BoxRec

good eye - i see that now

Seems like the WBA slept with Turki and they went on to adopt fightfax as their baby

https://www.brunchboxing.com//items-1/t ... replace-it

Boxing Prospect wrote: ↑10 Aug 2024, 04:56 Seems like the WBA slept with Turki and they went on to adopt fightfax as their baby

https://www.brunchboxing.com//items-1/t ... replace-it

Just suggests that WBA want more control over records and rankings because "impartial" ones show theirs as rubbish. Horrible organisation.

joshj909 wrote: ↑10 Aug 2024, 05:33

Boxing Prospect wrote: ↑10 Aug 2024, 04:56 Seems like the WBA slept with Turki and they went on to adopt fightfax as their baby

https://www.brunchboxing.com//items-1/t ... replace-it

Just suggests that WBA want more control over records and rankings because "impartial" ones show theirs as rubbish. Horrible organisation.

Should have a look at the new "impartial" rankings on Figfhtfax, they are fornicating hilarious. If you go through a single weight class and don't laugh at them you're lacking a sense of humour

Boxing Prospect wrote: ↑10 Aug 2024, 05:40

joshj909 wrote: ↑10 Aug 2024, 05:33

Boxing Prospect wrote: ↑10 Aug 2024, 04:56 Seems like the WBA slept with Turki and they went on to adopt fightfax as their baby

https://www.brunchboxing.com//items-1/t ... replace-it

Just suggests that WBA want more control over records and rankings because "impartial" ones show theirs as rubbish. Horrible organisation.

Should have a look at the new "impartial" rankings on Figfhtfax, they are fornicating hilarious. If you go through a single weight class and don't laugh at them you're lacking a sense of humour

I couldn't get past the heavyweights who even are these guys??

I noticed The WBA recognizes IBA sanctioned pro fights, while Boxrec has stopped.

I don't support the WBA, but I'm glad there's movement away from BR's monopoly on boxing records, historic and current

Manrae wrote: ↑10 Aug 2024, 11:51 I noticed The WBA recognizes IBA sanctioned pro fights, while Boxrec has stopped.

I don't support the WBA, but I'm glad there's movement away from BR's monopoly on boxing records, historic and current

I'd honestly trust Boxrec more than the WBA or IBA

joshj909 wrote: ↑10 Aug 2024, 12:19

Manrae wrote: ↑10 Aug 2024, 11:51 I noticed The WBA recognizes IBA sanctioned pro fights, while Boxrec has stopped.

I don't support the WBA, but I'm glad there's movement away from BR's monopoly on boxing records, historic and current

I'd honestly trust Boxrec more than the WBA or IBA

Agreed

We must hand over the WBA titles as quickly as possible. Boxrec must remain the ultimate guide to boxing.

The WBA has long been the very worst sanctioning organization. Their rankings have often been ridiculous.

I think the sport of boxing would be better off without the WBA.

Perkin Warbeck wrote: ↑10 Aug 2024, 19:19 The WBA has long been the very worst sanctioning organization. Their rankings have often been ridiculous.

I think the sport of boxing would be better off without the WBA.

Agree 100%

Very glad that boxrec has scrubbed WBA contamination off the site.

You can’t really be the “official record keeper of the sport of boxing”….

If you are just going to ignore a large part of the historical record and present scene over some sort of business disagreement.

I mean…evidently Khaosai Galaxy never held a world title…..Curry v. McCrory and Spinks v. Qawi were just normal title defense losses for McCrory and Qawi and Roberto Duran didn’t win his first world title until 1978 and Ray Leonard was his second ever title fight.

ldlamb wrote: ↑10 Aug 2024, 23:47 You can’t really be the “official record keeper of the sport of boxing”….

If you are just going to ignore a large part of the historical record and present scene over some sort of business disagreement.

This.

Manrae wrote: ↑11 Aug 2024, 09:52

ldlamb wrote: ↑10 Aug 2024, 23:47 You can’t really be the “official record keeper of the sport of boxing”….

If you are just going to ignore a large part of the historical record and present scene over some sort of business disagreement.

This.

X2

ldlamb wrote: ↑10 Aug 2024, 23:47 You can’t really be the “official record keeper of the sport of boxing”….

If you are just going to ignore a large part of the historical record and present scene over some sort of business disagreement.

Absolutely, this is a ridiculous situation.
Not showing all the minor titles was bad enough but to remove the WBA titles is madness.
It is not reasonable to pick and choose which titles to show!

These organisations are all corrupt in my view. One of the main reasons boxing is in the sad state it's in is because of these opportunists making ridiculous belts so they can scam sanctioning money from fighters.

It doesn't matter what any of us may think about the various boxing organizations.
In order to have a completely accurate database BoxRec should list whatever title was competed for by the boxers involved.
Even if it was for a belt deemed unworthy by some.
Politics should not be a factor.

Really? Talk about childish. Take your ball and go home John. Jesus. The WBA is THE original ranking organization. Period. I guess between the intrusive adds, constantly forcing you to sign in and reassert you are a human, someone who runs the show here forgot how this all started and is really only interested in the $$$. Lets not forget John that you got where you are on the backs of free volounteers who entered records in your database because of their love of the sport and history. Not because they wanted you to become the latest tinpot dictator in the sport...

I am not one to criticize boxrec because I love the site, but it's some kind of petty bullshit to not say, for instance, that Duran didn't win a belt until 1978 because it wasn't the origanization in favor. I hate alphabet boys but listing some titles and not others when they are all horrible is partisan and stupid, IMO. I'd much rather boxrec not list any titles after about 1955 than list only some that are on the right side of management

Maybe there will be a Boxrec ++ Super that includes WBA recognition and IBA professional bouts...

If they gonna stop listing them, why not just stop listing them from now?
Why erase history?

Looks like fightfax is making a return..

Scrubbing the WBA titles is ridiculous, it's childish behaviour from a site that promotes itself as the official record keeper for the sport.

Leaving that aside, has the records database become completely unusable for others the last month or so? Apart from full screen ads that are difficult to close, random ad pop-ups and ads covering part of a boxers record which make browsing on a mobile almost impossible, the website freezes regularly and seems to be using an incredible amount of memory when viewing on a computer.

chinarich wrote: ↑13 Aug 2024, 03:50 Scrubbing the WBA titles is ridiculous, it's childish behaviour from a site that promotes itself as the official record keeper for the sport.

Leaving that aside, has the records database become completely unusable for others the last month or so? Apart from full screen ads that are difficult to close, random ad pop-ups and ads covering part of a boxers record which make browsing on a mobile almost impossible, the website freezes regularly and seems to be using an incredible amount of memory when viewing on a computer.

yes, and it constantly forces you to verify you are a human and then dumps you back to the home screen when you do.

If the boss, in his infinite wisdom, will not restore the WBA title fights then he might as well delete all the WBC, IBF, WBO contests also.
Then, according to BoxRec, there will never have been any title fights.