U.S. National - AP
Mismatched Boxing Bouts on Rise in Ind.
Sun Oct 17, 5:22 PM ET U.S. National - AP
INDIANAPOLIS - Indiana has allowed a higher percentage of old and inactive boxers with losing records into the ring this year than any of the other top professional boxing states, a newspaper reported Sunday.
An analysis by The Indianapolis Star found that 30 percent of the 131 professional boxing matches held in Indiana this year have involved "at-risk" boxers. By comparison, just 4 percent of the 226 bouts in Nevada involved at-risk boxers.
The "at-risk" designation, created in 2000 by the National Association of Attorneys General Boxing Task Force, is based on age, inactivity, career losses, consecutive losses or consecutive losses by knockout.
"Indiana is frowned upon," said Tim Lueckenhoff of Missouri, president of the Association of Boxing Commissions. "That's the reputation they have. I don't want to say people think it's a joke, but it's inappropriate."
The Star also found that Indiana spends the least to regulate the sport among the top 10 states where boxing is most popular.
Indiana Boxing Commission chairman Jake Hall admitted there are mismatches in Indiana, but said: "In most states you have mismatches. If you didn't, you wouldn't have club shows."
There has been growing support for increased regulation of professional boxing in recent years following the creation of the task force.
A bill sponsored by Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), R-Ariz., to create a U.S. Boxing Commission passed the Senate in April and is being considered by the House.
The bill would give a presidentially appointed panel the power to veto any proposed bout, create uniform medical regulations and establish a database of medical and statistical information.
I grew up in Chicago's South side and Northwest IN has most of IN fighters. NW IN is basically the IN suburbs of Chicago. I think they should tighten up regulation there! :cool:
it seems like those big names in boxing are training hard but they get stuck fighting guys that seem like they dont take the sport seriously...thats the only thing that bothers me about boxing.
but then you have a glen johnson with 6 losses or more and you put him in wiht Roy Jones, and knocks him out. Just cause someones been knocked out don't count em out!
Yeah i've seen a guy with like a record of 8 - 31, going against guys like James toney, and Hasim Rahman (he's from my local area), I didnt personally see the fights, but it makes ya kind of wonder who let him in with those guys.
When we were discussing the Rydell Booker mismatch vs. James Toney, we were going through his opponent list. One guy had 175 losses and one of that guy's opponents had a similar number. Both guys were active, one of them a week previously in Lafayette, IN, about 30 min. from my town.
When I saw Vernon Forrest vs. Shane Mosley II in Indianapolis in 2002, there was a guy on the undercard that was like 13-57 fighting an unbeaten prospect. I know it's commonplace to put a bum with rounds against a guy with a future to see how good the prospect is, but why is that 13-57 guy even fighting anymore?