Professional boxers fighting in amateur tournaments is essentially legalized bullying......

Jalolov just won the World Amateur Championships, he is however the exception to the rule.

As for the original question, I have no issue with it, top amateurs are essentially pro's now anyway (with stipends, soft jobs, government payments, a government team including trainers and nutritionists). Some of the top UK amateurs were better off in the amateurs than they were in the pros.

The reason to do both is to fight for your nation (amateurs) as well as your pocket (pro). As as an emerging pro your competition in the amateurs is likely much better than being in the pros for those early bouts.

 

The mistake you’re making is that you’re thinking of the times when the US was pro boxing. At that time the amateurs were exactly as you say they are now. It was a training ground for the professional ranks.
That’s simply not the case today. Now the rest of the world joins in on the pro game. In the Soviet Union and Cuba, the amateur game was everything. In many Eastern European countries it is still everything. There’s a reason why the best amateurs also tend to make the best pros. That’s where boxing is developed and perfected. That’s why the Loamchenko’s, Usyk’s, Rigo’s and Beterbiev’s can step into the pro game and dominate from the start, win titles with few fights. They don’t need the experience of knocking over paid cannon fodder to hype themselves up for the US market. They can step right in.

You simply don’t know what you’re talking about, you don’t understand pro or amateur boxing today.

 

Which elite pro’s are fighting amateurs?

 

No, it's really not. They're fighting under the same rules, have to make the same weight and have to use approved equipment. Just because that Uzbek dude iced someone doesn't remove the fact that pro's in the last Olympics didn't fare very well at all. You get amateurs of all ages, you get pros of all ages. You'll have amateurs fighting people less seasoned than them, you have pros fighting people less seasoned than them; there's no substance to this argument at all.

If you don't like the idea of people with more experience fighting someone with less experience then boy are you watching the wrong sport.

 

How do they manage to win then?

 

I understand your point but I just don't think there's enough to back you up. N'Dam did terribly when he went back to AM. And some AM fighters do step up very quickly. But regardless, you can have 40 fights as a pro and end up fighting an AM with 70 fights. If it's under AM rules, those pro fights don't really count for much as if you try and fight like a pro you'll likely just get schooled.

 

I think the way the WBA hand out titles makes it easier to win a world title to be totally honest, the opportunity comes up more often as well. The messy style is certainly more suited to the short distance of an amateur fighter than a 12 round affair. We had 2 world class pros in the Olympics and both flopped in 2016 and Takayama failed to even make it to the Japanese amateur nationals this year.

The amateur system is weighted in favour of amateur fighters in every way, compared to professionals. The weight is the most notable, with the same day weigh ins not helping any professional that turns their hand to amateur boxing.

Some amateurs are green, others aren't. You look at the truly elite amateurs and when they turn pro they are "pro ready", their wasn't any doubt with the likes of Lomachenko, Usyk, Madrimov, and the such.

 

Problem is the Olympics are a joke and don't even know what they're supposed to be. They started as a European amateur sporting festival then became a globalist entity which has become monetised. All these sports became professionalised and the Olympics are caught somewhere in between. Some sports are entirely professional at the Olympics, such as tennis. If you don't do that in tennis, it makes a mockery of the gold medal, since that amateur college player ain't beating Nadal or Djokovic etc. and everyone knows he doesn't deserve the prestige of Olympic gold medallist. And in this way boxing is also rather laughable. Let the pros in.

 

What about the fully matured 20 something year old amateurs with over 200+fights competing against teens with 10-20 matches under there belts?

 

I think the Ant is missing the point about the AM and Pro games being different. Three rounds vs twelve rounds. More about boxing and less about damage. There is overlap of course but there are differences. It is not just a training ground for future pros. It's not designed to be expressly a training ground for future pros. Its its own thing. In some countries it is a very prestigious thing.

The games are different. A amateur, even a very good one, is wise to take a little time to adapt to the pro game.

A great example of this us Loma vs Salido. There is no way Salido would have beaten Loma in an amateur match. He would have been disqualified many times over. I believe he came in overweight as well.

However, in the pro setting, with a different and looser interpretation of the rules, Salido gave Loma an education in prize fighting.

No way was Salido the better technical boxer. He was though, far more experienced in prize fighting and he used that experience effectively.

Different game. Different tactics allowed. Different scoring.