http://www.*****.net/2011/02/eddie-hearn-wants-prizefighter-rule.html Matchroom Sports Eddie Hearn has announced this week that he has written to the British Board of Boxing Control to outline his plans to let losing boxers fight on in the event that a winning fighter has to pull out with a cut. During the latest Prizefighter tournament, finalist Tony Dodson was forced to pull-out of his £32,000 battle with Travis Dickinson, allowing Sam Couzens to come in fresh and pick up £16,000 for less than five minutes work. Therefore, Hearn is asking for permission from the board to allow the losing boxer to progress in the event of a cut or a withdrawal, to make it fairer to the original boxers who take place in the event and also meaning that reserves will only be used in exceptional circumstances. I wrote to the board last week and the line of thinking is that if a fighter is OK to continue but loses he should progress to the next round if his opponent is forced to quit, Boxrec News reported Hearns saying. A lot of people say that if you lose you shouldnt progress but in the ABAs you can progress if you are fit and healthy if your opponent pulls out.
Agreed. It is a real anomaly that somebody can walk straight into the final after sitting down watching the whole event and pocket that much money.
As much as I hate Prizefighter, credit must always be given when deserved and this is a positive step from Hearn. As others have, and will, say, unless they are going to have a fixed sum for any substitutes that make an appearance, which should never equal the runner-up or winners cheque, this is the perfect solution.
If they say no, why doesn't Hearn work out a winnings system where you win money for every win you have in the tournament. but in a way in which if for example like dodson you pull out after semis you get the losing finalist cheque and the replacement would get the winning the quarter final fee if you see what I mean
Menay Edwards would've went to the finals against Travis Dickinson. I think this rule should be altered a little. The loser should advance if they aren't stopped in the fight. In the event that they are, the other loser should advance, if they were stopped, then bring in the wildcard.
Casey nearly lost his Prizefighter when he had to face a fresh substitute in the final. It is a weak point of the competition.
If that was the case we wouldve had a rematch of that boring affair between dickinson and the other guy Slate was it? no one wouldve wanted to see that. I think the idea that if someone has to pull out they get the same pay as if theyd went in and lost the next fight has to be the fairest i think that lad in the final wouldve been happy with the money/exposure/oppurtunity.
They should have a panel to decide which of the losers is most deserving of being brought back. Sometimes a guy has lost a dodgy split decision so it would make sense that he was given the second chance should the situation arise. I don't think it should automatically be the man who lost to the drop out because then a boxer who has caused an injury through rough housing could be rewarded for it.