BoxRec

dondada wrote:

GlobalBox wrote:Firstly let me say I love Boxrec, schedules, ratings, records, forums, for me they are great and part of my daily life.

With that out the way I would like to say I personally think its the wrong decision not to record the Haye fight on there records, its up currently as a No Contest, with a line underneath about Haye winning in the fifth.

The bout may have not been sanctioned by the local authority i.e. BBBOC but it was sanctioned by a boxing union, it was also given credence by two world organisations who allowed it to be
fought for two (spurious i know) belts. (1)

The fight was an official fight with medical staff, world ranked judges and referees, was fought in front of nigh on 30,000 fans, for the life of me I cannot see what the problem is in displaying the result.

I have always felt this was an independant site and I still like to think it is but there is clearly a judgement being made somewhere to not show the result 2), surely there cannot be any legal worries, every newspaper in the country has something about the fight, every website that remotely covers boxing has a report and comments etc, news channels across the world have had at least a line in there sports round up.

I just think common sense should prevail and the result be listed as any result at a responsible promotion would be.

Good post

1. This is something that everyone should acknowledge needs to be disregarded. These organisations do not give a flying you know what. If an independent, credible records site decided to list results and shows based on whoever a 'governing body' decided to make up belts for, for money, chaos would ensue.

2. This is right but, trust me, it isn't for the reasons some people think (and are making defamatory comments about). I suspect it's mainly about the validity of the commission. I think it was valid; some others don't because the EBU decided to kick them out...even though technically they weren't booted out until yesterday. What regular forum users, I suppose, might not be suspected to understand is that a big can of worms is being opened in record keeping terms.

A few questions.

Do you want future LBF shows (if they have any) recorded, even though they are effectively a rogue commission and not part of the EBU? If so, does that mean one has to record the shows from other independent commissions who have no established ties with anyone else or those who might even have been kicked out from other places? If the answer is yes, what happens when a lad who has a 20-0 on one of these commission's shows is brought over to the UK and fights a concussive puncher? BoxRec will have been responsible for giving a veneer of respectability to something which might not be as robust as you would like.

Let's say Haye and a Klit doesn't happen. A promoter suggests staging Haye v Price under the auspices of the EBF. This would be perfectly legal. Does BoxRec record it? If it does, does it record all past and future EBF shows?

In short, my view is that the to-ing and fro-ing about the results is not necessarily about this bill itself but future implications.

Honestly, it's a bloody minefield.

Bajingo wrote:[Good points, are they going to change all of Sauerland's shows in Germany to NCs as well, as they do the same thing there? Not trying to sound like You Know who but it's complete hypocrisy, Boxrec needs to stay impartial and not be influenced by promoters, sanctioning bodies, whoever.

RonnieTheSharkClark wrote:WHAT A LOT OF RUBBISH!!! BOTH FIGHTERS PUT ON AN EXCELLENT FIGHT AND BROUGHT A LOT OF RESPECT TO THE RING, YEAH THEY MADE A MISTAKE "A BIG ONE AT THAT" BUT DON'T WE ALL!!! I THINK BOXREC SHOULD JUST GET OVER IT, THE FIGHT HAS HAPPENED SO PUT IT UP ON YOUR SITE SO THE PUBLIC KNOW EXACTLY WHATS WENT ON INSTEAD OF JUST IGNORING THE SITUATION!!!

GO ON BOXREC DO THE RIGHT THING!!!!!!!

iamasadlittleboy wrote:

GlobalBox wrote:Firstly let me say I love Boxrec, schedules, ratings, records, forums, for me they are great and part of my daily life.

With that out the way I would like to say I personally think its the wrong decision not to record the Haye fight on there records, its up currently as a No Contest, with a line underneath about Haye winning in the fifth.

The bout may have not been sanctioned by the local authority i.e. BBBOC but it was sanctioned by a boxing union, it was also given credence by two world organisations who allowed it to be
fought for two (spurious i know) belts.

The fight was an official fight with medical staff, world ranked judges and referees, was fought in front of nigh on 30,000 fans, for the life of me I cannot see what the problem is in displaying the result.

I have always felt this was an independant site and I still like to think it is but there is clearly a judgement being made somewhere to not show the result, surely there cannot be any legal worries, every newspaper in the country has something about the fight, every website that remotely covers boxing has a report and comments etc, news channels across the world have had at least a line in there sports round up.

I just think common sense should prevail and the result be listed as any result at a responsible promotion would be.

Out of interest, would you like to see white collar fights listed on boxrec as long as there is judges, referees and medical staff?

dondada wrote:

Bajingo wrote:[Good points, are they going to change all of Sauerland's shows in Germany to NCs as well, as they do the same thing there? Not trying to sound like You Know who but it's complete hypocrisy, Boxrec needs to stay impartial and not be influenced by promoters, sanctioning bodies, whoever.

Why would the Sauerland shows be changed to NCs when they were ran by a non-rogue commission and when the authorities of that country (Germany) weren't protesting at the involvement of said body (the Austrians)? It's not a like-for-like comparison, IMO. But there are other examples to back you up...just not this one

Jeff Thomas wrote:

dondada wrote:

Bajingo wrote:[Good points, are they going to change all of Sauerland's shows in Germany to NCs as well, as they do the same thing there? Not trying to sound like You Know who but it's complete hypocrisy, Boxrec needs to stay impartial and not be influenced by promoters, sanctioning bodies, whoever.

Why would the Sauerland shows be changed to NCs when they were ran by a non-rogue commission and when the authorities of that country (Germany) weren't protesting at the involvement of said body (the Austrians)? It's not a like-for-like comparison, IMO. But there are other examples to back you up...just not this one

Can you explain this more Ian? How dies it work over there and how does this differ?

dondada wrote:Hello mate. Part of the spin put out was that Allegedly channel was simply doing what Sauerland has done before - staging a show in one country under the auspices of a foreign country's board. Sauerland did this in Germany via the Austrian board. There are two key differences though. Firstly, none of the German boards protested against Austria's involvement (to my knowledge)...in any case, they would have difficulty doing so because Germany is very fragmented in governance terms compared to Britain (i.e there are several Boards in Germany). Secondly, the EBU didn't have a vote to kick Austria out. So it wasn't really a like-for-like comparison, IMO.

dondada wrote:

GlobalBox wrote:Firstly let me say I love Boxrec, schedules, ratings, records, forums, for me they are great and part of my daily life.

With that out the way I would like to say I personally think its the wrong decision not to record the Haye fight on there records, its up currently as a No Contest, with a line underneath about Haye winning in the fifth.

The bout may have not been sanctioned by the local authority i.e. BBBOC but it was sanctioned by a boxing union, it was also given credence by two world organisations who allowed it to be
fought for two (spurious i know) belts. (1)

The fight was an official fight with medical staff, world ranked judges and referees, was fought in front of nigh on 30,000 fans, for the life of me I cannot see what the problem is in displaying the result.

I have always felt this was an independant site and I still like to think it is but there is clearly a judgement being made somewhere to not show the result 2), surely there cannot be any legal worries, every newspaper in the country has something about the fight, every website that remotely covers boxing has a report and comments etc, news channels across the world have had at least a line in there sports round up.

I just think common sense should prevail and the result be listed as any result at a responsible promotion would be.

Good post

1. This is something that everyone should acknowledge needs to be disregarded. These organisations do not give a flying you know what. If an independent, credible records site decided to list results and shows based on whoever a 'governing body' decided to make up belts for, for money, chaos would ensue.

2. This is right but, trust me, it isn't for the reasons some people think (and are making defamatory comments about). I suspect it's mainly about the validity of the commission. I think it was valid; some others don't because the EBU decided to kick them out...even though technically they weren't booted out until yesterday. What regular forum users, I suppose, might not be suspected to understand is that a big can of worms is being opened in record keeping terms.

A few questions.

Do you want future LBF shows (if they have any) recorded, even though they are effectively a rogue commission and not part of the EBU? If so, does that mean one has to record the shows from other independent commissions who have no established ties with anyone else or those who might even have been kicked out from other places? If the answer is yes, what happens when a lad who has a 20-0 record built on one of these commission's shows with no video evidence is brought over to the UK and fights a concussive puncher? BoxRec will have been responsible for giving a veneer of respectability to something which might not be as robust as you would like.

Let's say Haye and a Klit doesn't happen. A promoter suggests staging Haye v Price under the auspices of the EBF. This would be perfectly legal. Does BoxRec record it? If it does, does it record all past and future EBF shows?

In short, my view is that the to-ing and fro-ing about the results is not necessarily about this bill itself but future implications.

Honestly, it's a bloody minefield.

keithmoonhangover wrote:This was written by The Law on a different thread.

The reason is because Boxrec only list shows on the Boxrec 'schedule' which are sanctioned by the national governing body (i.e. the country where the fight is taking place).

We do list the 'results' of other shows (including unsanctioned shows), but they do not appear on our schedule. Therefore the result of Haye v Chisora should appear on Boxrec but it will not appear on our schedule.

We have always had this rule in place.

The results should be up.

Jeff Thomas wrote:I don't see anything wrong with the way they've listed that.

veriton wrote:Boxrec is losing all credibility over this. Years of hard work building the site up are being flushed down the toilet over some point of principle that no-one understands.

oliverfennell wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:This was written by The Law on a different thread.

The reason is because Boxrec only list shows on the Boxrec 'schedule' which are sanctioned by the national governing body (i.e. the country where the fight is taking place).

We do list the 'results' of other shows (including unsanctioned shows), but they do not appear on our schedule. Therefore the result of Haye v Chisora should appear on Boxrec but it will not appear on our schedule.

We have always had this rule in place.

The results should be up.

Also, re the bit in red, as I pointed out elsewhere, Klitschko v Thompson 2 was held in Switzerland and sanctioned by the BDB of Germany. According to Law's point above, that should not have been on the schedule either.

exittored wrote:
The BBBofC is a limited company that has no official government ties or authority and is purely a money making excercise like all self appointed boxing authorites are.

oliverfennell wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:This was written by The Law on a different thread.

The reason is because Boxrec only list shows on the Boxrec 'schedule' which are sanctioned by the national governing body (i.e. the country where the fight is taking place).

We do list the 'results' of other shows (including unsanctioned shows), but they do not appear on our schedule. Therefore the result of Haye v Chisora should appear on Boxrec but it will not appear on our schedule.

We have always had this rule in place.

The results should be up.

Also, re the bit in red, as I pointed out elsewhere, Klitschko v Thompson 2 was held in Switzerland and sanctioned by the BDB of Germany. According to Law's point above, that should not have been on the schedule either.

exittored wrote:

veriton wrote:Boxrec is losing all credibility over this. Years of hard work building the site up are being flushed down the toilet over some point of principle that no-one understands.

Great post

Final round wrote: Well explained

Couldn't the fact the the EBU didn't kick them out until after the fight took place could be a good enough reason to list it correctly?

rhino222 wrote:Are Boxrec running scared of the BBB of C??