They have always had this policy. I don't know if they apply it equally. I doubt it. "Confirmed by the local commission" or whatever. I guess lots of fights are missing.
The term 'unlicensed' merely means not licensed by the BBBofC. Therefore the West Ham bill was as unlicensed as any because 'unlicensed' or 'licensed' doesn't really mean a great deal and is blown out of proportion. Bodies like the EBF, IBA etc all issue licences but none are recognised by Boxrec. I believe a couple of years ago Dominic Negus and Chris Bacon boxed each other on EBF licences. They had safety standards to board level, a proper ref and both had 12 round experience as ex-board boxers. Except for the profile of the fight, the mechanics of it were pretty much the same as Haye v Chisora but Boxrec don't include it because it was also not licensed by the recognised body of this country. If you advocate Haye v Chisora being recorded then you advocate that sort of fight being added.
I think they might have to wait for a report from the LBF so not the usual straight forward situation.
No, because the LBF are recognised by the EBU. The WBA and WBO also recognised the fight. Negus v Bacon was only recognised by the EBF who have no significance. Boxrec are being hypocrites here and the only reason this isn't being recognised is because of their feud with Allegedly. They recognise those Bigger's Better tournaments on Eurosport that are totally unlicensed and unsanctioned (Lee Kellett was fined by the BBBofC for taking part).
So what about all the fights that take place outside of Britain with non British fighters? Boxrec don't list those as unlicensed.
