but won't turn pro early either since they don't want to wait 4 more years. They will use the amateurs for what they are meant for, to gain experience and seasoning, and turn pro when ready.

I can't comment on AIBA's involvment with a new league in pro boxing, don't know enough about it.

There is no doubt that amateur boxing needs to make changes. The scoring system does suck and nobody hated it more than me and I was a long time AIBA official who worked the ’08 Olympics. AIBA has made some changes to the scoring system and though I no longer officiate and have not used the new system, I have heard that the new changes are an improvement. I do like some of AIBA's plans for 2016 Olympics but don't like others.
AIBA plans to go to the scoring system that they are using currently for the WSB which is the 10 pt must system but it gets entered electronically. I’m OK with that. The problems in the past weren’t the scoring system but the corrupt judges which still exist today. I have no problem with removing the headgear. It only helps to prevent cuts. I don't think it does much to prevent brain damage but I am sure the medical community will not like the headgear being removed. It will help the fans see the boxers like in '76. Adding pros to the Olympics is not the answer. First of all, you are not going to see PBF or Pacman type of pros coming back. AIBA is looking to use WSB guys and maybe bring back pros that have less than 15 fights who will have to sign agreements with AIBA.
The reason the '76 Olympics had people who watched it and knew who the boxers were was because of TV coverage. Amateur boxing was on network TV (ABC) at least once a month back in the 70's. ABC Wide World of Sports used to show USA vs the world back then. They would box good teams like the Soviet Union, Cubans, and East Germans, etc The communist countries had good coaches and boxers and with the cold war still going on, it made for great television. Cable TV didn't exist. You had 3 network stations, PBS and maybe 3 UHF chanels so if you wanted to watch sports on a Saturday you watched either Wide World of Sports or whatever pro or college game was on another channel. Times were different.
This day and age with all of the cable sports channels USA Boxing for some reason can not get their guys on TV. It's gets worse every year. I don’t know what the problem is. After the ’76 Olympics, the number of kids signing up to box went through the roof. Now you can’t get these lazy kids off their couch and if they do, they have more choices of sports to play and boxing isn’t high on the list when they never see amateur boxing on TV except for the Olympics. The only thing more boring than watching the ’04 Athens Olympic boxing was the ’08 Beijing Olympic boxing. You are right that the scoring system used, led to punch and hold, punch and wrestle and punch and run. I’ll be curious to see how it looks at the ’11 World Championships when you bring in all of the officials and boxers from all over the world. It won’t the same as the US Championships or Olympic trials when it comes to scoring and style of boxing.
At the end of the day, what AIBA is trying to do is take over pro boxing and be in control of all boxing, amateur and pro. They have their work cut out for them. They will try and put all of the alphabet organizations out of business and I don’t see them going out easy. That’s going to be one fight worth watching.

[JMac]

An interesting post on the current scene by Luis Del Valle who is a 13-0 pro featherweight who had been a USA U-19 national champion and competed in either the cadet or junior worlds had to say about AIBA adding pros to the 2016 Olympics:

IMO i dont think the pro's will go back... Once you get use to the one time weigh in and thats it.. u never want to go back to, the back to back weigh ins.. a lot of pros will have to compete in a higher weight classs that they do as a pro just because of that fact. Unless there respectable $$$$ on the table I dont think it would happen, at least with the pro's

[DCAmateurBoxing]

There is no doubt that amateur boxing needs to make changes. The scoring system does suck and nobody hated it more than me and I was a long time AIBA official who worked the ’08 Olympics. AIBA has made some changes to the scoring system and though I no longer officiate and have not used the new system, I have heard that the new changes are an improvement.

Depends on which side of it that you are on. In Mobile, one of our boxers from MD had 4/5 judges had him winning on their raw scores, but after the accepted score calculation--our boxer lost. There are mathematical scenarios that can have 5/5 judges having boxer A winning, but the accepted score has boxer B winning. I like the theory of eliminating the two judges that don't have "similar" scores as the other three, but the application of the system needs work. I still am not convinced the boxer that would have won under paper scoring or 1-second window ESS system, is still winning now.

I have no problem with removing the headgear. It only helps to prevent cuts. I don't think it does much to prevent brain damage but I am sure the medical community will not like the headgear being removed.

I don't agree with this and I think WSB boxers will attest to that after they took the headgear off. By the sheer definition of physicals and the absorption and dispersement of force, I think the headgear does take damage away from the skull/brain. There are many reports/studies that go into more detail.

The reason the '76 Olympics had people who watched it and knew who the boxers were was because of TV coverage. Amateur boxing was on network TV (ABC) at least once a month back in the 70's. ABC Wide World of Sports used to show USA vs the world back then. They would box good teams like the Soviet Union, Cubans, and East Germans, etc The communist countries had good coaches and boxers and with the cold war still going on, it made for great television. Cable TV didn't exist. You had 3 network stations, PBS and maybe 3 UHF chanels so if you wanted to watch sports on a Saturday you watched either Wide World of Sports or whatever pro or college game was on another channel. Times were different. This day and age with all of the cable sports channels USA Boxing for some reason can not get their guys on TV. It's gets worse every year.

We don't need TV. We have other media routes that are more popular, less expensive. . .internet. Just look at the way that the music industry has changed and now artists can post a video of a song, get 10 million views and sell a download directly from that video viewed. The problem is that USAB doesn't want to promote these athletes in action. After doing a live stream of the 2010 US Nationals, which was great, they said 2011 would go up, but it hasn't. At the trials, they prohibited from any video being published or posted. So, many people outside the boxing community don't even know who these boxer are or have seen them in action--many in their own back yards. The best national tournaments and even the trials have an audience filled with boxers, coaches, family of boxers/coaches, boxing officials and a handful (literally) of the general public who seem to have stumbled in. We need support from outside the boxing community. Just take a look at how UFC has done it. They simulcast the first part of live PPV for free on cable/online and when they start the main card, you have to pay. It's easy to find UFC fight video online and that's what promotes the buzz of people wanting to see more. They actually encourage and pay fighters to use social media to interact with fans. My point is there is better and more efficient technology available today that can easily help promote the sport but the key is seeing the actual competition. Not just tweeting or fb'ing about boxers, but actually seeing the results of their hard work in action.

At the end of the day, what AIBA is trying to do is take over pro boxing and be in control of all boxing, amateur and pro. They have their work cut out for them. They will try and put all of the alphabet organizations out of business and I don’t see them going out easy. That’s going to be one fight worth watching.

Yeah, I don't see the governing bodies of pro boxing just laying down for this one. They have way more money than AIBA and they don't want to share any $$$. AIBA has been slowly but surely encroaching in their area, but eventually they will have a direct fight on their hands. No pun intended. Just my .02.

[Slythex]

Few additional thoughts here:

Depends on which side of it that you are on. In Mobile, one of our boxers from MD had 4/5 judges had him winning on their raw scores, but after the accepted score calculation--our boxer lost. There are mathematical scenarios that can have 5/5 judges having boxer A winning, but the accepted score has boxer B winning. I like the theory of eliminating the two judges that don't have "similar" scores as the other three, but the application of the system needs work.

I think, in theory, the idea was good, but in practice it's less clear. I found that the scores at the Trials were much closer than the scores for, say, the JOs, or Nationals. I don't know if this is a function of the new ESS methodology, or just boxers with comparable level of skill.

I still am not convinced the boxer that would have won under paper scoring or 1-second window ESS system, is still winning now.

I can state definitively that there could easily be a difference between paper scoring and the current ESS. Like you said, we saw that with your boxer in Mobile. I never thought to test a comparison with the one second window versus the new ESS though. I think the one second window method was flawed though.

What I think I'd like to see tested is something to the effect where you remove the 'one blow=one point' approach. I'd still keep the similar thing, but instead not average the three accepted judge scores. You'd wind up with a round by round score of like 35 to 27, but I think the average normalizes the scores too much.

All that said, I've also heard rumors that AIBA is thinking of getting rid of the ESS entirely going to a more pro style 10 pt must system. This would be after the 2012 Olympics though. Also, only a rumor, so take that with a huge pile of salt.

As for allowing pro boxers, I don't see any way this would be feasible. These days, the top pros are looking for the big paydays. I can't see there be enough money involved to warrant the big names bothering to enter as there's no upside to it. Could you really see Manny Pacquiao or Floyd Mayweather compete in the Olympics for basically nothing? And if the Olympics doesn't attract the BEST pros, what's the point. It works for hockey because you do get the best players, but also because there's some parity amongst the top countries (Canada, Sweden, Russia, US, Finland, etc.)

[DCAmateurBoxing]

John, I agree the one second window was flawed and at least we are trying to improve. I just don't know how I feel about new system.

Question for you. Are the raw scores for first level tiebreaker reflective of all five judges or just the raw scores of the judges who's scores were "most similar". If the former is true then that mean those judges who were out of line with the three accepted are actually having an impact on the results.

Also thank you for taking time to review the calculations at the trials with me. I feel like mr many coaches understood how it works and even some officials certainly didnt. I wish we gave our boxers and coaches more chances to get familiar with it (like PAL).

At first reaction, don't want the pro scoring but then again maybe it may work out. But isn't that where we were when we had the Olympic robbery by Korean judges that prompted the ESS in the first place?

[Slythex]

Question for you. Are the raw scores for first level tiebreaker reflective of all five judges or just the raw scores of the judges who's scores were "most similar". If the former is true then that mean those judges who were out of line with the three accepted are actually having an impact on the results.

The raw scores used for the level one tiebreaker are from all 5 judges. You may have read about some situations where they drop the high and low, but that was for a beta version used in one of the Pan Am qualifiers earlier this year.

As far as getting people familiar with the system, I've made a point of trying to to be as open and transparent as possible about it, especially since I don't think USAB has traditionally had a reputation for acting that way. I know I posted about the system a few times when we first got the system, and then again when I had a chance to play with it. That said, we've only had it in our possession maybe 6 weeks or so prior to the national championships, so it's not like we had months to put it through its paces. I did take about 70 scorecards (ran out of time or I'd have run more) from local shows to use as real data for testing (I also created an excel spreadsheet 'simulator.')

USAB asked me to go to the national coaches' retreat in Colorado Springs to present on the system, so the intent to be open and educate everyone is there. In fact, I'd be glad to make my powerpoint presentation on the system available (I don't think this was posted on the usaboxing.org site, although it may have been), as well as the raw excel spreadsheet test data. Shoot me a private message with your email address, and I'll send it along (this offer holds for anyone interested, by the way).

[JMac]

At first reaction, don't want the pro scoring but then again maybe it may work out. But isn't that where we were when we had the Olympic robbery by Korean judges that prompted the ESS in the first place?

Yes at the '88 Olympics when Roy Jones got robbed. The ESS looked good to the IOC but no matter what system you use, you have people using it and that is where the problems lies. I can tell you from experience that the corrupt officials have not gone away. For some countries, cheating is no big deal as long as their guy wins. Sad really but reality. I'm ready to go back to pro style scoring so it is something fans can understand. AIBA knows who the cheaters are. They just need to get rid of them which they do only when it works in their favor.