Olympic Champion has a right to an immediate title shot?
-
TheLeprechaun
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 5199
- Joined: 27 Jun 2013, 20:42
Olympic Champion has a right to an immediate title shot?
I've always been under the impression that the olympic gold medalist is entitled to challenge for a world title in his first fight if he wants it. Obviously the vast majority of olympic champs don't go for it. Is this correct though? If an olympic champ decided to fight for the heavyweight title and campaigned to the governing bodies, would they insert him as mandatory challenger without a pro fight?
-
boxingcoach1
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 7
- Joined: 23 Oct 2012, 18:19
Re: Olympic Champion has a right to an immediate title shot?
i wouldn't imagine so lomachenko had one in his 2nd but his previous wsb fights count as pro bouts to american governing bodys maybe wrong but thats my take on things
-
TheLeprechaun
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 5199
- Joined: 27 Jun 2013, 20:42
Re: Olympic Champion has a right to an immediate title shot?
Olympic champ Teofilo Stevenson from Cuba was offered a fight with Ali after he won the olympics. As he was Cuban, he stayed amateur.
Pete Rademacher won the olympic title and enforced an immediate title shot against Floyd Patterson. He put up a good effort but lost.
It seems like in the heavyweight division at least, there is a history of Olympic champs being lined up for title fights in their first fight, if they want it.
Pete Rademacher won the olympic title and enforced an immediate title shot against Floyd Patterson. He put up a good effort but lost.
It seems like in the heavyweight division at least, there is a history of Olympic champs being lined up for title fights in their first fight, if they want it.
Re: Olympic Champion has a right to an immediate title shot?
Not in Britain though, the board would need to see rounds in first, 4, 6, 8, 10 rounders first usually, America anything goes, it's about marketing and money.
Re: Olympic Champion has a right to an immediate title shot?
There are obviously exceptions who could hold their own but the majority would take a pounding in such a step up.
I know Khan was a silver medalist, but imagine he had won and was thrown in the deepend against who ever the world champion was at the time. His career would have been ended in the first fight.
Joshua against a Klitschko?
I agree the ams with really good pedigree should be moved faster but thats a step too far for me.
I know Khan was a silver medalist, but imagine he had won and was thrown in the deepend against who ever the world champion was at the time. His career would have been ended in the first fight.
Joshua against a Klitschko?
I agree the ams with really good pedigree should be moved faster but thats a step too far for me.
-
Boxing Prospect
- Light Heavyweight
- Posts: 6592
- Joined: 25 Jun 2012, 14:35
Re: Olympic Champion has a right to an immediate title shot?
If we go with Khan and suggest he was a Lightweight when he debuted, a world title fight would have seem him facing:Emmseegee wrote:There are obviously exceptions who could hold their own but the majority would take a pounding in such a step up.
I know Khan was a silver medalist, but imagine he had won and was thrown in the deepend against who ever the world champion was at the time. His career would have been ended in the first fight.
Joshua against a Klitschko?
I agree the ams with really good pedigree should be moved faster but thats a step too far for me.
Juan Diaz (WBA)
Diego Corrales (WBO and WBC)
Leavander Johnson (IBF)
Interesting to think about but yeah, can't see him having beaten any of them (Johnson won the vacant title about a month before Khan's debut)
Re: Olympic Champion has a right to an immediate title shot?
Quite simply, no. It's not correct, never has been correct, and I have no idea where you got that from.