Thursday, November 16, 2006

The Mind of the WBC: Understanding the Meaning of ‘Eliminator’

By JE Grant

In its quest to achieve ever-increasing idiocy, the WBC issued another of its infamous semi-English news releases that give us insights to the dysfunctional organization.

This time it concerns the upcoming Manny Pacquiao – Erik Morales III bout for something called the WBC International Super-Featherweight title.

Setting aside for a moment the ludicrous and virtually meaningless “title,” the WBC also want to call this a “final eliminator” for the right to face the “world” champion Marco Antonio Barrera.

In plain English that means that in order to have the bout sanctioned for the purpose of calling it an “eliminator” that both fighters will have to fork over a sum of cash for what the WBC calls “a high distinction and honor for both fighters.”

Pacquaio is rated number one and Morales number two as they prepare to meet Saturday.

Why, then, is there any need at all to call this bout anything? If either fighter wins should it not follow very simply that the winner would be dubbed a “mandatory” challenger?

Obviously at the bottom of all of it is the matter of sanctioning fees – the true lifeblood of any of the sanctioning bodies.

But what does it mean to fight an eliminator and win?

Ask Oleg Maskaev. In Nov. 2005 he defeated Sinan Samil Sam in an elimination bout that pitted the top two rated fighters in the division (yes, it is somewhat laughable that Sam was in the top two, but stay with me).

The two men entered the ring with the assurance that the winner was entitled to a world title shot.

Maskaev handily captured a decision and guess what, he was passed over by James Toney who was suddenly, and inexplicably, dubbed “mandatory” for the then-champion Hasim Rahman all the way from his then-number five rating.

Of course Rahman and Toney fought to a draw and Maskaev finally did get his title shot.

As the nutty alphabet sanctioning bodies continue to be guided by raw disregard for the very men who line the pockets of their staffs, there will be more and more disregard for their edicts and their belts.

Perhaps one or more state commissions will curtail the percentage of purses a sanctioning body can extract from fighters and promoters for the right to operate in their state.

Imagine if the Nevada, New Jersey, California, or New York commissions took the lead in denying the sanctioning bodies from creating “International” or regional titles for the sole purpose of confiscating sanctioning fees.

In all likelihood most of the organizations would simply fade away.......if only we could be so fortunate.


Anonymous the cruiserweight (bizzy) said...


More to come...

8:25 PM  
Blogger JE Boxing said...

Just as police try to breakdown organized crime by going after the money --- state commissions should take some of the money out of the sanctioning body (shakedown)business.

8:43 PM  
Anonymous the cruiserweight (bizzy) said...

Excellent point J.E. Here is one for you...(I couldn't believe this one, but yet I could...) Check out the WBA's situation at cruiserweight when you get a chance. They will soon have not one...Not two...But THREE 'world champions'. (In ONE 'organization'!) This is just unbelievable...

11:57 AM  
Blogger JE Boxing said...

Check out the thread on ESB that I'm running on an article entitled "Stop Hating Today's Heavyweights." I don't know the guy who wrote it or is debating me but it is fun.

12:13 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Support independent publishing: buy this book on Lulu. Purchase Professional Boxing tickets from Coast to Coast Tickets. We have your sports needs covered with New York Yankees tickets, Boston Red Sox tickets and premium Bengals tickets. Check out our Black Eyed Peas tickets and Broadway show tickets.

Powered by Blogger

Site Feed
free web counters
ISP Access Providers