BoxRec

jujigatame wrote:I'm guessing that, given the right amount of palm-greasing, just about anyone can get "ratification by two-thirds of the Board of Governors".

I'm sure. IMO he'll fight Hughie or Andrej, and neither will be top fifteen.

Saw Sulliman saying he's reluctant to sanction the Fury fight.

Looks like Wilder will have to pick someone from the Top 15

punchoutsb wrote: I assume the rules being referred to are the WBC's on voluntary defenses:

WBC Rules and Regulations wrote: Champions shall defend their titles, either in a voluntary or mandatory defense, against a challenger (each, a “Qualified Challenger”) in one of the following categories:

(a) any of the top ten (10) rated contenders; or

(b) with the approval of or ratification by a majority of the Board of Governors,
i. any boxer rated 11 to 15;
ii. a champion or a highly-rated boxer of another weight division;
iii. another WBC champion, such as a WBC Diamond or Silver Champion, Champion Emeritus, or Champion in Recess;
iv. a former world champion or other elite challenger;
v. a champion of another boxing organization recognized by the WBC; or

(c) under special circumstances and with the approval of or ratification by two-third (2/3rd) of the Board of Governors, a contender not otherwise listed in one or more of the above categories.

you're actually supposed to have 2 defenses within a year, athough many WBC
champions have zero in over 12 months for absolutely no good reason (cotto,
floyd, etc). one is against the top contender mandated by the WBC, and the other
is the guy the champ voluntarily chooses who fits the criteria listed above. after
that, you can defend it against anyone you want as many times as you want.
the WBC obviuosly doesn't enforce any of its own rules anymore and make up
their own rules (rocchigiani bankruptcy).

crusader wrote: First, even if Hughie, a 20 year old novice who has only been a pro for two years.

there is no such thing as a 16-0 novice who has been a pro over 2 years after
winning a world youth amateur title. he is a legit top 50 pro and what they
call an "up and comer". after a few years and a few losses he may become a
gatekeeper or journeyman trying to angle his way back to a top fight and this
may be the biggest opportunity he ever gets in his life, but he is no novice.

GO HUGHIE!!!

sucracristo wrote:... he is no novice.

by the standard of the average WBC title
contender his is a novice.

sucracristo wrote:

punchoutsb wrote: I assume the rules being referred to are the WBC's on voluntary defenses:

WBC Rules and Regulations wrote: Champions shall defend their titles, either in a voluntary or mandatory defense, against a challenger (each, a “Qualified Challenger”) in one of the following categories:

(a) any of the top ten (10) rated contenders; or

(b) with the approval of or ratification by a majority of the Board of Governors,
i. any boxer rated 11 to 15;
ii. a champion or a highly-rated boxer of another weight division;
iii. another WBC champion, such as a WBC Diamond or Silver Champion, Champion Emeritus, or Champion in Recess;
iv. a former world champion or other elite challenger;
v. a champion of another boxing organization recognized by the WBC; or

(c) under special circumstances and with the approval of or ratification by two-third (2/3rd) of the Board of Governors, a contender not otherwise listed in one or more of the above categories.

you're actually supposed to have 2 defenses within a year, athough many WBC
champions have zero in over 12 months for absolutely no good reason (cotto,
floyd, etc). one is against the top contender mandated by the WBC, and the other
is the guy the champ voluntarily chooses who fits the criteria listed above. after
that, you can defend it against anyone you want as many times as you want.
the WBC obviuosly doesn't enforce any of its own rules anymore and make up
their own rules (rocchigiani bankruptcy).

I agree the WBC doesn't enforce it's own rules (none of the ABC org's seem to), but I don't think you're correct regarding voluntary defenses. The rules and regulations spell out voluntaries must be against "Qualified Challengers", which is the quoted section above. So there is no limit to the number of voluntaries, but they must fit within the "Qualified Challenger" criteria. They also don't have a hard and fast rule about number of defenses, saying a champion should "strive" to defend three times per year.

punchoutsb wrote: They also don't have a hard and fast rule about number of defenses.

have you been interested in boxing a long time? historically the requirement to keep a title
has been a defense against the fighter mandated by the title and then a 2nd against
anyone in their rankings, in a year, and no more required fights beyond that. historically
there have been way too many defenses against unranked guys to even mention. it isn't
as common nowadays to see unranked defenses beyond those two because champions don't
fight very often and it's getting rare to see the titles even enforce the two required fights, with
some not fighting at all in over 12 months for no good reason at all. unless you just became
interested in the sport you should have a head full of memories of defenses against unranked
guys, some of which turned out to be competitive fights. there is also nothing stopping any
ranking committee from ranking anyone they feel like. ishe smith wasn't ranked by the IBF
until well after his challenge of bundrage appeared on the schedule, and neither were a few
of tyson's opponents.

sucracristo wrote:

punchoutsb wrote: They also don't have a hard and fast rule about number of defenses.

have you been interested in boxing a long time? historically the requirement to keep a title
has been a defense against the fighter mandated by the title and then a 2nd against
anyone in their rankings, in a year, and no more required fights beyond that. historically
there have been way too many defenses against unranked guys to even mention. it isn't
as common nowadays to see unranked defenses beyond those two because champions don't
fight very often and it's getting rare to see the titles even enforce the two required fights, with
some not fighting at all in over 12 months for no good reason at all. unless you just became
interested in the sport you should have a head full of memories of defenses against unranked
guys, some of which turned out to be competitive fights. there is also nothing stopping any
ranking committee from ranking anyone they feel like. ishe smith wasn't ranked by the IBF
until well after his challenge of bundrage appeared on the schedule, and neither were a few
of tyson's opponents.

Yes, I have been a fan and follower of the sport for about 22 years now and I am well versed in it's history thanks to my dad who is a boxing historian in his own right.

I'm just quoting you the WBC official rules and regulations. Take them for what they are, it is what it is.

sucracristo wrote:

punchoutsb wrote: I assume the rules being referred to are the WBC's on voluntary defenses:

WBC Rules and Regulations wrote: Champions shall defend their titles, either in a voluntary or mandatory defense, against a challenger (each, a “Qualified Challenger”) in one of the following categories:

(a) any of the top ten (10) rated contenders; or

(b) with the approval of or ratification by a majority of the Board of Governors,
i. any boxer rated 11 to 15;
ii. a champion or a highly-rated boxer of another weight division;
iii. another WBC champion, such as a WBC Diamond or Silver Champion, Champion Emeritus, or Champion in Recess;
iv. a former world champion or other elite challenger;
v. a champion of another boxing organization recognized by the WBC; or

(c) under special circumstances and with the approval of or ratification by two-third (2/3rd) of the Board of Governors, a contender not otherwise listed in one or more of the above categories.

you're actually supposed to have 2 defenses within a year, athough many WBC
champions have zero in over 12 months for absolutely no good reason (cotto,
floyd, etc). one is against the top contender mandated by the WBC, and the other
is the guy the champ voluntarily chooses who fits the criteria listed above. after
that, you can defend it against anyone you want as many times as you want.
the WBC obviuosly doesn't enforce any of its own rules anymore and make up
their own rules (rocchigiani bankruptcy).

crusader wrote: First, even if Hughie, a 20 year old novice who has only been a pro for two years.

there is no such thing as a 16-0 novice who has been a pro over 2 years after
winning a world youth amateur title. he is a legit top 50 pro and what they
call an "up and comer". after a few years and a few losses he may become a
gatekeeper or journeyman trying to angle his way back to a top fight and this
may be the biggest opportunity he ever gets in his life, but he is no novice.

Novice = "a person new to or inexperienced in a field or situation"

Hughie is very much a professional boxing novice, especially compared to those who typically challenge for major world titles. After 2 years most fighters, even those who show tremendous promise, are still considered prospects, aren't fighting top 5 opposition, and aren't challenging for world titles. Hughie's 16 fights--a low number for a HW title challenger--have also been against quite a low level of opposition overall, with half of his opponents having losing records, 8-7 former CW Shane McPhilbin having failed to score a win in his 6 previous and 2 subsequent fights, 16-11 Matthew Greer having been stopped in 5 of his 7 previous fights, 1-0 Alex Rozman now being 2-7, and none of his opposition being better than 4th tier Andriy Rudenko. Moreover, at just 20 he's a HW baby and at this point has shown little punching power or physical strength, which I'm sure Wilder's team has picked up on.

crusader wrote:Novice = "a person new to or inexperienced in a field or situation"

Hughie is very much a professional boxing novice, especially compared to those who typically challenge for major world titles. After 2 years most fighters, even those who show tremendous promise, are still considered prospects, aren't fighting top 5 opposition, and aren't challenging for world titles. Hughie's 16 fights--a low number for a HW title challenger--have also been against quite a low level of opposition overall, with half of his opponents having losing records, 8-7 former CW Shane McPhilbin having failed to score a win in his 6 previous and 2 subsequent fights, 16-11 Matthew Greer having been stopped in 5 of his 7 previous fights, 1-0 Alex Rozman now being 2-7, and none of his opposition being better than 4th tier Andriy Rudenko. Moreover, at just 20 he's a HW baby and at this point has shown little punching power or physical strength, which I'm sure Wilder's team has picked up on.

Hughie isn't ready for the title fight and won't be in the next 3-4 years, but even Hughie from 2 years ago would be a beter choise than any version of Wawrzyk.

Wawrzyk seems so glass jawed that I agree. I can see him falling over as soon as he's hit.

The fight is off, as I mentioned, how could that happened?? Is that a jok!!

crusader wrote: Hughie is very much a professional boxing novice

you have absoulutely no idea what you are talking about

sucracristo wrote:

crusader wrote: Hughie is very much a professional boxing novice

you have absoulutely no idea what you are talking about

Nice response to my post. I'll mention my points again along with a few others if you actually want to reply to them with an explanation as to why I'm wrong:

-He never fought as a senior in the amateurs to my knowledge, unlike the large majority of HW contenders and champs. Keep in mind that I also specified professional boxing in my previous post, so I mention amateur boxing because you brought it up.

-He's been a pro for only about two years, and there are only two fighters in BoxRec's top 75 who turned pro after him, one being Joshua--who although the hottest prospect in the division isn't looking like he'll be fighting for a world title for a while--and Tom Schwarz, who doesn't appear remotely close to a title fight, which is to be expected given his limited pro experience.

-He's only had 16 fights, meaning that even though there are 43 fighters ahead of him in the BoxRec rankings only 4 have fewer bouts than him. One of those is Joshua, who has matches lined up with people well off championship level in Cornish and Whyte; then we have Parker and Breazeale with 15 fights to Hughie's 16 and neither of them seeming to be in the title picture as they gain experience at a lower level; and finally there is Teper, who also has 15 fights, just won an EBU title, and will likely defend it in his next bout rather than fighting for a world title. He's the most experienced of the group, and a big difference between him and Hughie is that he's fought fringe-contenders like Price and Duhaupas in addition to some other decent journeymen on the Euro-circuit, so he's much better prepared for a title fight than Hughie.

-That leads to me to more detailed talk of opposition levels. I'd expect that most major world title challengers will have fought opposition involving at least a contender, a fringe-contender, another prospect, or a past his prime guy who used to be a top fighter at the weight. Looking at Hughie's record shows that he hasn't even fought one of these types of opponent, and in fact half of his wins are over fighters without winning records.

In addition, it's clear that several of the fighters he faced with winning records were quite poor and on bad form: 8-7 former CW Shane McPhilbin failed to score a win in his 6 previous and 2 subsequent fights, 16-11 Matthew Greer was stopped in 5 of his 7 previous fights, 1-0 Alex Rozman is now 2-7, and 6-1 Dorian Darch is now 9-4 with an early stoppage loss against light hitting Eddie Chambers, not to mention that he was already stopped early by Ian Lewison prior to facing Hughie. Then we have people like Danny Hughes, who is an area-level domestic fighter without notable success and 10-4 David Gegeshidze, who is now 16-9, loses to every decent fighter he faces while typically getting stopped, and has only one victory against someone with a winning record.

The best names on Hughie's records may well be 4th tier Andriy Rudenko and George Arias, who is little more than a punching bag for prospects and contenders. This type of opposition over the span of just 16 fights in a two year pro career makes Hughie quite inexperienced relative to the typical HW title challenger, and it's no wonder that most people with comparable experience aren't being matched with top 5 opponents for world titles yet.

-He’s also the youngest person in BoxRec’s top 65, clearly lacks pop, and doesn’t seem to have much physical strength at this stage, which could be partially a product of physical immaturity when compared to older men.

Now obviously Hughie isn't a novice compared to the average person who steps in a gym, but context is important, and in the context of him being a professional boxer who could fight Wilder in his next bout, he is very much a novice....that term can be defined as "a person new to or inexperienced in a field or situation", and Hughie would clearly be new to that level of boxing and inexperienced in that situation. He's a decent prospect who could probably use AT LEAST another 3-4 years before he accepts a fight like this.

kych wrote:The fight is off, as I mentioned, how could that happened?? Is that a jok!!

no. that's the power of thread.
http://boxrec.com/boxer/468841

man wrote:

kych wrote:The fight is off, as I mentioned, how could that happened?? Is that a jok!!

no. that's the power of thread.
http://boxrec.com/boxer/468841

People power! lol
It might have something to do with the fact Sulaiman said he wasn't comfortable sanctioning Fury for the fight.
He was more positive about Wawrzyk...
Who knows. It seems pretty unprofessional to give any opponent such short notice, but other Haymon fighters like Arreola (Kassi) and Mayweather do...

lowlefthand wrote:

man wrote:

kych wrote:The fight is off, as I mentioned, how could that happened?? Is that a jok!!

no. that's the power of thread.
http://boxrec.com/boxer/468841

People power! lol
It might have something to do with the fact Sulaiman said he wasn't comfortable sanctioning Fury for the fight.
He was more positive about Wawrzyk...
Who knows. It seems pretty unprofessional to give any opponent such short notice, but other Haymon fighters like Arreola (Kassi) and Mayweather do...

especially since they have really enough
time to think about it.

47 days until fight time and still no opponent.
Come on and name someone already.This is getting crazy.

tiny_acres wrote:47 days until fight time and still no opponent.
Come on and name someone already.This is getting crazy.

The World Heavyweight Title used be prestigeous - it is shocking really that a man (very hard puncher that he is) can be a champ but not be up to the challenge of top contenders. They shouldn't have to look for an advantage in a challenger, he should be confident of taking anyone on.

palooka wrote:

tiny_acres wrote:47 days until fight time and still no opponent.
Come on and name someone already.This is getting crazy.

The World Heavyweight Title used be prestigeous - it is shocking really that a man (very hard puncher that he is) can be a champ but not be up to the challenge of top contenders. They shouldn't have to look for an advantage in a challenger, he should be confident of taking anyone on.

All champions look for the easiest touch with the most pay.If the money is not right in their mind
they will hold off the fight until forced to fight.
Wilder is no exception.I expect a very weak challenger in Alabama.The fight is supposed to be live
primetime on NBC.Wilder will be paid no matter who he fights.So expect the worst.

tiny_acres wrote:

palooka wrote:

tiny_acres wrote:47 days until fight time and still no opponent.
Come on and name someone already.This is getting crazy.

The World Heavyweight Title used be prestigeous - it is shocking really that a man (very hard puncher that he is) can be a champ but not be up to the challenge of top contenders. They shouldn't have to look for an advantage in a challenger, he should be confident of taking anyone on.

All champions look for the easiest touch with the most pay.If the money is not right in their mind
they will hold off the fight until forced to fight.
Wilder is no exception.I expect a very weak challenger in Alabama.The fight is supposed to be live
primetime on NBC.Wilder will be paid no matter who he fights.So expect the worst.

Sadly you speak the truth, though for my money wilder has had his gimme in Molina. I always imagined it went - tough mandated challenger and then a weaker foe hand picked, tough mandated challenger and then another voluntary weaker hand picked foe. If it's all weaker hand picked foe then people get tired quick.

Palooka I actually think that Wilder knows he will lose to Povetkin.
So I do not blame him for trying to get in these easy picks for some quick cash.
Wilder will be forced very soon to face Povetkin and then the money train will stop.
I would take the money while I had a chance.

Povetkin can box to a really high standard and is accurate and hard hitting, I don't think he'd be surprised by Wilders big swings and hurls - I think he'll take him apart though I also think Wilder will have a lot of heart.

palooka wrote:Povetkin can box to a really high standard and is accurate and hard hitting, I don't think he'd be surprised by Wilders big swings and hurls - I think he'll take him apart though I also think Wilder will have a lot of heart.

Wilder will give it his all.But Povetkin will beat him with a late knockout.
Might even be a good enough fight for a rematch.

it could easily be that wilder is well built up
fluke and that his first world class opponent
will be his last. he seems not at all confident
in his game, and that as such can be a real
career killer.