Comments Thread For: Oscar De La Hoya sounds off on ?shady? Zuffa Boxing

[BoxingUpdates]

De La Hoya took aim at what he believes will be Zuffa Boxing's approach to matchmaking, as well as its attempts to change the Ali Act.
[Click Here To Read More]

[Plick647]

and if ANYONE knows shady...

[GoonFace9917]

Shady ?.Look in the mirror

[purepuncher]

Oscar is promoting, developing fighters and speaking up for fighters. The changes to the Ali act would also benefit him, but he’s pushing back.
Hate gonna hate but the GB has done more than everyone on this forum combined.

[Grandma Lover]

Oscar is completely right. The only reason to disagree with him is if you just dont like the guy or an idiot. Or both.


Also this is so stvpid
"This is perhaps not entirely true, given that Alalshikh arranged a fight between heavyweight prospect Jared Anderson and Martin Bakole, who promptly derailed Anderson’s development by knocking him out in the fifth round. Bob Arum, who promotes Anderson under the Top Rank banner, has said he thinks the test came too early".

Anderson wasn't a prospect and was time for him to step up. Bakole was the perfect guy seeing as hes just a journeyman and ended up getting knocked out in his next fight and not having done anything meaningful since. Much less in a mediocre division at best.

[MulaKO]

Say what you will about Oscar but it seems like he’s the only one with balls at this moment to be taking a stand against these f@ckin snakes in the grass who will destroy the sport and monopolize it

[Rockybigblower]

This is an interesting conundrum. Plenty of boxing fans have called for less divisions and one belt per division in the past. I'm all for that. I have never been one who thinks that boxers should be paid millions in non unification bouts. I like the idea of one title holder who gets the millions to fight the best available challenger. If the challenger wins...he gets paid the millions to fight the next best contender. All champions should be mandatory defences only and the only way to do that is reduce the belts. I think the issue here is promotors setting a set pay scale for in house fights.

[Coverdale]

Let's break this down:

• Why is BS trying to hype up another promoter 'beef'? It does nothing to progress the sport and I can only imagine appeals to the drama-loving social media generation. As individuals, none of these egotistical promoters is particularly interesting. Let's hear about the actual fights.
• Since when did Boots - Ortiz become a 'superfight'? I've noticed this dubious adjective prefacing their names a few times now when it is nothing of the sort. It's a decent fight for the division, that's about it.
• The Muhammad Ali Act hasn't prevented myriad fighters being treated badly by their promoters since it was enacted. It's been, at most, a best practice which more powerful parties (i.e. wealthy promoters and their expensive lawyers) have had latitude in interpreting.
• The sanctioning bodies having a 'long history' means nothing by and of itself. Plenty of bad things have a long history and it doesn't mean they should continue. The WBA has the longest history of them all, the same organisation which currently name three 'world' heavyweight champions. If they disappeared tomorrow is anyone here going to shed a tear?
• The obnoxious bald meathead from the UFC has yet to put on a single boxing show. Maybe let's wait until he does before we worry about it too much, eh?

[Butt stuff]

Let's break this down:

• Why is BS trying to hype up another promoter 'beef'? It does nothing to progress the sport and I can only imagine appeals to the drama-loving social media generation. As individuals, none of these egotistical promoters is particularly interesting. Let's hear about the actual fights.
• Since when did Boots - Ortiz become a 'superfight'? I've noticed this dubious adjective prefacing their names a few times now when it is nothing of the sort. It's a decent fight for the division, that's about it.
  [*]The Muhammad Ali Act hasn't prevented myriad fighters being treated badly by their promoters since it was enacted. It's been, at most, a best practice which more powerful parties (i.e. wealthy promoters and their expensive lawyers) have had latitude in interpreting.
• The sanctioning bodies having a 'long history' means nothing by and of itself. Plenty of bad things have a long history and it doesn't mean they should continue. The WBA has the longest history of them all, the same organisation which currently name three 'world' heavyweight champions. If they disappeared tomorrow is anyone here going to shed a tear?
• The obnoxious bald meathead from the UFC has yet to put on a single boxing show. Maybe let's wait until he does before we worry about it too much, eh?

I think this is one of the biggest points I've not seen anyone else talk about. Most boxers are and will be used and abused then likely retire with nothing but life long injuries to show for it. If anything it needs making stronger with a proper regulatory entity (I know these end up being corrupt themselves but I think it'll do more good than bad).

Also I don't understand the whole title issue, that seems to be the least of the problems for Zuffa imo, unless they're also secretly looking to somehow undo the first point of the act?

1. Protects Boxers from Exploitation
Prevents promoters from having unfair financial and contractual control over fighters.
Prohibits coercive long-term contracts that tie boxers to a single promoter indefinitely.

[TonyRespectful]

Thank you Oscar for stepping up and speaking out.