Analysing the WBC's ridiculous rules (for the hell of it)
Posted: 30 Mar 2011, 17:50
Scandals and lawsuits involving the main sanctioning bodies have included an FBI indictment leading to a president of one being jailed, while a successful multi million dollar lawsuit brought another to its financial and oh so humble knees.
Rather than putting them out of business, these events seemed to make the organisations start following their own rules. What follows demonstrates how ridiculous even the published rules of the WBC are.
The italics are mine, the bold is direct from the WBC rule book.
there is no scope for buttering up the WBC officials here. No sir, none at all…:
Promoters‟ Obligations. The promoter(s) shall pay the expenses of the WBC Supervisor(s) to championship contests, not to exceed two (2) persons, including transportation, meals, hotels and other incidental expenses. Any attendance by the WBC President at any championship contest will be in an official capacity, and all of his expenses will be paid by the promoter(s).
Another section you just couldn’t make up:
The WBC reserves the right not to certify or to withdraw certification from any bout as being for a WBC recognized championship if, in the opinion of the Board of Governors, the bout jeopardizes the prestige and good standing of the WBC, or fair and uniform treatment of its own champions, or may cause confusion in the boxing community or the public.
Cause confusion? The WBC? No way!
and that, in the case of a non-mandatory:
the challenger is required to grant one (1) option for his first title defense, in the event that he is successful in his challenge
]Who on earth are the WBC to demand this? []]
Next, because so damn important that the non-scoring president has a good view:
The President of the WBC must be seated by the apron.
Then a half hearted and unconvincing stab at ‘fairness’:
The WBC Supervisor(s), particularly in mandatory bouts, should not be citizen(s) of the country where the contest is held, nor from the same country as either boxer, unless both boxers are from the same country where the contest is held.
Why ‘particularly in mandatory bouts’? Is it less important to administer with integrity if defending against, say, the third best fighter in the world?
Champions will defend their titles either in a voluntary or mandatory defense (against) a former or retired world champion upon majority vote of the Board of Governors
How former? How retired? From the ‘safety’ conscious WBC, isn’t this dangerous at best?
The No. 1 rated boxer in the WBC rankings is not necessarily the official mandatory challenger;
Come again?
Under extreme special circumstances, such as an unification bout or a proposed bout with a legendary boxer, that could result in a great promotion, prestige, and importance for the sport of boxing, the WBC may sanction such bout as a mandatory bout.
Let ‘s take a wild stab. Does this ‘great promotion’ swell the coffers of the WBC?
may grant special authorization to allow a WBC champion to engage in a non title 10 or 12 round bout. Sanction fees are applicable
What? No judges, no oversight, but you still want to steal a sanction fee? For what exactly?
Each promoter participating in a purse offer procedure shall pay a non refundable fee to the WBC as follows: Heavyweight division bid- $10,000 Cruiser to middleweight division bid- $7,500 Super welter to super bantamweight division bid - $5,000 Bantam to straweight division bid - $2,500. The fee must be received by the WBC before the submission of the bid.
So, apart from outright extortion, what is this? And given the WBC is non profit making, why is the fee (eg, presumably the cost) dependent on weight class?
Rather than putting them out of business, these events seemed to make the organisations start following their own rules. What follows demonstrates how ridiculous even the published rules of the WBC are.
The italics are mine, the bold is direct from the WBC rule book.
there is no scope for buttering up the WBC officials here. No sir, none at all…:
Promoters‟ Obligations. The promoter(s) shall pay the expenses of the WBC Supervisor(s) to championship contests, not to exceed two (2) persons, including transportation, meals, hotels and other incidental expenses. Any attendance by the WBC President at any championship contest will be in an official capacity, and all of his expenses will be paid by the promoter(s).
Another section you just couldn’t make up:
The WBC reserves the right not to certify or to withdraw certification from any bout as being for a WBC recognized championship if, in the opinion of the Board of Governors, the bout jeopardizes the prestige and good standing of the WBC, or fair and uniform treatment of its own champions, or may cause confusion in the boxing community or the public.
Cause confusion? The WBC? No way!
and that, in the case of a non-mandatory:
the challenger is required to grant one (1) option for his first title defense, in the event that he is successful in his challenge
]Who on earth are the WBC to demand this? []]
Next, because so damn important that the non-scoring president has a good view:
The President of the WBC must be seated by the apron.
Then a half hearted and unconvincing stab at ‘fairness’:
The WBC Supervisor(s), particularly in mandatory bouts, should not be citizen(s) of the country where the contest is held, nor from the same country as either boxer, unless both boxers are from the same country where the contest is held.
Why ‘particularly in mandatory bouts’? Is it less important to administer with integrity if defending against, say, the third best fighter in the world?
Champions will defend their titles either in a voluntary or mandatory defense (against) a former or retired world champion upon majority vote of the Board of Governors
How former? How retired? From the ‘safety’ conscious WBC, isn’t this dangerous at best?
The No. 1 rated boxer in the WBC rankings is not necessarily the official mandatory challenger;
Come again?
Under extreme special circumstances, such as an unification bout or a proposed bout with a legendary boxer, that could result in a great promotion, prestige, and importance for the sport of boxing, the WBC may sanction such bout as a mandatory bout.
Let ‘s take a wild stab. Does this ‘great promotion’ swell the coffers of the WBC?
may grant special authorization to allow a WBC champion to engage in a non title 10 or 12 round bout. Sanction fees are applicable
What? No judges, no oversight, but you still want to steal a sanction fee? For what exactly?
Each promoter participating in a purse offer procedure shall pay a non refundable fee to the WBC as follows: Heavyweight division bid- $10,000 Cruiser to middleweight division bid- $7,500 Super welter to super bantamweight division bid - $5,000 Bantam to straweight division bid - $2,500. The fee must be received by the WBC before the submission of the bid.
So, apart from outright extortion, what is this? And given the WBC is non profit making, why is the fee (eg, presumably the cost) dependent on weight class?
