Should Lomas WSB fights count?

STB - it's always a danger when writing overlong posts that people simply don't read them. Perhaps you overlooked my points.

One can argue over the semantics all day, but in reality and under the rules and laws of the various sanctioning and governing bodies, AIBA is not legally recognised as a professional governing or sanctioning body.

Therefore, whatever you may consider to be right or wrong, under the rules and regulations of the professional bodies, AIBA has no legal right to stage professional fights.

Ergo, WSB bouts cannot legally be considered pro fights, whether you consider them so or not - whether they should be considered as such or not.

As in the example I typically use - paying a coupla mates $20 each to fight in your regulation size ring in your basement gym does not make it a Pro fight. Equally two fighters having a prestige bout without pay but sanctiond by an official professional body - a SAC or one the ABCs for example would be a professional bout even if neither got paid. Go figure.

 

:deal

 

This thread will be used as future reference for those who think Loma's WSB fights are pro fights.

 

Tip of the cap for taking the high ground, instead of ending up on a milk carton like SweetSciGuru.:good

 

:yep

 

I think people are trying to use these WSB fights as a way to diminish Lomachenko's record because for some reason they feel butthurt about it.

 

Yes, they are trying to find anything bad about Lomachenko that they can find, just like Golovkin, Kovalev, Klitschko, etc., Lomachenko's haters even claim that punches to the legs, balls, hips, hitting on the break, after the bell are approved by the boxing rules, they also claim that Laurence Cole is the best referee in the history of boxing...............

 

There kinda isn't - under the dictionary definition of the term you can argue the point, but under the rules of the various professional bodies a fight is only a 'professional' bout if is it is sanctioned, overseen and officiated by accredited officials and the appropriste governing bodies (a SAC or the BBBofC for instance).

Take also for instance the case of the 'Biggers Better' tourneys - look up Constantin Bejenaru on Wikipedia and you'll find his pro record listed as 11 - 0. Look it up on Boxrec, however, and you'll find him 5 - 0 because his 6 BB wins are not recognised as 'professional' bouts by any of the recognised professional bodies.

If you personally consider the WSB professional however despite the differences in officiating, weigh-ins, fight selection etc, no one can stop you. If you feel strongly about it perhaps you should write to the various sanctioning bodies and explain your position.

 

The irony of the whole scenario is if Lomachenko's WSB were skilled opponents instead of tomato cans and journeymen then his WSB experience is superior to G Rus' professional experience.

 

Bigger's Better ought to be counted as pro bouts, IMO, and used to be until they went back and retroactively changed the records. Pretty silly that no European commission just says "ok yeah, why not" and sanctions them. All the participants are obligatorily professional fighters already, in one combat sport or another. Many are pro boxers, some come from kickboxing or MMA (and thus are technically making what should be considered their "pro boxing debut" when they first enter BB) - yet they are to a man all pros already...which can not be said of boxers in the WSB, all of whom enter having only previously been amateurs.

WSB is a pro-style amateur boxing tournament which should never be counted as sanctioned pro bouts.