Howard Clark 42 lost his last 51 fights now terminally ill with dementia.

shame that

 

I'll nip down the shop and buy the mag tomorrow to read the article.

I've said it many times that the board should step in sooner with journeymen - I know it deprives them of doing something they love doing, but there's no reason why the board couldn't deduct a % of fighter's purses and put it into a training programme for fighters once they retire - those without a trade or no obvious path into training, managing or promoting fighters.

 

I don't understand how they get or are allowed licences. :huh

 

I'd guess forcing those deductions might be a problem from a legal point of view?

Not sure mate, but boxers have always been "earn today, worry about tomorrow when it happens"

Tommy Hearns, who earned a **** load of money, has just been declared bankrupt.

 

it is a fine line between a journeyman who can look after himself, and one that takes a kicking every time.
terrible shame about howard though

 

Peter Buckley
won 32 (KO 8) + lost 256 (KO 10) + drawn 12 = 300
this lad was fightin up to a year or two ago and retired winning his last fight but i couldnt be bothered countin how many he had lost in a row cause it was to much.

 

It's not something I've looked into, or been inclined to do, looking into that kind of stuff.

Yeah was shocked when Hearns was declared bankrupt given the amount of big fights he had, but you only have to listen to him speak to realise he ain't all there (even in 1980 he sounded really daft) - so it shouldn't come as a surprise..... wonder how the others are doing?

Maybe as a side issue the board could encourage a training programme of some sort, Leeds rugby actively encourage players to attend university.

 

What a shame.

I remember when Clarke was stopped by Vargas in Vargas's first defence of his IBF title.

I remember then thinking what the **** is he doing here. Good British level war horse, hope he lives for a few years longer.

 

That was on the Holy-Lewis I undercard, he was always going to get walloped in that one.

 

Only lost 10 by KO! I dunno if that's a good or bad thing actually. Is it better to be stopped a lot or take a beating 256 times? :-(

What makes them want to do it? Surely the trainers, promoters, family and friends can see clearly if the fighter cannot? Because seriously if a family member or a mate of mine was getting beaten consistently I'd tell them to stop. If you wanna box fine, do it in the ams with headguards or just stick to sparring.

 

A lot of journeymen with massive losing records are not necessarily bad boxers who should lose their licenses.

They may not have the ambition or ability to be world beaters, but they generally know how to look after themselves and look to put on a good show whilst not getting cut or stopped. (which would mean a suspension).

Although boxing needs fighters like these, I feel promoters and managers have a duty of care to look after them, particularly in the sad case of Howard Clark.

There's enough money at the top end of the sport to make sure fighters at the grass roots level don't push themselves beyond the limit, and if they do, they shouldn't have to face the rest of their lives without at least financial support.