Page 1 of 1

Historical Precedents for Title Holders

Posted: 03 Mar 2022, 15:35
by KiwiRider
To our esteemed boxing history buffs:
Are there historical precedents in times of war- WW2, Vietnam etc-where belts have been shelved or held aside while title holders have been pressed into military service?
Just wondering because of the Uysk situation?
Champion in recess? :maybe:

Re: Historical Precedents for Title Holders

Posted: 03 Mar 2022, 18:41
by Riddick Bowie
Yeah Joe Louis didn't defend several years while WWII was on. He was boxing exhibitions for the soldiers. When he came back for a fight proper, his rematch with Billy Conn, he had lost his edge.

Ali wouldn't serve in Vietnam so lost his title and licence.

This Ukraine thing won't go on very long. Russia's on course to take it quicker than the yanks took Iraq. Shouldn't affect Usyk's next defence.

Re: Historical Precedents for Title Holders

Posted: 03 Mar 2022, 19:04
by gregregegg
Depends on how much support Ukraine get and if usyk stays and fights a gorrila style war once city's get toppled. That can go for ages... I'm no history/war buff, but have watched a lot of news this week and my general vibe is the experts can't really figure out a timeline. Some are guessing quick, some guessing long some not willing to guess.

As to it not effecting usyks defence, even if he gets out unscathed it doesn't have to go long to effect the title defence. Not in camp, not sparrig, highly doubt he is eating his usual diet (probably 6000+Cals/week at heavyweight)... Few weeks of that takes ages to recover from in terms of getting to heavyweight title fight condition..