BoxRec

daviddee wrote:

questionmore wrote:David from Dundee who's brothers a pro boxer... that's very upfront of you. But it says nothing as to who you are and if your a part of MBC. so whats your opinion of the article :??

It's a new organisation in the sense of competition I like the idea of anyone giving each other competition because surely that would be a good thing. I am not part of the MBC and In an ideal world if the BBBOFC were doing things right fully then no one would come along. Boxing is very corrupt.

What would you change with the bbbofc mate ?

spudder56 wrote:

daviddee wrote:

questionmore wrote:David from Dundee who's brothers a pro boxer... that's very upfront of you. But it says nothing as to who you are and if your a part of MBC. so whats your opinion of the article :??

It's a new organisation in the sense of competition I like the idea of anyone giving each other competition because surely that would be a good thing. I am not part of the MBC and In an ideal world if the BBBOFC were doing things right fully then no one would come along. Boxing is very corrupt.

What would you change with the bbbofc mate ?

Should be a vote every year by the members to elect the people in power. The boxers should have more say after all they pay to be represented not the other way about.. Full review of decisions by referee's and judges. I believe an independent panel for any complaint again elected by members. Full disclosure of salary and expenses. A team/department who book the officials for shows. The biggest thing is to stop Mis match fights. There is a boxrec points system for rankings it's not great but pepper matchmaking would improve the sport greatly

Most of them recommend ations are great points to be fair. Elected members to have more of a say.vote into power who you would like to run it , like we do in parliament

spudder56 wrote:

Junker wrote:Has anyone ever been paid out from the BBBoC insurance?
Its a genuine question. I know recent cases like Jerome Wilson, Jonjo Finnegan and Kieran Farrell didn't get anything despite suffering permanent brain injuries.

Of course some have been paid out mate or else the board wouldn't have insurance what would be the point

Perhaps to satisfy some sort of legal requirement brought about by being sued by Michael Watson?

I'm genuinely curious. The 3 fighters mentioned above were refused insurance payouts despite suffering permanent brain injuries. The bar for payout eligibility must be set pretty high for cases like that to get turned down.
If anyone knows of any specific cases where BBBoC insurance was successfully claimed I'd be interested.

daviddee wrote:

spudder56 wrote:

daviddee wrote:
It's a new organisation in the sense of competition I like the idea of anyone giving each other competition because surely that would be a good thing. I am not part of the MBC and In an ideal world if the BBBOFC were doing things right fully then no one would come along. Boxing is very corrupt.

What would you change with the bbbofc mate ?

Should be a vote every year by the members to elect the people in power. The boxers should have more say after all they pay to be represented not the other way about.. Full review of decisions by referee's and judges. I believe an independent panel for any complaint again elected by members. Full disclosure of salary and expenses. A team/department who book the officials for shows. The biggest thing is to stop Mis match fights. There is a boxrec points system for rankings it's not great but pepper matchmaking would improve the sport greatly

Fantastic suggestions. Maybe the mbc if they are to be better than the board could do this? Unlikely to get a look in by the board, but it should definitely be considered if anyone on any council reads this.

In regards to higher profile I was speaking boxers. They could have asked tasif Khan, lee churcher, Craig mcewan or Nathan decastro rather than the ones mentioned. Nothing against the guys mentioned it just seems it's not a fair

This is a free country , unless your Tyson Fury, who apparently is not allowed to have an opinion!
So if people want to become involved in MBC shows - go ahead!

But just remember you're then finished with the BBBof C. Nobodies caring to be honest.
By the way , the Board pay out regularly to injured boxers and so does their benevolent fund.
Nobody will learn who gets paid out, because, quite rightly, it's confidential.

The Board, without question is the best boxing governing body in the world. It makes mistakes occasionally, and some procedures and processes need to be reviewed, but they do a grand job.

The people who complain about them are usually those who have had a decision go against them, and they take it personally. 86 years and still going strong.

By the way I' m not and never have been a member of the Board.

This is a free country , unless your Tyson Fury, who apparently is not allowed to have an opinion!
So if people want to become involved in MBC shows - go ahead!

But just remember you're then finished with the BBBof C. Nobodies caring to be honest.
By the way , the Board pay out regularly to injured boxers and so does their benevolent fund.
Nobody will learn who gets paid out, because, quite rightly, it's confidential.

The Board, without question is the best boxing governing body in the world. It makes mistakes occasionally, and some procedures and processes need to be reviewed, but they do a grand job.

The people who complain about them are usually those who have had a decision go against them, and they take it personally. 86 years and still going strong.

By the way I' m not and never have been a member of the Board.

The benevolent fund and the insurance are 2 different things.
The benevolent fund makes small payments of a grand or two & ive heard of several cases of this bring paid. Its nice but of no long term benefit.
The insurance is supposed to replace lost earnings but when I was looking into Jerome's case the policy seemed to have been deliberately worded to make it virtually impossible to claim. That's why I'm interested to know of anyone who has successfully claimed from it.

Very valid points raised.

Still waiting for someone from the MBC to tell us what they have in place.

I looked into private insurance for boxers, its doable.

Im confused a bit can you have duel licenses ? Tony Dodson I'm sure has boxed with both licenses ? Someone above mentioned your finished withj bbbc if you have out to do with MBC ? Confused

My understanding is that the bbbofc view anyone boxing on an MBC show as boxing in unlicensed or another martial art, which you can't do as part of your license rules, so you get called up by the area council. I suppose there is nothing to stop you paying for and holding both licenses.

Chisora and all them boxed on a Luxembourg show and had sanctions. I've heard the sanctions can range from words of advice to a suspension, depending on the circs.

I think that is the basis of the legal battle the MBC are saying they have with the bbbofc...restriction of trade etc. That's all gone quiet though.

CharlesListon wrote:My understanding is that the bbbofc view anyone boxing on an MBC show as boxing in unlicensed or another martial art, which you can't do as part of your license rules, so you get called up by the area council. I suppose there is nothing to stop you paying for and holding both licenses.

Chisora and all them boxed on a Luxembourg show and had sanctions. I've heard the sanctions can range from words of advice to a suspension, depending on the circs.

I think that is the basis of the legal battle the MBC are saying they have with the bbbofc...restriction of trade etc. That's all gone quiet though.

Bruce Baker tried to take a similar case to court and lost.

My personal opinion is mbc is a accident waiting to happen , it won't be long before something bad happens
I personally know of two boxers with damaged skulls / brains boxing under their banner
To be respected more medical screening is a priority to start with

Junker wrote:The benevolent fund and the insurance are 2 different things.
The benevolent fund makes small payments of a grand or two & ive heard of several cases of this bring paid. Its nice but of no long term benefit.
The insurance is supposed to replace lost earnings but when I was looking into Jerome's case the policy seemed to have been deliberately worded to make it virtually impossible to claim. That's why I'm interested to know of anyone who has successfully claimed from it.

I know they had two payouts in the same year a few years ago. One was Valery Odin, I think the other was Neil Jarmolinski.

CharlesListon wrote:My understanding is that the bbbofc view anyone boxing on an MBC show as boxing in unlicensed or another martial art, which you can't do as part of your license rules, so you get called up by the area council. I suppose there is nothing to stop you paying for and holding both licenses.

Chisora and all them boxed on a Luxembourg show and had sanctions. I've heard the sanctions can range from words of advice to a suspension, depending on the circs.

I think that is the basis of the legal battle the MBC are saying they have with the bbbofc...restriction of trade etc. That's all gone quiet though.

Their is no ongoing 'live' trial. But people are being fooled into being quiet by fear of contempt of court.
If this is untrue lets have some facts on courts & schedules etc so it can be verified... all their is are unsubstantiated intentions.

I don't believe that these injured boxers are given a pay out, I would imagine similar to Michael Watson after people rallying around kinda of money, insurance brokers will have small print everywhere as its not really a secure thing to insure is boxing. I'm against MBC but the potential rivalry between boards could force them into altering the fundemental flaws within the BBBofC, bullying tactics and it's my ball mentality is kind of things boxers deal with... Iv heard it first hand, they have lost sight on there goal and there own ethos, to maintain the safety of there boxers. For me hindering there potential earning, licensing procedures, matchmaking,( putting in a highly skilled amateur like AJ against an aging Matt Skelton is not safety) common sense should prevail, start putting boxers first and the rest will fall into place.

Cazelo wrote:

daviddee wrote:
Should be a vote every year by the members to elect the people in power. The boxers should have more say after all they pay to be represented not the other way about.. Full review of decisions by referee's and judges. I believe an independent panel for any complaint again elected by members. Full disclosure of salary and expenses. A team/department who book the officials for shows. The biggest thing is to stop Mis match fights. There is a boxrec points system for rankings it's not great but pepper matchmaking would improve the sport greatly

Fantastic suggestions. Maybe the mbc if they are to be better than the board could do this? Unlikely to get a look in by the board, but it should definitely be considered if anyone on any council reads this.

In regards to higher profile I was speaking boxers. They could have asked tasif Khan, lee churcher, Craig mcewan or Nathan decastro rather than the ones mentioned. Nothing against the guys mentioned it just seems it's not a fair

Good points daviddee. Although I cant see much chance of such being implemented by either bodys.

Ok Cazelo :idea: maybe your in a position to ask some questions to these high profile boxers and tell us your findings. Lets take the 2 most longstanding Tasif Khan & Nathan Decastro. Ask them how many guaranteed fights they have had training camps & sold tickets for this year (with Khan these are world title fights) that have been cancelled. And then ask for their opinion :??

daviddee wrote: Should be a vote every year by the members to elect the people in power. The boxers should have more say after all they pay to be represented not the other way about.. Full review of decisions by referee's and judges. I believe an independent panel for any complaint again elected by members. Full disclosure of salary and expenses. A team/department who book the officials for shows. The biggest thing is to stop Mis match fights. There is a boxrec points system for rankings it's not great but pepper matchmaking would improve the sport greatly

Great idea to vote people in but you know what people arnt actualy interested in giving up there time.I went up for licence holders rep in the midlands and was voted in because there were three of us and that was just giving up one sunday a moonth listening to and being there for licence holders at the meetings.I did it for two years was meant o be only one because no one else put themselves forward the other person doing it had done it for 2 and a half because of the same thing.So actualy finding a whole area board to vote in from licence holders as well finding people with the skills to do it would be next to impossible imo. Until i sat in on these meetings for 20 months you dont realise the amount of unpaid hours the area councils put in.

I do think a vote for the big positions on the main board would be a good idea but also think the candidates should really come from the area boards as people out side the set up are all for getting involved until they find how much of there free time is taken up by a none paying role.

Another point is that every you every body is invited along to the area AGM to listen to whats gone etc to ask questions and put forward proposals.

Iv been to three and there has never been more than four licence holders from the whole of the midlands going along.This year i wasnt there but i got told one licence holder turned up. If people want to really have a say in whats affecting them surely turning up once a year to the AGM might be a start.On average less than 1 per cent turn up so far.

jonp wrote:Another point is that every you every body is invited along to the area AGM to listen to whats gone etc to ask questions and put forward proposals.

Iv been to three and there has never been more than four licence holders from the whole of the midlands going along.This year i wasnt there but i got told one licence holder turned up. If people want to really have a say in whats affecting them surely turning up once a year to the AGM might be a start.On average less than 1 per cent turn up so far.

Well said Jon I have been on the area council for well over 10 years and we hear everybody saying licence holders want change etc but every year hardly anybody turns up to propose changes etc so we can only assume everybody is happy coz if they weren't they would be at the AGM to voice their concerns we at the Midlands are always open to suggestions from licence holders and always follow them through thoroughly I am sure Jon can vouch that this is the case

spudder56 wrote:

jonp wrote:Another point is that every you every body is invited along to the area AGM to listen to whats gone etc to ask questions and put forward proposals.

Iv been to three and there has never been more than four licence holders from the whole of the midlands going along.This year i wasnt there but i got told one licence holder turned up. If people want to really have a say in whats affecting them surely turning up once a year to the AGM might be a start.On average less than 1 per cent turn up so far.

Well said Jon I have been on the area council for well over 10 years and we hear everybody saying licence holders want change etc but every year hardly anybody turns up to propose changes etc so we can only assume everybody is happy coz if they weren't they would be at the AGM to voice their concerns we at the Midlands are always open to suggestions from licence holders and always follow them through thoroughly I am sure Jon can vouch that this is the case

Same thing whenever a "boxers union" is mentioned - it has been tried before but 99% just weren't arsed enough.

bripez wrote:

spudder56 wrote:

jonp wrote:Another point is that every you every body is invited along to the area AGM to listen to whats gone etc to ask questions and put forward proposals.

Iv been to three and there has never been more than four licence holders from the whole of the midlands going along.This year i wasnt there but i got told one licence holder turned up. If people want to really have a say in whats affecting them surely turning up once a year to the AGM might be a start.On average less than 1 per cent turn up so far.

Well said Jon I have been on the area council for well over 10 years and we hear everybody saying licence holders want change etc but every year hardly anybody turns up to propose changes etc so we can only assume everybody is happy coz if they weren't they would be at the AGM to voice their concerns we at the Midlands are always open to suggestions from licence holders and always follow them through thoroughly I am sure Jon can vouch that this is the case

Same thing whenever a "boxers union" is mentioned - it has been tried before but 99% just weren't arsed enough.

Exactly correct mate

bripez wrote:

spudder56 wrote:

jonp wrote:Another point is that every you every body is invited along to the area AGM to listen to whats gone etc to ask questions and put forward proposals.

Iv been to three and there has never been more than four licence holders from the whole of the midlands going along.This year i wasnt there but i got told one licence holder turned up. If people want to really have a say in whats affecting them surely turning up once a year to the AGM might be a start.On average less than 1 per cent turn up so far.

Well said Jon I have been on the area council for well over 10 years and we hear everybody saying licence holders want change etc but every year hardly anybody turns up to propose changes etc so we can only assume everybody is happy coz if they weren't they would be at the AGM to voice their concerns we at the Midlands are always open to suggestions from licence holders and always follow them through thoroughly I am sure Jon can vouch that this is the case

Same thing whenever a "boxers union" is mentioned - it has been tried before but 99% just weren't arsed enough.

People like to moan on the net and that but iv been there, i was in manchester at the AGM when 39 licence holders stood up to vota against a lot of differnt things and it caused the meeting to be ajourned.If all the people who went on about change were there and doing something rather than talking our points would have got thru.The same with the area councils i want to hear what goes on and i want to havea bit of insight so i put myself forward to be a licence holders rep there were only two other licence holders who could be bothered to do it out of the whole of the midlands.

What it did for me was actualy make me appreciate a little bit more exactly what the area councils put in.Its ok shouting for votes and change etc but who would do it then because all this people shouting for the change are actualy conspicuous in there absence when it comes down to giving up yr sundays etc,they want change as long as somebody else is doing the groundwork lol.

Theres still things id vote against with the board and things im still complaining about but until there is a proper change and a system that could work in its place ill also get my hands dirty working in the mix and trying to make things better rather than just complaining about what doesnt work and how it COULD be better.

couldn't agree with you more Jon. I think it's the same in all sports. People think they are to irrelevant to make the change so don't go along and others are just lazy would rather moan and do nothing about it. The changes I would like are as a fan. I've been a huge fan of boxing since I was a kid. I have the down side of being involved through my brother which has sickened me in a lot of ways. Hopefully small changes happen

jonp wrote:Another point is that every you every body is invited along to the area AGM to listen to whats gone etc to ask questions and put forward proposals.

Iv been to three and there has never been more than four licence holders from the whole of the midlands going along.This year i wasnt there but i got told one licence holder turned up. If people want to really have a say in whats affecting them surely turning up once a year to the AGM might be a start.On average less than 1 per cent turn up so far.

Hi Jon; I was wondering if you could answer a question please; JamieM has quoted that boxing is corrupt and you pay extra to referees and judges to ensure your fighters win the decision. Can you confirm or deny this please; I have tried telling him he is full of poo but he is adamant (he also likened boxing to WWE in as much as the decision is decided even before the boxers enter the ring!!!!)


Cheers