Unofficial commissions l

[half man half amazin]

All biba/Mbc boxers have the same medicals as any other sanctioning organisation and their fights are the same duration of any other professional contest, so I don't really understand why the boxers aren't having their fights listed, has anybody actually given an official reason for this. It's like sherdog or any other mma records database not listing bellators fights because the ufc have told them not to, it just wouldn't happen because it's unprofessional. I think all the boxers on biba/Mbc licences have a right to know an official reason why their fights aren't being recorded or listed.

[questionmore]

I think your getting yourself in knotts pal as you obviously didnt understand what i wrote, Maybe your just a bit thick.. wouldnt be the first time thats been said about you

So no court date then... just more waffle.

Maybe you need to read back your posts and not just your post Damien. But wait - everyone else is thick stupid dumb or has some kind of vendetta against you all so excuse my ignorance - yes I must be thick

Its not rocket science pal.. I was stating a hypothetical issue that could arise, for a bbbofc promoter, nothing difficult to understand.

Why dont you stop hiding behind an alias, and put your statements to your own name, like i do..
That way we can judge ourselves if theres any personal vendetta

what makes you think im hiding ? I choose to question more (hence the name) and its my freedom of choice to use whatever name I choose on a public forum. But you can continue to call me 'thick' or 'pal' - that's your freedom of choice.
Who I am is insignificant to you. What should be of importance is the best interests and welfare of the boxers under your wing -that's how it is for me anyways.

But I'll make you a promise. IF you can tell me the impending court date. We can meet up at court and I can tell you all about myself

[damianhucker1]

That post is very telling,for a few reasons. one being you wont reveal who you are and hide behind a username because the personal nature would be revealed... ill cover other points later

[questionmore]

That post is very telling,for a few reasons. one being you wont reveal who you are and hide behind a username because the personal nature would be revealed... ill cover other points later

your going off on another tangent

What is significant to everybody is a court date. If you dont believe me ask any of your boxers what they want to know:
a/ A court date when BIBA/MBC will persue BoxRec for listings reinstatment etc
or
b/The real name of questionmore - a poster on a BoxRec forum.

Ive asked the same question again and again and again regarding a court date (as have countless others) but neither you, Gianluca, or anyone from BIBA/MBC have come up with a date.

If you want to play detective with my last post then go ahead. Read it again - its not complicated

[LucaDiCaro]

Looking on this is a quandary for me. I think Luca is right to fight his corner and I think John and Marina are right to choose who they want to be in their database.

I couldn't agree more, except BoxRec are, as Marina Shepherd said at the WBC Convention that they are the Official Record Keeps for most Commissions, as such if they are operating as an official record keeper, and not as an 'unofficial record site' as they have been claiming, then they are required to accurately record records of all professional boxers.

As an example we have had three boxers from a certain West European boxing commission whose boxers records are recorded on Boxrec, compete against our boxers yet even their records have not been updated, as such they are doing a disservice to those that they even say they do 'recognise'.

[LucaDiCaro]

All biba/Mbc boxers have the same medicals as any other sanctioning organisation and their fights are the same duration of any other professional contest, so I don't really understand why the boxers aren't having their fights listed, has anybody actually given an official reason for this. It's like sherdog or any other mma records database not listing bellators fights because the ufc have told them not to, it just wouldn't happen because it's unprofessional. I think all the boxers on biba/Mbc licences have a right to know an official reason why their fights aren't being recorded or listed.

Well put

[LucaDiCaro]

So, just so I understand correctly - according to the BBBofC and Boxrec:

Any boxer not registered with the BBBofC = "Unlicenced"

Any organisation other than the BBBofC = "Unofficial"


Does this pretty much sum it up ? (unless of course we are talking about a boxer or organisation that the BBBofC and/or Boxrec happen to like then this definition doesn't apply ?)

I think you've just about summed it up briprez

[damianhucker1]

That post is very telling,for a few reasons. one being you wont reveal who you are and hide behind a username because the personal nature would be revealed... ill cover other points later

your going off on another tangent

What is significant to everybody is a court date. If you dont believe me ask any of your boxers what they want to know:
a/ A court date when BIBA/MBC will persue BoxRec for listings reinstatment etc
or
b/The real name of questionmore - a poster on a BoxRec forum.

Ive asked the same question again and again and again regarding a court date (as have countless others) but neither you, Gianluca, or anyone from BIBA/MBC have come up with a date.

If you want to play detective with my last post then go ahead. Read it again - its not complicated

Only one going on a tangent is you my friend,
I cant answer questions i dont know the answers to, unlike you who thinks he has the answer to everything.
Of course i want to know a court date, but i also realise these things dont just happen overnight. Fail to prepare then prepare to fail, it has to be done properly to ensure maximum success obviously. So that is the only answer to your question, it has to go through the correct procedures, so as things stand no date is set, you keep asking the question when you know theres no date set, if there was then it would have already been said.
But to think that having no date set at current means nothing is happening is rather foolish, the best thing is to wait, like the rest of us are doing, rather than keep repeating the same rubbish.

As for your identity, well you already gave it away a while ago, but ive just been giving you the opportunity to say it yourself, THAT is why i know your comments are nothing more than a personal vendetta, Weve actually crossed paths on facebook previously havent we...
Which is why i found your comment about putting boxers best interest first funny

[questionmore]

Now you've lost me ? A vendetta is a blood fued or something of that gravity - perhaps its your choice of words. But you seem to make a good detective. You've already called me thick so It couldn't have been difficult for an intelligent man like yoursef to work it out - but give yourself a pat on the back anyways.

This thread is about unofficial commissions. And some boxers at another place asked about the BoxRec listings and were reassured a court date would be set 7 days after the LBA (Letter Before Action) was sent (over 7 days ago). So its a valid question as boxers are asking - And where better to find out about something BoxRec related than here.

But thanks for finally answering the simple question of what's the court date as nobody else would.

Their is no court date. Thanks

I think I'll take The Law's advice and not hold my breath. But stranger things have happened, so if a court date does materialise then I look forward to meeting you

[Sklar]

Looking on this is a quandary for me. I think Luca is right to fight his corner and I think John and Marina are right to choose who they want to be in their database.

I couldn't agree more, except BoxRec are, as Marina Shepherd said at the WBC Convention that they are the Official Record Keeps for most Commissions, as such if they are operating as an official record keeper, and not as an 'unofficial record site' as they have been claiming, then they are required to accurately record records of all professional boxers.

As an example we have had three boxers from a certain West European boxing commission whose boxers records are recorded on Boxrec, compete against our boxers yet even their records have not been updated, as such they are doing a disservice to those that they even say they do 'recognise'.

Have you spoken to the commissions directly about this? Do the commissions you claim Dr Shepherd and John keep records for recognise your organisation(s)? It's not unusual for 'licensed' fighters to box exhibitions and/or 'unlicensed' matches and for them not to be listed on BoxRec, that's reasonable IMO.

I sincerely wish you every success with your endeavours, but I'm naturally a little turned off by aggressive litigation or threat thereof. It's always rubbed me up the wrong way due to personal experience. Like I wrote earlier, though, I do think you're right to toot your own horn, nobody else will do it for you.

[The Law]

Gianluca, is this (see link below) the same Wentworth solicitors who wrote that letter? Interesting ....

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05388680

I see that they specialise in Immigration law, conveyancing and probate/wills .... Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Furthermore, it appears that this solicitors firm has no website, which is pretty much unheard of, is this true?

I look forward to seeing the outcome of their letter

Luca, I see that you have not answered my questions. It's merely a polite query, I am not trying to imply anything. Companies House suggests that Wentworth Solicitors is in 'liquidation', is this true? ..... Also what's their website? ....

[LucaDiCaro]

Looking on this is a quandary for me. I think Luca is right to fight his corner and I think John and Marina are right to choose who they want to be in their database.

I couldn't agree more, except BoxRec are, as Marina Shepherd said at the WBC Convention that they are the Official Record Keeps for most Commissions, as such if they are operating as an official record keeper, and not as an 'unofficial record site' as they have been claiming, then they are required to accurately record records of all professional boxers.

As an example we have had three boxers from a certain West European boxing commission whose boxers records are recorded on Boxrec, compete against our boxers yet even their records have not been updated, as such they are doing a disservice to those that they even say they do 'recognise'.

Have you spoken to the commissions directly about this? Do the commissions you claim Dr Shepherd and John keep records for recognise your organisation(s)? It's not unusual for 'licensed' fighters to box exhibitions and/or 'unlicensed' matches and for them not to be listed on BoxRec, that's reasonable IMO.

I sincerely wish you every success with your endeavours, but I'm naturally a little turned off by aggressive litigation or threat thereof. It's always rubbed me up the wrong way due to personal experience. Like I wrote earlier, though, I do think you're right to toot your own horn, nobody else will do it for you.

I have indeed and yes they do otherwise they would not have allowed their fighters to take part on our events, also they too have contacted boxrec as their fighters records haven't been updated - if you get the chance to read the whole letter before action you'll also see that Recognised World Championship organisations that are listed on Boxrec also have discussed the matter with BoxRec as these Championship fights are also not listed.

[LucaDiCaro]

Gianluca, is this (see link below) the same Wentworth solicitors who wrote that letter? Interesting ....

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05388680

I see that they specialise in Immigration law, conveyancing and probate/wills .... Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Furthermore, it appears that this solicitors firm has no website, which is pretty much unheard of, is this true?

I look forward to seeing the outcome of their letter

Luca, I see that you have not answered my questions. It's merely a polite query, I am not trying to imply anything. Companies House suggests that Wentworth Solicitors is in 'liquidation', is this true? ..... Also what's their website? ....

I have to say I have no idea - Mahtab Aziz is our lawyer (he's also the lawyer for a number of very well known championship level boxers both from the UK and around the World) I deal with him direct not through Wentworth's but as he had sent the LBA as Wentworth I assume it's not the same company as they are clearly still trading for him to do that, as for website again as I deal direct with Mahtab I wouldn't know if they have a website or not

[Sklar]

I couldn't agree more, except BoxRec are, as Marina Shepherd said at the WBC Convention that they are the Official Record Keeps for most Commissions, as such if they are operating as an official record keeper, and not as an 'unofficial record site' as they have been claiming, then they are required to accurately record records of all professional boxers.

As an example we have had three boxers from a certain West European boxing commission whose boxers records are recorded on Boxrec, compete against our boxers yet even their records have not been updated, as such they are doing a disservice to those that they even say they do 'recognise'.

Have you spoken to the commissions directly about this? Do the commissions you claim Dr Shepherd and John keep records for recognise your organisation(s)? It's not unusual for 'licensed' fighters to box exhibitions and/or 'unlicensed' matches and for them not to be listed on BoxRec, that's reasonable IMO.

I sincerely wish you every success with your endeavours, but I'm naturally a little turned off by aggressive litigation or threat thereof. It's always rubbed me up the wrong way due to personal experience. Like I wrote earlier, though, I do think you're right to toot your own horn, nobody else will do it for you.

I have indeed and yes they do otherwise they would not have allowed their fighters to take part on our events, also they too have contacted boxrec as their fighters records haven't been updated - if you get the chance to read the whole letter before action you'll also see that Recognised World Championship organisations that are listed on Boxrec also have discussed the matter with BoxRec as these Championship fights are also not listed.

Oh, well, I hope you all manage to work things out. The more boxing the better IMO provided the fighters are looked after.

[Counter-puncher]

Gianluca, is this (see link below) the same Wentworth solicitors who wrote that letter? Interesting ....

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05388680

I see that they specialise in Immigration law, conveyancing and probate/wills .... Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Furthermore, it appears that this solicitors firm has no website, which is pretty much unheard of, is this true?

I look forward to seeing the outcome of their letter

Luca, I see that you have not answered my questions. It's merely a polite query, I am not trying to imply anything. Companies House suggests that Wentworth Solicitors is in 'liquidation', is this true? ..... Also what's their website? ....

I have to say I have no idea - Mahtab Aziz is our lawyer (he's also the lawyer for a number of very well known championship level boxers both from the UK and around the World) I deal with him direct not through Wentworth's but as he had sent the LBA as Wentworth I assume it's not the same company as they are clearly still trading for him to do that, as for website again as I deal direct with Mahtab I wouldn't know if they have a website or not

Your relationship is with an individual, not the company he works for? That sounds as fishy as a hot night in Grimsby. You would have signed some terms of engagement at some point I assume, which should clarify that relationship for you, should you wish and need to find out

[damianhucker1]

The most frustrating thing for me in all this, is that in the area i operate, which is mainly Nottingham, theres a lot of lads just turning pro or about to turn pro, many of whom ive worked with in the past, whos careers wont be able to fully progress while this is all ongoing.
Those that have gone bbbofc are simply not going to achieve what they could with no other promoter putting on regularly pro shows in the city. some of them are decent lads who wont be able to sell enough tickets yet outside of the local area, will then end up as opponents and will never get to be built how they should do. and those who sign with me are also being hindered by all this for the reasons already stated in this thread. An example being ive just got off the phone to a trainer, who reffered to the following boxing codes, Amateur, Unlicensed, Maltese and Pro, with pro being bbbofc .
It all causes splits that are effecting the whole boxing scene in the area, and will only cause the unlicensed circuit to thrive instead.

Im NOT anti bbbofc, although im sure it may seem that way some times when i rant on here, they do have many good points, but they arent perfect.
The obvious thing is people say i can fix the whole local boxing scene by moving over to BBBOFC, but then id have no say in anything, and id be having to be part of the daft politics that is preventing boxers from developing... so in my opinion, no matter what ever comes of all this, and no matter what goes in with my own boxing path, the must is that this fracture is resolved, so my only real complaint at the bbbofc is to stop thwarting the boxing scene in Notts and surrounding area. Thats where i live, thats where i grew, and thats where i ultimately want to see boxing grow.
It needs a big shift for it to work, but im sure if its like that here, its probably like it elsewhere too...

SO all the those who have tried to argue on here previously with my points, if you cant see how what ive written on this post is hugely frustrating for not only me but also the boxers and the spectators, then your too far up someone butt to judge, surely those with a big opinion on this subject should be thinking of whats best for boxing.... in my neck of the woods, whats best for boxing is massively different to that of a few opinions on here.
For me its not about BBBofC vs MBC/BIBA , its Boxing growth vs the out of touch Suits.

There was originally a point made by bbbofc that boxers wishing to box on foreign shows had to apply, which implied that if an application was done through the correct channels then a bbbofc boxer could box on an mbc show and vice versa... but then when people applied it would be stated as not being in the best interest of boxing... its pretty obvious now that it WOULD be in the best interest of boxing if they did this properly on a case by case basis.. Fair enough turn down the application should it be to box someone whos had their bbbofc license removed or an application rejected, but hows it in the best interest of boxing to force a guy to be unable to develop his career in the home corner of a local show, if its the only pro show in their city....

Common sense needs to prevail, its gone on long enough... Im sure Robert Smith and Gianluca di Caro would never be the best of friends, and im sure there would still be political debate between both organisations... but if its all done with clarity and fairness, then in my opinion that is the way forward, forget expensive court cases, that will be expensive on both sides, when it need not even be the case.

As for boxrec, i see no reason for any of this to have gone how it is other than blind stubbornness or remuneration (greed), your aiding the fractured state im finding on the ground, for a dedicated boxing website i cant see how that can be anything other than bad business. A decline in boxing will mean a decline in site visitors and a decline in advertising revenue and ultimately a site that could become defunct.. im not suggesting thats going to be anytime soon, but surely its best to avoid that scenario.

Apologies for the rant guys, just had a couple of conversations this morning that got me pulling my hair out and the stupidity, and i dont mean from just my point of view... when boxers are getting frustrated and theres nothing i can do to help due to daft politics, when i know i could offere so much to help the lad, but his trainer and manager are on bbbofc licenses and know they cant, even though they know its whats best for him.
chances are he will jump to BIBA when his license expires in Feb, but ideally he would like to stay with the trainer hes been with since a kid, loyalty goes a long way in boxing...

[Sklar]

There's only ever going to be couple of dozen or so fighters in the country who can make a full on living out of the sport whichever banner they're fighting under. Beyond that it's about a shot at a bit of local glory and promoters/managers trying to get fat. As long as guys are healthy and people are happy, I'm not sure it matters.

[Looking On]

The most frustrating thing for me in all this, is that in the area i operate, which is mainly Nottingham, theres a lot of lads just turning pro or about to turn pro, many of whom ive worked with in the past, whos careers wont be able to fully progress while this is all ongoing.
Those that have gone bbbofc are simply not going to achieve what they could with no other promoter putting on regularly pro shows in the city. some of them are decent lads who wont be able to sell enough tickets yet outside of the local area, will then end up as opponents and will never get to be built how they should do. and those who sign with me are also being hindered by all this for the reasons already stated in this thread. An example being ive just got off the phone to a trainer, who reffered to the following boxing codes, Amateur, Unlicensed, Maltese and Pro, with pro being bbbofc .
It all causes splits that are effecting the whole boxing scene in the area, and will only cause the unlicensed circuit to thrive instead.

Im NOT anti bbbofc, although im sure it may seem that way some times when i rant on here, they do have many good points, but they arent perfect.
The obvious thing is people say i can fix the whole local boxing scene by moving over to BBBOFC, but then id have no say in anything, and id be having to be part of the daft politics that is preventing boxers from developing... so in my opinion, no matter what ever comes of all this, and no matter what goes in with my own boxing path, the must is that this fracture is resolved, so my only real complaint at the bbbofc is to stop thwarting the boxing scene in Notts and surrounding area. Thats where i live, thats where i grew, and thats where i ultimately want to see boxing grow.
It needs a big shift for it to work, but im sure if its like that here, its probably like it elsewhere too...

SO all the those who have tried to argue on here previously with my points, if you cant see how what ive written on this post is hugely frustrating for not only me but also the boxers and the spectators, then your too far up someone butt to judge, surely those with a big opinion on this subject should be thinking of whats best for boxing.... in my neck of the woods, whats best for boxing is massively different to that of a few opinions on here.
For me its not about BBBofC vs MBC/BIBA , its Boxing growth vs the out of touch Suits.

There was originally a point made by bbbofc that boxers wishing to box on foreign shows had to apply, which implied that if an application was done through the correct channels then a bbbofc boxer could box on an mbc show and vice versa... but then when people applied it would be stated as not being in the best interest of boxing... its pretty obvious now that it WOULD be in the best interest of boxing if they did this properly on a case by case basis.. Fair enough turn down the application should it be to box someone whos had their bbbofc license removed or an application rejected, but hows it in the best interest of boxing to force a guy to be unable to develop his career in the home corner of a local show, if its the only pro show in their city....

Common sense needs to prevail, its gone on long enough... Im sure Robert Smith and Gianluca di Caro would never be the best of friends, and im sure there would still be political debate between both organisations... but if its all done with clarity and fairness, then in my opinion that is the way forward, forget expensive court cases, that will be expensive on both sides, when it need not even be the case.

As for boxrec, i see no reason for any of this to have gone how it is other than blind stubbornness or remuneration (greed), your aiding the fractured state im finding on the ground, for a dedicated boxing website i cant see how that can be anything other than bad business. A decline in boxing will mean a decline in site visitors and a decline in advertising revenue and ultimately a site that could become defunct.. im not suggesting thats going to be anytime soon, but surely its best to avoid that scenario.

Apologies for the rant guys, just had a couple of conversations this morning that got me pulling my hair out and the stupidity, and i dont mean from just my point of view... when boxers are getting frustrated and theres nothing i can do to help due to daft politics, when i know i could offere so much to help the lad, but his trainer and manager are on bbbofc licenses and know they cant, even though they know its whats best for him.
chances are he will jump to BIBA when his license expires in Feb, but ideally he would like to stay with the trainer hes been with since a kid, loyalty goes a long way in boxing...

I agree with pretty much every word.

[The Law]

The most frustrating thing for me in all this, is that in the area i operate, which is mainly Nottingham, theres a lot of lads just turning pro or about to turn pro, many of whom ive worked with in the past, whos careers wont be able to fully progress while this is all ongoing.
Those that have gone bbbofc are simply not going to achieve what they could with no other promoter putting on regularly pro shows in the city. some of them are decent lads who wont be able to sell enough tickets yet outside of the local area, will then end up as opponents and will never get to be built how they should do. and those who sign with me are also being hindered by all this for the reasons already stated in this thread. An example being ive just got off the phone to a trainer, who reffered to the following boxing codes, Amateur, Unlicensed, Maltese and Pro, with pro being bbbofc .
It all causes splits that are effecting the whole boxing scene in the area, and will only cause the unlicensed circuit to thrive instead.

Im NOT anti bbbofc, although im sure it may seem that way some times when i rant on here, they do have many good points, but they arent perfect.
The obvious thing is people say i can fix the whole local boxing scene by moving over to BBBOFC, but then id have no say in anything, and id be having to be part of the daft politics that is preventing boxers from developing... so in my opinion, no matter what ever comes of all this, and no matter what goes in with my own boxing path, the must is that this fracture is resolved, so my only real complaint at the bbbofc is to stop thwarting the boxing scene in Notts and surrounding area. Thats where i live, thats where i grew, and thats where i ultimately want to see boxing grow.
It needs a big shift for it to work, but im sure if its like that here, its probably like it elsewhere too...

SO all the those who have tried to argue on here previously with my points, if you cant see how what ive written on this post is hugely frustrating for not only me but also the boxers and the spectators, then your too far up someone butt to judge, surely those with a big opinion on this subject should be thinking of whats best for boxing.... in my neck of the woods, whats best for boxing is massively different to that of a few opinions on here.
For me its not about BBBofC vs MBC/BIBA , its Boxing growth vs the out of touch Suits.

There was originally a point made by bbbofc that boxers wishing to box on foreign shows had to apply, which implied that if an application was done through the correct channels then a bbbofc boxer could box on an mbc show and vice versa... but then when people applied it would be stated as not being in the best interest of boxing... its pretty obvious now that it WOULD be in the best interest of boxing if they did this properly on a case by case basis.. Fair enough turn down the application should it be to box someone whos had their bbbofc license removed or an application rejected, but hows it in the best interest of boxing to force a guy to be unable to develop his career in the home corner of a local show, if its the only pro show in their city....

Common sense needs to prevail, its gone on long enough... Im sure Robert Smith and Gianluca di Caro would never be the best of friends, and im sure there would still be political debate between both organisations... but if its all done with clarity and fairness, then in my opinion that is the way forward, forget expensive court cases, that will be expensive on both sides, when it need not even be the case.

As for boxrec, i see no reason for any of this to have gone how it is other than blind stubbornness or remuneration (greed), your aiding the fractured state im finding on the ground, for a dedicated boxing website i cant see how that can be anything other than bad business. A decline in boxing will mean a decline in site visitors and a decline in advertising revenue and ultimately a site that could become defunct.. im not suggesting thats going to be anytime soon, but surely its best to avoid that scenario.

Apologies for the rant guys, just had a couple of conversations this morning that got me pulling my hair out and the stupidity, and i dont mean from just my point of view... when boxers are getting frustrated and theres nothing i can do to help due to daft politics, when i know i could offere so much to help the lad, but his trainer and manager are on bbbofc licenses and know they cant, even though they know its whats best for him.
chances are he will jump to BIBA when his license expires in Feb, but ideally he would like to stay with the trainer hes been with since a kid, loyalty goes a long way in boxing...

I agree with pretty much every word.

No offence intended 'Looking on' but Damian has posted from the exact same IP address as you. Either you are posting from the same house or office using the same WIFI ....

As for Damian's post, he makes some good points and I appreciate his concerns. I don't agree with every single point but I believe that he genuinely cares for his boxers.

[Looking On]

On my phone in same place.
Nothing rumbled there.
We work together a lot and i consider him a very good friend so im entitled to agree.
I am a trainer and he is the promoter of the boxer i train.
Be sure to check the WiFi address when we are next both online at the same time as then you will find cant be one person in two separate places like you seem to imply.
Yet another nail in the boxrec coffin, no wonder people like myself don't come to the site so often.
We are both online right now reading this so will be both online with same WiFi as i type this.

[damianhucker1]

On my phone in same place.
Nothing rumbled there.
We work together a lot and i consider him a very good friend so im entitled to agree.
I am a trainer and he is the promoter of the boxer i train.
Be sure to check the WiFi address when we are next both online at the same time as then you will find cant be one person in two separate places like you seem to imply.
Yet another nail in the boxrec coffin, no wonder people like myself don't come to the site so often.
We are both online right now reading this so will be both online with same WiFi as i type this.

Maybe in future add a little im with Damian at the bottom as a disclaimer

In all seriousness i had previously said i wasnt commenting on this anymore as i get wound up by doing so, but its not easy to just ignore it if im trying to read other things on here, just that when you get the same narrow minded comments over and over again its not easy to not comment.

As much as i still think Paul Smith is a prick, i can understand why people like him and Bellew no longer post here

[The Law]

On my phone in same place.
Nothing rumbled there.
We work together a lot and i consider him a very good friend so im entitled to agree.
I am a trainer and he is the promoter of the boxer i train.
Be sure to check the WiFi address when we are next both online at the same time as then you will find cant be one person in two separate places like you seem to imply.
Yet another nail in the boxrec coffin, no wonder people like myself don't come to the site so often.
We are both online right now reading this so will be both online with same WiFi as i type this.

No-one said anything was 'rumbled'. It was clear that your opinions are biased so I merely double checked your ip address to confirm this. It is actually against the forum rules for more than one member to regularly post from the same ip address as each other unless they notify the moderators beforehand. Therefore I was actually being polite by not banning you. Now that you have informed me it's fine

[dw01]

Why do the BBBoC / Boxrec fans keep swerving the topic and pickup on other issues only vaguely relating to the subject?


What are the aims of this BBBoC/Boxrec partnership, and why are they so against the MBC?

The more the topic goes on, the more it becomes incredibly clear of a racket to freeze out competition. This is nothing to do with standards or the interests of the sport at all.

[The Law]

Why do the BBBoC / Boxrec fans keep swerving the topic and pickup on other issues only vaguely relating to the subject?


What are the aims of this BBBoC/Boxrec partnership, and why are they so against the MBC?

The more the topic goes on, the more it becomes incredibly clear of a racket to freeze out competition. This is nothing to do with standards or the interests of the sport at all.

There is no 'partnership' between the BBBofC and Boxrec. I've worked for both organisations and I have friends who work for the MBC. The key point, as stated earlier, is the fact that it is Boxrec's prerogative as to which shows they choose to list. If the owner of Boxrec chooses not to list shows from specific organisations (for whatever reason) then that's totally his choice.

[dw01]

Why do the BBBoC / Boxrec fans keep swerving the topic and pickup on other issues only vaguely relating to the subject?


What are the aims of this BBBoC/Boxrec partnership, and why are they so against the MBC?

The more the topic goes on, the more it becomes incredibly clear of a racket to freeze out competition. This is nothing to do with standards or the interests of the sport at all.

There is no 'partnership' between the BBBofC and Boxrec. I've worked for both organisations and I have friends who work for the MBC. The key point, as stated earlier, is the fact that it is Boxrec's prerogative as to which shows they choose to list. If the owner of Boxrec chooses not to list shows from specific organisations (for whatever reason) then that's totally his choice.

I understand that, however, with power comes responsibility! You can interpret that as you like, but;

1. Boxrec claims NOT to be an official records keeper, yet has been quoted as being an official records keeper on several occasions;

2. As a 'go to' site for many people, it is irresponsible to not include fights that are deemed as pro, regardless of who sanctions it;

3. The decision to not recognise several organisations by Boxrec, was stated 'by Boxrec' as pending an EBU meeting (???);

4. It is remarkably coincidental that Boxrec's decisions all seem to support the BBBoC, and their dislike of the MBC.


I'm keen to ask this of Boxrec (who would I ask?): if I organise a show with a number of pro boxers licensed by an African or Central American organisation that Boxrec currently recognises, would Boxrec record them? There's no need to ask why I would do this, let's keep it hypothetical.