BoxRec

Kevin wrote:Thaxton is a lightweight who has not been included in the current batch of eliminators, that's why he went for the WBF do you really expect him to sit around waiting for a couple of years in the hope he gets a British shot?

Well he wouldn't have to, would he? If all the fighters at light-welter were put on the same path...

Kevin wrote:Witter could have vacated months/years ago but wanted to keep the belt why should he be penalised because he is a 'world' class fighter.

How is not getting a Lonsdale for keeps when you don't make anywhere near the required defences, being 'penalised'?

Manos de Oro wrote:

Kevin wrote:Thaxton is a lightweight who has not been included in the current batch of eliminators, that's why he went for the WBF do you really expect him to sit around waiting for a couple of years in the hope he gets a British shot?

Well he wouldn't have to, would he? If all the fighters at light-welter were put on the same path...

Kevin wrote:Witter could have vacated months/years ago but wanted to keep the belt why should he be penalised because he is a 'world' class fighter.

How is not getting a Lonsdale for keeps when you don't make anywhere near the required defences, being 'penalised'?

Thaxton is a lightweight not a light-welter, he's rated number 3 by Boxing Monthly but won't get a shot at the British title because of politics


I was saying if he wasn't given the belt and just had to vacate it

Kevin wrote:

Manos de Oro wrote:

Kevin wrote:Thaxton is a lightweight who has not been included in the current batch of eliminators, that's why he went for the WBF do you really expect him to sit around waiting for a couple of years in the hope he gets a British shot?

Well he wouldn't have to, would he? If all the fighters at light-welter were put on the same path...

Kevin wrote:Witter could have vacated months/years ago but wanted to keep the belt why should he be penalised because he is a 'world' class fighter.

How is not getting a Lonsdale for keeps when you don't make anywhere near the required defences, being 'penalised'?

Thaxton is a lightweight not a light-welter, he's rated number 3 by Boxing Monthly but won't get a shot at the British title because of politics

I know, I just think he would be able to handle himself at light-welter.
It's all about politics these days, which is why I think the board should get their act together - aren't they supposed to be an impartial, non-political, non-profit body, etc. The British title, history aside, is being treated like merely another alphabet title nowadays, and they seem to be content to let it... considering their supposed ethos I just don't understand their attitude...

He probably could, but he's operating in the lightweight section now and wishes he had all of his career.

Do you think Charlie Magri should have been given a Lonsdale belt to keep?

Kevin wrote:Do you think Charlie Magri should have been given a Lonsdale belt to keep?

Haven't a clue mate - I wasn't even nearly born when Magri first challenged for it.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote:

nickd wrote:Witter would KO Bosworth in 1 now. Pointless.

I think Witter will vacate once he gets this lonsdale belt, I dont blame him he has bigger fish to fry.

Yes, but why did the board put Bosworth forward as a canditate. They shouldn't have done that. I know most people expected Stephen Smith to win that eliminator - but why nominate Bosworth if that is their response with the win.

Why couldn't they have sanctioned Oscar Hall when he fought Witter as a title defence. I appreciate Hall was a last minute replacement but had a decent record.

I can understand the criticisms but its not as if unworthy opponents with a huge gulf in class difference have never contested for a British belt (cough Damon Hague cough).

There have been opportunities for Witter to make these defences, he should have been stripped as opposed to be award £30,000 + for no reason.

Bosworth won the eliminator, should have had the fight - if the fight never happend then Witter would should have been stripped. Thats what happend with other fighters (look at Tony Dodson).

I'm sorry Stu but I massively disagree with you. It would never happen but I bet Junior would fight Bosworth and two other top British contenders on the same night and spark them all out. Line em up. He's already battered Bosworth.

Why on earth should he be stripped? Dodson wasn't in a position to defend his title because of long-term injury.

Your point about Michael Hall IS the point. He's been in the top few for ages and is as good as most. He's dropped very narrow decisions to the likes of Barrett and Mutley and off the top of my head I think he beat Bosworth.

I was there for the fight. I know and like Michael but he was totally demolished, despite giving it a good go. The same would happen to the rest of them.

Dunno about Thaxton though...that might be interesting. But no way on this planet should the lad be stripped. He's not avoiding anybody.

You are basically asking for Froch-Hague type mismatches. Go and eat some raw meat, you bloody thirsty Celt!!! 8)

My point was is why did the BBBoC sanction the Froch vs Hague for the vacant title and then deam that no challenger is worthy to fight Witter.

Now, I'm not saying Froch is all that but there is only one Super Middle who I think would be interested in fighting for this belt (foget Magee, Reid and Joe) who I think would provide a good test to Froch and that is Dodson. Whoever wins that fight, neither would have achieved the number of defences so really the BBBoC should do the same for them?

The BBBoC were perfectly happy to sanction Andy Halder vs Scott Dann - that had mismatch written all over it.

The BBBoC were perfectly happy to sanction Bosworth vs Smith in an eliminator - Bosworth won, he should have had his crack. If they just wanted Witter vs Smith to happen, then they should have just made Smith the mandatory.

I'm not saying Witter would have won, but this decision (and I still await futher evidence that it is happening) is unpresidented and shows glearing inconsisties as there have been many British title mismatches in recent years without them ever just giving the belt to the champion.

For me its wrong because it is inconsistent as we have had glearing British title mismatches.

I take your point. It isn't unprecedented though. As Kev mentions earlier, it's how Charlie Magri got his belt.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:I take your point. It isn't unprecedented though. As Kev mentions earlier, it's how Charlie Magri got his belt.

Whilst you might argue otherwise I think Magri's case though was more of an extreme than Witter's. I do not know how many flyweights were around in the early 80's but I do know the current situation - it is a job to do a top 6 of eligable British flyweights currently, I wouldn't have thought the situation was much different in Magri's era.

Was there any flyweight elimination fights when Magri was champ? If there was an Magri never defended against them, then it was wrong back then.

Does anyone know if Jason Booth has a Lonsdale belt for keeps, because looking on here he hasn't done the required number of defences. The title hasn't been defended since Ian Napa.

If you look at the history of the Flyweight devision the British belt was "out of service" for 5 years after Magri won the belt. I doubt this will be the case for the British Light Welterweight belt - that is why it IS unpresidented.

6 months down the line there will be purse bids for a vacant title.

I just think its wrong to be given the belt without earning it the same way as everybody else.

Sure he would start heavy favourite over the top contenders but upsets do happen, and I`m sure British title fights could be made at the weight, this just cheapens the title,

tonyevs wrote:I just think its wrong to be given the belt without earning it the same way as everybody else.

Sure he would start heavy favourite over the top contenders but upsets do happen, and I`m sure British title fights could be made at the weight, this just cheapens the title,

Yep, agreed.

tonyevs wrote:I just think its wrong to be given the belt without earning it the same way as everybody else.

Sure he would start heavy favourite over the top contenders but upsets do happen, and I`m sure British title fights could be made at the weight, this just cheapens the title,

The sickening thing about this development is that legitimate contenders for him do exist, it's just they are safely protected by their fake 'world' titles. This is a shocking display of contempt for tradition from the board. The likes of Howard Winstone must be rolling in their graves. What pathetic leadership and vision.

Surely deep down in his heart Witters knows this is not the way he wanted to get the Lonsdale belt?