:shock: I'm actually thinking this will look something like Donaire/Sidorenko. I think I might be underestimating Narvaez big time though. Still to pick him to win? That's very unlikely.:think
Just that it's in Panama? :yep Not that Zamora's long in il dente, or that Mosquera's just slicker/quicker/better?
10/22 - Marco Huck vs. Rogelio Omar Rossi - WBO Cruiserweight title Huck TKO/KO 10/21 - Francisco Arce vs. Hugo Ruiz WTF? Already happened! 10/22 - Paulus Moses vs. Richard Abril - Interim WBA Lightweight title Did this get called off? It's not even on boxrec? It says Abril against Acosta? If we can do that one, Acosta by UD. 10/22 - Alberto Mosquera vs. Brunet Zamora - Interim WBA Light Welterweight title Mosquera SD/MD 10/22 - Jason booth vs. Scott Quigg - BBBofC Super Bantamweight title Quigg SD/MD 10/22 - Nonito Donaire vs. Omar Andres Narvaez - WBC/WBO Bantamweight title Donaire TKO/KO 10/24 - Akira Yaegashi vs. Pornsawan Porpramook - WBA Minimum title PP SD/MD 10/29 - Luis Concepcion vs. Hernan Marquez II - WBA Flyweight title Hernan Marquez TKO/KO 10/29 - Ivan Calderon vs. Raul Garcia - Interim WBO minimumweight title Calderon UD 10/29 - Katsunari Takayama vs. Nkosinathi Joyi - IBF Minimumweight title Joyi SD/MD
Here's a nice article on the Hopkins-Dawson fight, commissions and organizations: http://www.fightsaga.com/news/item/1478-Hold-On-An-Explanation-of-the-WBC-s-Hopkins-vs-Dawson-Ruling What's important to us: as IB said, quoting the article: "Declaring official fight results such as wins, losses, draws and no contests that are to be recognized internationally." - this means ultimately it's up to the CSAC to approve the WBC's ruling or decline and say the TKO was a proper call. Regarding rules, what I said: "Creating and implementing fight rules specific to the sanctioning body. For example, some sanctioning bodies approve of standing (8) counts and the Three-Knockdown Rule while others don't (All rules must be approved by each jurisdiction's commission)" - therefore whatever rules the organization have should apply to the fight such would be the rule on an accidental or intentional incident leading to a fight ending injury, before the start of the 5th, it's a technical draw according to the WBC. Normally it would simply mean the WBC recognizes the mistake, make a change accordingly to their rules, forward it to the local commission, and as I said, from there it should be pure technicality to become official - why would a local commission disregard such ruling if organizations bring the rules, and by rules it's a TD? It's the bold part however where the loop-hole is: does the CSAC approve or disapprove the WBC's rule on accidental or intentional injuries? If they approve, they have to change it to TD, because it's a TD. If not and such an MMA incident is indeed a TKO win in California, nothing the WBC can do about it, it will remain a TKO. Like I said, such things can happen if local commissions have own specific rules contradicting with organizations who make sport specific rules and bring them for a reason: to have a clear outcome when such an incidents happen. Disregard WBC vs. CSAC for a moment: should this fight ending in such an incident be a TKO without any decisive BOXING action in the ring, or be a draw because such non-boxing incident should not result in a boxing outcome, especially with literally no decisive action pre-injury? IMO it should clearly change to a TD, and if it doesn't, California rules are garbage. There was no legitimate boxing outcome in this fight, period.