Pro boxing at the Olympics!

Mantis Toboggan

What's the feeling with this one?

Tyson Fury and Manny Pacquiao have said recently they would love to go to the Olympics.

Initially I thought it was ridiculous but thinking about it if they were to separate the pros from the amateurs it would make for some tasty fights!

Joeseph Balls

It would stop lads dodging each other, will never happen though.

Littlehorny

These top guys already got to have their amatuer careers, let the young lads in the spotlight for a change ffs. Some of the top pros only fight once or twice a year nowadays, how will they handle a four or five fight tournament, they can say they'll go to the Olympics all they like but do you honestly think Fury and Wilder would meet in a heavyweight final for no money? Total non story as far as i'm concerned.

Andre 3000

Yeah, it might make sense for someone like Manny who's about to "retire" and has all the money he can make from pro Boxing made, but for someone in their prime like Fury and Wilder, it makes no sense.

Donald Trump

Tyson Fury wrote: »

What's the feeling with this one?

Tyson Fury and Manny Pacquiao have said recently they would love to go to the Olympics.

Initially I thought it was ridiculous but thinking about it if they were to separate the pros from the amateurs it would make for some tasty fights!

I'm sure that the same rules would apply to the Pros as the Amateurs. Including

1) Having to qualify through a tournament
2) Being under 35
3) Have to respect weight limits.. (This used to be <2kg above fighting weight for random checks or something if I remember correctly)

The pros who would do well are simply the ones who were already outstanding as amateurs. The likes of Lomachenko or Golovkin. Rigondeaux too (Cubans wouldn't take him back though).

Who would Ireland have back if they could choose? Quigley? But then again O'Reilly is strong there and a genuine medal hopeful.
Andy Lee is a bit old.
Frampton would be too short for his weight. He wouldn't get away with drying out a stone and rehydrating if he's fighting two days in a row.
JJN isn't doing anything special.

Tyson Fury? I can't see it happening even if he said he wanted to. Maybe his cousin would have a stab at it. He was a good youth boxer but turned before he did anything at senior level. Still, I think that the best amateur could beat them in an amateur bout.

walshb

The new age limit for elites is 40 I believe.

Mantis Toboggan

The one good thing to come out of the Olympics would be structure, which is badly needed in the pro game. There would be no ducking opponents and a clear structure would help get more casual fans into the sport.

There would be no qualifying, like the golf it would be the highest ranked in each country that can choose to go.

There's not a hope in hell that this will happen though, possibly in the future but certainly not for Rio.

Dodge

You might get the odd fruitcake like Fury trying (and he's said he wants to) but in general most pros won't be interested. They've too much to lose. They'll have one chance to qualify if the vote passes on June 1st. By then, most of the big nations will have most of their team already qualified.

Even if they want to go for that last qualifier, and there's a space available, they still need to be entered by their national association. Then they've win 3/4/5 bouts (in a format they don't fight at) for the right to go to the Olympics, where they may have another few fights

Oh and they won't be paid while they're doing it. The reason most lads go pro is because of money. No prize money here, so no interest for most of them.

I hope its voted down, but even if it goes ahead I can't see it making any difference to Rio

walshb

I think it's a horrible plan! Until the sport bcome one entity then go away!

Donald Trump

I reckon that the idea is just being floated to keep the American's happy.

Same as how AIBA changed the scoring as the Yanks blamed their poor performances on that.

Dodge

No, don't think that's true.

The man in charge, Wu, has already tried to go pro with the APB but it really hasb't had any profile at all. This is his next step

Dodge

They definitely wouldn't be used to fighting 4/5 times in a week. Even if you'd expect them to be older, more experienced boxers. They're closer now than in the past but in many ways they're different sports. There are reasons why the top amatuers take a while to get going in the pros

walshb

All depends on the pro that enters. A beast, killer, banger could see serious harm come to the amateurs. A fencer/stylist/boxer would allow most amateurs be very competitive. 3x3 mins is plenty of time for a heavy hitting dangerous and aggressive pro to get the job done. Completely unfair and potentially lethalfor the amateurs.

Dodge

pac_man wrote: »

As an aside, I know there's a pro at Conlans weight that has qualified for Rio

The only "pros" have come through the AIPB and they're basically all considered amateurs by everyone. They can still fight in World Champs etc (as Ireland's Joe Ward did at light heavy)

The 2 to get the spots at bantam are from France and China

walshb

pac_man wrote: »

That pro who is known to bang and is moving back into the amateur style, would be less dangerous and power possibly compromised because they wouldn't be sitting down on their punches as much. You'd also be taking into account the bigger gloves,constantly on the weight and that beast/killer would be softened up a bit.

Why would they not sit down on their punches? It is 3x3 minutes of boxing. There is no set technique or behaviour. The banger can go about the 9 minutes however he feels, as long as it's within the rules. Simple fact is that the pro is allowed to go as heavy and as hard as he wants to. The boxing is practically pro style over 3 rds. The gloves are 10 ounces up to 64 and 12 ounces from 69 onwards. I could be wrong, but most pros use 10 oz, no?

Dodge

So he was! Didn't realise he had 15 fights at "pro" level before coming back to the AIBA.

Joe_ Public

This guy Wu is dangerous. I recall before he became AIBA president, he was being portrayed as a reformer who was going to fix amateur boxing, same as Platini in Uefa. But he's just bonkers and, as a previous poster said, his strategy seems to be to gradually erode the distinction between amateur and pro until the term amateur is rendered meaningless. He's basically jealous that other sports like golf and tennis will have the world's top stars in rio while boxing is left with names only familiar to hardened fight fans. The integrity of the sport means jack sh£t to people like him when it doesn't roll in the cash.

Dick phelan

Terrible idea for the AIBA and just another stupid decision in their attempt to make AIBA more and more like the pro's, how's this going to work? After qualifying will amateur lads have to do a box off against a top pro who decides he wants to go, how brutal would it be to see Pacquiao fighting some African wildcard entry, it's actually dangerous, The pro's have had their chance at the olympics ect leave the younger guys have theirs otherwise what the hell is the point of amateur boxing if the pro's can enter the big tournaments? It will shoot them in the foot as well because more and more guys would turn over earlier if they knew the olympics is still open to them, this along with the removal of the headguard are two of the dumbest decisions made by the AIBA leave amateur boxing alone.

Dodge

Just on the technical aspects, once a boxer is qualified, they can't be unqualified (unless they won't make the weight). So if Michael O'Reilly qualifies, then Andy Lee can't qualify at middle weight for Ireland

The 'pros' will have one chance in the final AOB Qualifer in June with the last 4/5 spots up for grabs. That's if the rule passes. I'm still holding out hope it doesn't

Joe_ Public

If that vote does pass, will be interesting to see what happens. If Lee did indicate his desire to box at rio (can see why he might given the nightmare of athens), would he have to box off against O'Reilly or others to make the final qualifier? Assuming O'Reilly doesnt qualify in the next couple of weeks of course.

Dodge

It's up to the IABA to nominate their entrant for qualifiers so they could go with a box off or choose who they like

In reality O'Reilly should qualify in Turkey and if he doesn't he'll get the nod for the final Qualifer

But it is up to the national federation who they select

Joe_ Public

If he reproduces his Worlds form, you'd have to fancy him alright. To think that the Australian guy he beat up in the Worlds is already qualified for Rio, it'd be crazy to think O'Reilly would't make it, but that's how it goes in the Olympics, especially if you're in the European section. I notice Ukraine have nobody qualified yet so they'll surely have a decent contingent and England are sending Antony Fowler, there's two I'd hope to avoid for a start.

Dodge

There's 32 down for the middleweights. By far the most. O'Reilly should be seeded

Dick phelan

Joe_ Public wrote: »

If he reproduces his Worlds form, you'd have to fancy him alright. To think that the Australian guy he beat up in the Worlds is already qualified for Rio, it'd be crazy to think O'Reilly would't make it, but that's how it goes in the Olympics, especially if you're in the European section. I notice Ukraine have nobody qualified yet so they'll surely have a decent contingent and England are sending Antony Fowler, there's two I'd hope to avoid for a start.

Fowler really isn't all that, i'd fancy O'Reilly to beat him.

Dodge

pac_man wrote: »

This the part I don't get. I've been keeping an eye on Robeisy Ramírez(Cuban 2012 Gold Medalist), and was wondering what the story with him was. He fights at Conlans weight and the other Cuban Cruz
has already qualified within that weightclass. However, Ramírez fought in the Americas qualifiers a couple of weeks ago and was a big upset that he got beaten. Unless Cruz is injured or something, what would happened if Ramírez qualified?

Cubans have said Cruz won't make the weight so they're trying to qualify Ramirez. He lost in the Americas so if he doesn't qualify at the AOB then Cuba are out of bantam. Only found out myself at the weekend

I think Turkey too are trying at MW this week so they may have said the same about their AIPB qualifier

Joe_ Public

pac_man wrote: »

I agree he's a bit overrated. It was him that made me set up the headguard poll a few weeks back. Seems to get a cut or claims to be robbed in nearly every tournament.

I wouldnt over-rate Fowler, just that I'd rather avoid him in the draw, assuming he won't be seeded. Plus he is, after all, a world bronze medallist the same as O'Reilly, I definitely wouldn't want to take him for granted either. Didnt see that poll, but I'd have voted 10 times to bring back headguards and don't trust the aiba's stated reasons for having them removed.

Joe_ Public

Dodge wrote: »

Cubans have said Cruz won't make the weight so they're trying to qualify Ramirez. He lost in the Americas so if he doesn't qualify at the AOB then Cuba are out of middleweight. Only found out myself at the weekend

I think Turkey too are trying at MW this week so they may have said the same about their AIPB qualifier

I wouldn't even try to second guess what the Turkish lads are up to. Remember this is where Joe Ward got done over 4 years ago. The Turkish boxers were practically unbeatable that week, yet none of them came close to medal when it came to the Olympics funnily enough. And funny why these tournaments always go to the same countries too!

LuckyGent88

Well professionals have been approved to compete at rio anyway.
Farcical decision and the Olympics are becoming a joke these days with all the professional sports competing where it's not the pinnacle of their sport.

Joe_ Public

It's kind of depressing but hardly a shock either. Hardly much of a point having an outcry about it now when the horse has already bolted. But would like to know how the IABA voted, presumably in favour, and what its reasoning was.

Mantis Toboggan

Joe_ Public wrote: »

It's kind of depressing but hardly a shock either. Hardly much of a point having an outcry about it now when the horse has already bolted. But would like to know how the IABA voted, presumably in favour, and what its reasoning was.

84 out of 88 federations voted in favour of it.

Think there argument is that 1, there's no such thing as amateur sports people anymore and 2. All the rest of the sports at the Olympics have their best athletes and boxing wants to follow.

Joe_ Public

Tyson Fury wrote: »

84 out of 88 federations voted in favour of it.

Think there argument is that 1, there's no such thing as amateur sports people anymore and 2. All the rest of the sports at the Olympics have their best athletes and boxing wants to follow.

In fairness to Wu, I don't think he's been underhand about his motives, it's about money and exposure and if that's what they want, fair enough. It's a democratic vote after all. But you could also argue boxing differs from other sports in that there's a clear delineation between the amateur and pro wings, as much as the likes of Paddy Barnes or Katie Taylor aren't really "amateurs" in the strict meaning of the term. I could also say boxing doesn't actually have to slavishly follow the lead of rival sports, but then that would be hopelessly naive on my part.

I did find something to cheer myself up in Paddy Barnes tweet, though:

"it's a ploy to get Zou Shiming back in the Olympics and keep me Paddy Bronze"

walshb

I am in two minds on this. I believe that it's not a fair or level playing field, but I'd also love to see the elite pros in the games just to see how it goes. Some people seem to think that the sports are the same. They are not. Ok, the amateur game now is more like the pro game, as in the style and scoring and rules, but it's still not near the kind of savage level that exists at the pro game.

Pro boxers are a differnet animal in general. I would fear for the safety of some amateur boxers. Take the likes of Conlan. In 9 minutes he may well come up against a monster. Can he hold his own for 9 minutes against an elite pro who now knows that he doesn't even have to pace himself, and that he can go hell for leather from the opening bell?

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

I am in two minds on this. I believe that it's not a fair or level playing field, but I'd also love to see the elite pros in the games just to see how it goes. Some people seem to think that the sports are the same. They are not. Ok, the amateur game now is more like the pro game, as in the style and coring and rules, but it's still not near the kind of savage level that exists at the pro game.

Pro boxers are a differnet animal in general. I would fear for the safety of some amateur boxers. Take the likes of Conlan. In 9 minutes he may well come up against a monster. Can he hold his own for 9 minutes against an elite pro who now knows that he doesn't even have to pace himself, and that he can go hell for leather from the opening bell?

That's a decent and honest take but you still have to resolve your curiosity as to how amateurs would cope in the ring with seasoned pros on the one hand with your fears that serious damage might be caused on the other. I'm not sure the Olympics is the place for such notions to be played out. Not to mention what it says about the esteemed place personal safety is supposed to hold within the amateur code.

Andre 3000

Absolutely disgusting. I can't say anything else about it. It's just disgusting what they've done and allowed. If any professional boxer was any sort of a human he'd refuse to take part in this.

Chivito550

Former world heavyweight champion Mike Tyson, who as an amateur won gold at the 1981 and 1982 Junior Olympic Games, has branded the move "ridiculous".

"It's ridiculous, it's foolish, and some of the pro fighters are going to get beat by the amateurs. It's just going to happen, I really believe that," the 49-year-old said last week.

He said the three rounds in the Olympics would work in favour of the amateurs, with professionals used to fighting as many as 12 rounds.

Northern Ireland's Carl Frampton, a former amateur who has won WBA and IBF world title belts at super-bantamweight, said allowing professionals into the Olympics was 'ridiculous'.

"They're two different sports. It's like a badminton player playing tennis," he said on Twitter.

http://www.rte.ie/sport/boxing/2016/0601/792514-aiba-clears-the-way-for-professional-boxers-in-rio/

Joe_ Public

The key will be how they change the qualification process for 2020. Can't see them sticking with the current format if they want to get the best pro boxers in Tokyo when the lion's share of the tickets are already handed out. One thing for sure the Euro Champs will have no role to play and can even see the World Champs being cut loose from any direct link too.

walshb

Chivito550 wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/sport/boxing/2016/0601/792514-aiba-clears-the-way-for-professional-boxers-in-rio/

Well, one thing is for certain, when Tyson was 20/21 and professional, no amateuir under no rules would have gotten out of rd 1 against him, and that includes Lewis and Bowe from Seoul. Hold on, maybe the iron chinned Ray Mercer would have....

Strazdas

walshb wrote: »

I am in two minds on this. I believe that it's not a fair or level playing field, but I'd also love to see the elite pros in the games just to see how it goes. Some people seem to think that the sports are the same. They are not. Ok, the amateur game now is more like the pro game, as in the style and scoring and rules, but it's still not near the kind of savage level that exists at the pro game.

Pro boxers are a differnet animal in general. I would fear for the safety of some amateur boxers. Take the likes of Conlan. In 9 minutes he may well come up against a monster. Can he hold his own for 9 minutes against an elite pro who now knows that he doesn't even have to pace himself, and that he can go hell for leather from the opening bell?

Though such a monster probably wouldn't have the skill levels to successfully score well in an amateur bout. Amateur boxing is very skillful and technical, I'm not sure if hardened brutes will be suited to the discipline at all.

walshb

Strazdas wrote: »

Though such a monster probably wouldn't have the skill levels to successfully score well in an amateur bout. Amateur boxing is very skillful and technical, I'm not sure if hardened brutes will be suited to the discipline at all.

Although they are different sports the idea is pretty much the same. You need to engage to score, to win. That is it in a nutshell. Pros won't suddenly step in the ring clueless. Punching hard and often is pretty much what will win fights. Just picture it. A top level pro is IMO at a distinct advantage against an amateur. He is trained to a higher degree, likely bangs with more variety and potency, and has bags and bags of stamina to go full out for 9 minutes. I can't see many amatuer type cuties lasting the 9 minutes here.

Sure, some amatueur may do well and win some fights, but most likely due to them meeting pros that aren't real punchers and killers.

BTW, what skill levels would an elite pro not have to land punches against amateurs in Rio? I could be wrong, but the art form is still the same. Hands move, feet move, body moves and punches fly.

Andre 3000

What pros do ye lads think will actually go to the Olympics? I can see a few fringe lads and past prime lads go just for a final moment in the spotlight (Shane Mosley is one tha comes to mind, especially after last weekend's loss) but thinking about it now, surely no "elite" boxer in today's game would go considering most probably have fights scheduled around the time of the Olympics.

Chivito550

walshb wrote: »

Although they are different sports the idea is pretty much the same. You need to engage to score, to win. That is it in a nutshell. Pros won't suddenly step in the ring clueless. Punching hard and often is pretty much what will win fights. Just picture it. A top level pro is IMO at a distinct advantage against an amateur. He is trained to a higher degree, likely bangs with more variety and potency, and has bags and bags of stamina to go full out for 9 minutes. I can't see many amatuer type cuties lasting the 9 minutes here.

Sure, some amatueur may do well and win some fights, but mist likely due to them meeting pros that aren't real punchers and killers.

BTW, what skill levels would an elite pro not have to land punches against amateurs in Rio? I could be wrong, but the art form is still the same. Hands move, feet move, body moves and punches fly.

If the above is true, then what you are saying is that our Olympic medalists down the years were never actually the best in the world at their own art? This surely devalues their medals in comparison to medals won in sports like athletics where all the best in the world are there.

I was under the understanding that because amateur and pro boxing are so different, that the amateur would surely win more often than not at their own game, a bit like a rugby league team beating a union team in a rugby league match and visa versa. Different codes of the one sport.

walshb

Chivito550 wrote: »

If the above is true, then what you are saying is that our Olympic medalists down the years were never actually the best in the world at their own art? This surely devalues their medals in comparison to medals won in sports like athletics where all the best in the world are there.

I was under the understanding that because amateur and pro boxing are so different, that the amateur would surely win more often than not at their own game, a bit like a rugby league team beating a union team in a rugby league match and visa versa. Different codes of the one sport.

And you're in with your usual comparisons. :pac: Get over it, we just don't cut the mustard at track and field

The sports were never ever the same. The art form is.

walshb

Chivito550 wrote: »

I was under the understanding that because amateur and pro boxing are so different, that the amateur would surely win more often than not at their own game, a bit like a rugby league team beating a union team in a rugby league match and visa versa. Different codes of the one sport.

To think this is wrong, particularly in a sport so very intimate as boxing, where one shot can end a fight. It's not really comparable to other sports and their variants. And nobody said they are "so" different. I don't think I did.

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

Although they are different sports the idea is pretty much the same. You need to engage to score, to win. That is it in a nutshell. Pros won't suddenly step in the ring clueless. Punching hard and often is pretty much what will win fights. Just picture it. A top level pro is IMO at a distinct advantage against an amateur. He is trained to a higher degree, likely bangs with more variety and potency, and has bags and bags of stamina to go full out for 9 minutes. I can't see many amatuer type cuties lasting the 9 minutes here.

Sure, some amatueur may do well and win some fights, but most likely due to them meeting pros that aren't real punchers and killers.

BTW, what skill levels would an elite pro not have to land punches against amateurs in Rio? I could be wrong, but the art form is still the same. Hands move, feet move, body moves and punches fly.

I think we could all agree, wherever we stand, that the terms "pro" and "amateur" are fairly loose when it comes to describing all boxers. Some pros barely fight more than a handful of times a year, and vary their training accordingly, while many amateurs train every day and prepare like professionals. I'd certainly consider the training the Irish lads get in the HPU superior to that of a lot of the pros anyway. That said, the pros would have some advantages but I don't know why you'd be so clear-cut about it. Depends on teh individual fighters really.

walshb

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I think we could all agree, wherever we stand, that the terms "pro" and "amateur" are fairly loose when it comes to describing all boxers. Some pros barely fight more than a handful of times a year, and vary their training accordingly, while many amateurs train every day and prepare like professionals. I'd certainly consider the training the Irish lads get in the HPU superior to that of a lot of the pros anyway. That said, the pros would have some advantages but I don't know why you'd be so clear-cut about it. Depends on teh individual fighters really.

I agree. It's quite a complex and debatable area. So many permuations, but the general feel is that a pro who is trained and prepared is allowed go into the ring against an amatuer who is trained and prepared with rules that are quite similar, and where the aim of the game is to hit each other, well I feel the pro has the advantage. They are trained to a higher degree of "brutality." They absorb shots better, throw shots harder and with more variety, and have mor stamina as well. Of course, some instances will see the amatuers win. I understand this, Either via KO, or on points. That's the complex natue of the sports!

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

I agree. It's quite a complex and debatable area. So many permuations, but the general feel is that a pro who is trained and prepared is allowed go into the ring against an amatuer who is trained and prepared with rules that are quite similar, and where the aim of the game is to hit each other, well I feel the pro has the advantage. They are trained to a higher degree of "brutality." They absorb shots better, throw shots harder and with more variety, and have mor stamina as well. Of course, some instances will see the amatuers win. I understand this, Either via KO, or on points. That's the complex natue of the sports!

Yes, I agree it's a complex area and I, for one, have no real idea how it'll all play out, but i think it's a sad day for the sport. Incidentally, talking about Tyson and destroying fighters, I don't think he ever did that as an amateur himself. He never even qualified for the Olympics, though in fairness that all happened before d'Amato got hold of him.

walshb

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Yes, I agree it's a complex area and I, for one, have no real idea how it'll all play out, but i think it's a sad day for the sport. Incidentally, talking about Tyson and destroying fighters, I don't think he ever did that as an amateur himself. He never even qualified for the Olympics, though in fairness that all happened before d'Amato got hold of him.

But I was mentioning Tyson as a polished 20/21 year old pro stepping in against an amateur over 9 minutes. Tyson as an amateur was very good, but not near as lethal or polished as what he was aged 20/21 as a pro!

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

But I was mentioning Tyson as a polished 20/21 year old pro stepping in against an amateur over 9 minutes. Tyson as an amateur was very good, but not near as lethal or polished as what he was aged 20/21 as a pro!

Fair point.

Chivito550

Be interesting to see how pro boxers, who are used to very lax anti-doping procedures, deal with being part of Olympic boxing which is fully compliant with WADA. Methinks many pro boxers won't want that level of extra scrutiny put on themselves, particularly the ones up to no good.

Chivito550

walshb wrote: »

To think this is wrong, particularly in a sport so very intimate as boxing, where one shot can end a fight. It's not really comparable to other sports and their variants. And nobody said they are "so" different. I don't think I did.

On countless occasions you have used the term "different sports" when I have presented an argument that our boxers don't have to beat the best to win Olympic medals while our athletes do (not to mention 3 from each country, and only one bronze medal but that's besides the point). Now you are backtracking and saying they aren't all that different and pros would beat our best amateurs. Which stance are you taking?

walshb

Chivito550 wrote: »

On countless occasions you have used the term "different sports" when I have presented an argument that our boxers don't have to beat the best to win Olympic medals while our athletes do (not to mention 3 from each country, and only one bronze medal but that's besides the point). Now you are backtracking and saying they aren't all that different and pros would beat our best amateurs. Which stance are you taking?

You've been peddling this nonsense for years now. There seems to be a sense of begrudgery from you as regards our boxers getting recognition. You keep harping back to our athletes and other sports. I knew you'd construe this thread to bring it back up again.

Our boxers DO have to beat the best to medal. It's obvious you cannot get your head around that simple statement.

Get over the whole amateur boxers "don't have it as tough" as track and field athletes to medal. It's stale, untrue and boring.

And it's why your beloved Sonia will always be second best to our Katie!:p