BoxRec

It strikes me that the standard of fighters to come out of the world ametre championships (i.e the standard it takes to win them) is much greater than the olympics.

We often see people point to Kahn and Harrison as examples as to why there is a big difference between the Pro's and the Ams however one need only look so far as Carl Froch and David Haye to see people who excelled in the World championships transfer well to the professionals.

ANy thoughts... also why do we do so crap in the world ametres?

The standard is exactly the same. You have the same countries and therefore the same fighter representing their respective country in both the World Champs and the Olympics. Unless, of course, a fighter turns pro in between the two tournaments.

Taking the example of comparing Khan and Harrison (Olympians) to Froch and Haye (World Championship reps) has absolutely no relevance as it is too narrow to prove the general point you're making.

There are some top flight amateurs that will be more suited to the pro game than others, and this has always been the case. It has more to do with style, strength, stamina, power and most importantly the mental makeup of the individual fighter.

As to why we do not do so well in the World amateurs, well it isn't a easy one to answer, other than to say the competition is exceptionally tough. The eastern European countries always had a conveyor belt system of producing top quality amateurs who were systematically trained for international competitions given the shorter format. And that's not even mentioning the Cubans.

I would say the World amateur championship is the harder competition for a number of reasons..

Although the Olympics gives the far greater exposure and higher recognition. The world Championships is the harder competition to win. Britain have never had a World Championship gold medalist.

The world amateurs do not have strict numbers on the entrants, meaning more entries and fighters having to compete in more contests to get to the medal stages.

There are no qualification tournaments enforcing fighters from in some cases weaker continents to be represented at every weight division. (Australia always manage a near full Olympic team.)

Where in the Olympics there is a limit on European nations, the World Championships allows all the stronger Eastern European nation to send a full team. Eventhe four home nations are allowed to do so separately.

I also remember Ruslan Chagaev winning the World Championships in 2001, even though he was banned from the Olympics in 2000 for fighting professionally. I remember thinking at the time that there is no way Audley would have got Gold if Ruslan would have been allowed to enter.

Another point is that a doping offence will get you a life ban from the Olympics. While the World Championship will allow former offenders to compete.

The olympics is the most prestigious and consequently the Worlds the year after the Olympics are IMO the easiest to medal as a lot of guys turn pro after the Olympics.

This is a stupid thread, and it's in the wrong room anyway.

Some would say that the Europeans are harder than both of them. The fact is, they're all difficult.