Could BOXREC be the answer to ending governing body nonsense

[Jeff Thomas]

Ok we are all here because we love boxing! Some of us make a bit of money from it but our interest is largely non profiteering (think that's the word)....

Everyone in the whole boxing world uses Boxrec as a record keeping resource. What if Boxrec were to get together and crown the rightful linear champion? No money to be exchanged.sure inactivity and retirements will cause problems but I think it could work!

Then just ignore everything else?

[Datsue]

Ok we are all here because we love boxing! Some of us make a bit of money from it but our interest is largely non profiteering (think that's the word)....

Everyone in the whole boxing world uses Boxrec as a record keeping resource. What if Boxrec were to get together and crown the rightful linear champion? No money to be exchanged.sure inactivity and retirements will cause problems but I think it could work!

Then just ignore everything else?

I appreciate your enthusiasm & I know you're on the side of the angels mate.

But a more practical plan would be to arm yourself to the teeth & shoot anyone involved with either promoting boxing shows & sanctioning boxing.

[whiskey]

Give Masis Belts a ring and I'm sure they'd quote you a design for a belt.

I'd even chip in.

[whiskey]

http://www.masisboxingbelts.com/

[LeedsLad]

I think it's a good idea.

The problem is though, marginalising the alphabets only benefits the fans, and the GENUINE champions within the sport, of which there are only a couple.

Fringe fighters make big money, promoters and TV firms can use the billing to sell their productions to the masses better.

[JLP]

Ok we are all here because we love boxing! Some of us make a bit of money from it but our interest is largely non profiteering (think that's the word)....

Everyone in the whole boxing world uses Boxrec as a record keeping resource. What if Boxrec were to get together and crown the rightful linear champion? No money to be exchanged.sure inactivity and retirements will cause problems but I think it could work!

Then just ignore everything else?

Jeff, what if I offered John Shep 500K to buy Boxrec? or a million quid? Would he take it? What about 2 million? He'd almost certainly have a price and once I'd found out what it was and paid up, I could control boxing. I like the sentiment of your idea but it is feasibly as corruptible as all the other councils and federations and organisation and associations...

(As it happens I don't have a spare fifty quid, but I'm sure some shyster somewhere would weasle their way in in a heartbeat).

[Jeff Thomas]

Yep but regardless of the rankings which do suck in terms of how things actually are- it is the first place I bet people go to find information.

[keithmoonhangover]

Ok we are all here because we love boxing! Some of us make a bit of money from it but our interest is largely non profiteering (think that's the word)....

Everyone in the whole boxing world uses Boxrec as a record keeping resource. What if Boxrec were to get together and crown the rightful linear champion? No money to be exchanged.sure inactivity and retirements will cause problems but I think it could work!

Then just ignore everything else?

Not trying to be a spoilsport, but doesn't The Ring magazine already do it?

[jtourettes]

No, see The Ring for reasons why.

[dondada]

The computerised rankings aren't very good. I love BoxRec, but they'd be a shit version of the IBO.

Aye they're always a cause of contention. But how many of the number ones in each division would you agree with? Probably more than any one sanctioning body's champions?

[keithmoonhangover]

The computerised rankings aren't very good. I love BoxRec, but they'd be a shit version of the IBO.

Aye they're always a cause of contention. But how many of the number ones in each division would you agree with? Probably more than any one sanctioning body's champions?

Bernard Hopkins and Timothy Bradley are the ones I'd disagree with the most, but they're mostly what I'd think was right.

You're right DD, Hopkins at #1 is surely an April fool.

[Jack B]

How about the boxers taking control of the situation?

From where I'm standing, one thing professional boxing lacks compared to other major sports, both at a national and global level, is a fighters' union (correct me if I'm wrong).

If something like this could be established, similar to the ATP in tennis or the PGA in golf, a professional 'world tour' of sorts could be introduced, where fighters had a guaranteed, regular schedule, earned the vast majority of the money brought in, and any excess profits would be pumped back into the (fighter-owned, non-profit) union, to set up advisory services, pension funds, etc. etc.

Basically, the balance of power would shift from the promoters to the fighters - which clearly should be the case in any professional, individual sport.

Another question - AIBA are clearly looking to take more of a control over boxing as a whole, with WSB and the introduction of APB next year. Do people think they will have any success? And if so, do people think that would be a good thing? Their brochure certainly looks/sounds impressive.

http://www.aiba.org/documents/site1/AIB ... l_2_BR.pdf

Quite telling that not London Olympic medallist has turned professional (as of yet) - clearly a shift change from the past.

[Caustic]

Ok we are all here because we love boxing! Some of us make a bit of money from it but our interest is largely non profiteering (think that's the word)....

Everyone in the whole boxing world uses Boxrec as a record keeping resource. What if Boxrec were to get together and crown the rightful linear champion? No money to be exchanged.sure inactivity and retirements will cause problems but I think it could work!

Then just ignore everything else?

Great idea Jeff, and we could let Horse do the rankings as well.

[dondada]

Plus the critieria for stripping these fighters would veer from 'I don't like the way he celebrated that last KO' to 'Have you seen how he behaves on Twitter' or 'He's a allegedly fighter, so we passed the title to the next best person (as long as he boxes for someone we all like, which is a pretty effing narrow field)' via 'He used to let on to me in Tesco, but hasn't done a stop and chat for a year now'.

Sorry? Why would it? There are plenty of people in this industry to justifiably slag off without starting on those who don't deserve it.

Edit - Ah, maybe you're thinking that forum users would decide. Gotcha.

[dondada]

Bernard Hopkins and Timothy Bradley are the ones I'd disagree with the most, but they're mostly what I'd think was right.

You're right DD, Hopkins at #1 is surely an April fool.[/quote]

No, it's just maths, that's it. The lack of human judgement often throws up weird anomalies.

[keithmoonhangover]

Bernard Hopkins and Timothy Bradley are the ones I'd disagree with the most, but they're mostly what I'd think was right.

You're right DD, Hopkins at #1 is surely an April fool.

No, it's just maths, that's it. The lack of human judgement often throws up weird anomalies.[/quote]

I know it's just maffs. But the maffs is wrong. In his last fight, the guy at #1 lost to the guy at #2. The system needs tweeking IMHO.

[Caustic]

No, it's just maths, that's it. The lack of human judgement often throws up weird anomalies.

Is that the problem with Horses rankings?

[dondada]

I know it's just maffs. But the maffs is wrong. In his last fight, the guy at #1 lost to the guy at #2. The system needs tweeking IMHO.

Hey, I'm sure those in charge are always looking for ways of tweaking the formula. Go for it!

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/BoxRe ... escription

[youngrell]

Great idea Jeff, I was thinking the same thing a few weeks back but more along the lines of a fans sanctioning body rather than just BoxRec.

I was going to post but I knew all the opposition it would get so I didn't waste my time. I, like you, think something serious definitely needs to happen. It was bad when there was 4 champions per division, but the introduction lately of Silver, Diamond, Super etc etc champs has diluted our sport even more and it's gone too far now.

Rather than everyone give the reasons why it can't be done (as we all know them anyway), why not try and give ideas towards something like this?

[Caustic]

Good lad Jeff and I have a lot of respect for him but he did box for two Masters 'titles' during his career!!

[dondada]

Plus the critieria for stripping these fighters would veer from 'I don't like the way he celebrated that last KO' to 'Have you seen how he behaves on Twitter' or 'He's a allegedly fighter, so we passed the title to the next best person (as long as he boxes for someone we all like, which is a pretty effing narrow field)' via 'He used to let on to me in Tesco, but hasn't done a stop and chat for a year now'.

Sorry? Why would it? There are plenty of people in this industry to justifiably slag off without starting on those who don't deserve it.

Edit - Ah, maybe you're thinking that forum users would decide. Gotcha.

Aye, I was looking at it from that angle, plus the problem with the computerised system as you still need an IBO style panel to arbitrate. No offence, but it would mean handing the championship decisions over to, say, yourself, Shep, The Law and some of the editors, which would be a disaster for one reason or another.

Probably. Less of a disaster than all of the ones knocking about now, mind. But not a job I would want.

[winkveron]

We all know that the ridiculous amount of titles are never going to go away. As long as the real fans know who the true champion is in each division and ignore the muppets who claim to be a world champion whilst holding the IBO* belt then we'll be fine. The fighters owe it to the fans to not claim they are a world champion or fighting for a world title when it is a meaningless bauble like the IBO or WBU for example.

*see Matthew Hatton talking about dreaming of being a world champion before fighting for the IBO at a leisure centre.