Boxing (Olympic)

After a horrid showing at the Olympics, the U.S. boxing program is in need of a total overhaul.

Only one week into the London Games, the once-storied Team USA boxing team has exactly one athlete remaining on the men's side.

Actually, earlier on Friday evening the U.S. believed they were totally done at the Olympics. But Errol Spence won a ruling from the amateur boxing's governing body, and now he gets to advance to the quarterfinals (h/t Ryan Maquinana, nbcolympics.com).

Still, even with Spence's victory in the appeals court, this Olympics is a huge failure for USA boxing.

This is a program that used to trot out all-time greats. Muhammad Ali won gold for the U.S., so did Oscar De La Hoya, hell, even Floyd "Money" Mayweather won a bronze back in 1996.

Now, the U.S. men's team is struggling to even get boxers into the quarterfinals, let alone the medal matches.

In 2008 the men took home one measly bronze medal, and there's a very good possibility that 2012 will be the first Olympic games America will fail to medal in boxing since 1904.

These results reflect very poorly on the athletes, but the issue is deeper than that.  

Its foundation, or really the lack thereof, is the problem.

Unlike many other Olympic sports, there is no push for the boxers to work out at a national training center together. Mostly, the athletes work with their own coaches, and then every four years they arrive to compete for a spot on the team.

It also doesn't help that young boxers must keep their amateur status to compete in the games. This means many talented boxers forgo their eligibility for the Olympics in order to compete professionally and earn a living.  

But the biggest killer of them all is that boxing is no longer a top-tier sport in America. The most talented youths flock to football and basketball, and even MMA has moved ahead of boxing for many kids.

The U.S. needs to find a way to curb all of these things.

Start at the grassroots and get kids interested in boxing again. Establish camps and clinics throughout the country for young talents, and most importantly, bring the potential Olympians together in one place to train.

This is the only way to reestablish America's boxing prowess.

If not, the U.S. will be heading home medal-less for years to come.

Just hours after Team USA appeared to have had their final boxer eliminated from the tournament, the AIBA overturned the ringside judges (h/t FOX Sports), ruling that welterweight Errol Spence should have been awarded four more points. This gave him a 15-13 victory over India's Krishan Vikas, allowing him to stay alive and move on to the quarterfinal round to face Russia's Andrey Zamkovoy. 

The unusual action by amateur boxing's international governing agency took place in the early morning hours, London time, and was, no doubt, in part inspired by what will go down in popular memory as one of the most poorly judged Games of all time. 

This was just the latest in a string of controversial decisions, but it seemed particularly odious. In an echo of the notorious Roy Jones Jr. loss at the 1988 Games in Seoul, even the referee appeared visibly surprised and had to stop himself short from raising Spense's hand after Zamkovoy's name was announced as the winner. 

Amazingly, this was the second fight the AIBA has found it necessary to overturn this week. On Wednesday, they overturned Magomed Abdulhaminov of Azerbaijan's 22-17 victory over Japanese bantamweight Satoshi Shimizu.

Shimizu was credited with no points during a third round in which he knocked down his opponent repeatedly.

As a lifelong boxing fan who came of age during an era when Olympic boxing was extremely prestigious, these games have at times been very tough to watch. The current scoring system is clearly a travesty and will thankfully be scrapped after these Games.

It will not be a moment too soon. The AIBA will emerge from London with a serious PR problem, and overturning a couple of particularly terrible decisions can only be viewed as far too little, way too late.

As Scott Christ of Badlefthook.com has eloquently put it in his own report tonight, "A real step isn't putting Humpty Dumpty back together again. It would be making sure he doesn't keep falling off the ledge all the time." 

In a shocking turn of events, Errol Spence, who was robbed earlier today in a fight—it appeared that he clearly deserved to win—has been reinstated into the Olympic tournament by the AIBA. 

In this e-mail, the AIBA states that the decision is being overturned in the bout because Spence's opponent repeatedly held but had minimal warnings and no point deductions and wasn't penalized for spitting out his mouthpiece. 

Had these fouls been properly officiated, Spence would've won 15-13.

This comes on the heels of one of the most controversial stretches of the Olympics ever, where it seems that decisions are routinely going the wrong way and that the refereeing has been awful.

For Team USA, this is a welcome reprieve after it has been on the short end of the stick numerous times throughout this Olympic tournament. 

So, Spence moves on to the quarterfinals, and with a victory, he will advance to the medal rounds. He's a nice kid and a terrific fighter, and he deserves the shot after not getting a fair shake initially.

Follow me on Twitter: @RalphLongo 

Now that all the U.S. boxers have been eliminated from the Olympic Games, it's official: the United States has officially had the worst showing that it's ever had at the Olympics. This follows a general trend of weak U.S. boxing over the past few games, as we haven't had a gold-medal winner since Andre Ward in 2004.

So, why did our Olympians fail?

Well, for starters, a lot of our fighters just don't have the right style necessary to thrive in Olympic competition. That's not to say they aren't good fighters though, as many will undoubtedly be great pros, like Jose Ramirez and Joseph Diaz, who have awesome pro styles.

But to be successful in the Olympics, you need to land singular punches that clearly land, as glancing blows don't count, the strength of the blows are irrelevant, and body punches are rarely registered by the judges.

A lot of the Americans like to throw combinations to the head and body, so while they do land, many of the blows aren't counted. If you throw a five-punch combination, and land two punches to the body and one to the head, there's a good chance you'll only get one point, as that's all the judges will have time to register.

This happened frequently, and was the reason why Americans seemed to be robbed a good amount of the time. It appeared that they won the fight if it was being scored by rounds, but when it comes to points our fighters kept coming up short. 

What really hurts our boxers as well is the lack of coaching talent for the Amateur team. We need to start bringing in coaches from other countries, like Cuba, Puerto Rico or the U.K. These guys have much more experience when it comes to Amateur boxing, and would surely help our program grow and improve. 

At the end of the day, many of the Olympians on the U.S. squad will go on to be great professionals, and it wouldn't be a surprise if three or more went on to win World Championships at the pro level. You can't discount them just because they couldn't win at the Olympics where corruption is rampant, and you wear headgear and big gloves, and only fight three rounds. 

Just to put in perspective how flawed the Amateur system is, think about all the times where Compu-Box has one fighter landing more punches, despite that fighter clearly losing the fight. It happens all the time. Olympic boxing needs to remedy itself and come up with a better system.

And our Amateur program needs to change its ways as well. 

Follow Me On Twitter: @RalphLongo

Here we go again. Another Olympics, another round of boxing judging controversies.

Amateur Boxing is one of the purest Olympic sports. It hasn’t changed much from Ancient Greece; at least, the core principles haven’t. It is still two men (or women) pitting their wits against each other. It’s a test of physical courage and mental fortitude, as well as technique and raw strength. Fighters put their bodies on the line and summon up reserves of courage in the certain knowledge they will be hit.

Unfortunately judges, referees and administrators often haven’t lived up to the standards of honor and bravery set by the protagonists in the ring.

The daylight robbery of Roy Jones Jr in the 1988 Olympics in Seoul, South Korea always springs to mind. The awarding of the gold medal to the local Korean was a grave crime against the sport.

London, unfortunately, has already seen its share of terrible judging, bordering on the ridiculous.

The bantam weight (round of 16) bout between Japan’s Satoshi Shimizu and Magomed Abdulhamidov (Azerbaijan) has caused the most controversy. Shimizu, who was trailing by seven points, blitzed the Azeri in the third round, forcing him onto the canvas SIX times.

AIBA rules state that after three knockdowns the referee should have stopped the fight and awarded the fight to Shimizu. Instead, he ruled most of the knockdowns as slips and only deducted two points for holding. Abdulhamidov was initially awarded the fight.

On appeal by the Shimizu, AIBA over turned the decision and ruled that the fight should have been a RSC (referee stopped contest) in favour of the Japanese boxer.

Unfortunately, that hasn’t been the only grievous mistake made by a referee or a judge in London. Iranian heavy weight Ali Mazaheri was disqualified for persistent holding in the second round of his bout against Cuba’s Jose Larduet Gomez.

Mazaheri was leading when the referee gave him three public warnings in quick succession, thereby giving him an automatic disqualification. The German referee has been suspended for issuing the warnings too quickly, but the Iranian is on his way home.

Then there has been some blatantly unfair judging. Lennox Lewis has expressed his "concern" at judging standards. The talented America bantamweight Joseph Diaz Junior lost out to the Cuban Lazaro Alvaro, even though many pundits felt Diaz won this fight.

There have also been some murmurings about hometown decisions favouring the British. Hometown decisions are the curse of both amateur and professional boxers.

Ireland’s Joe Ward lost out in a qualifying tournament in Turkey to his Turkish opponent. Ward appeared to easily win the fight, but didn’t get the decision. He is the highest-ranked boxer in the world not at the games.

British Super heavyweight Anthony Joshua won a nail biter against the classy, quick Cuban Erislandy Savon 17-16. Again, Savon appeared to have dominated the fight, but Joshua got the nod.

However, perhaps the most blatant example of questionable judging came in the last 16 middleweight bout between Britain’s Anthony Ogogo and the World’s No. 1 Ukrainian, Evhen Kytrov.

Khytrov was a point down going into the last round, even though he appeared to totally dominate Ogogo, raining down blow after blow.  Ogogo did land a few counter punches, but he was visibly tired. At the end, Ogogo was clinging desperately on the ropes. It actually looked like the referee might stop the bout at one stage.

The bout ended in a draw and went to a countback. Though it came back level, Ogogo was given the nod by the judges. The Ukrainians are considering appealing to the court of Arbitration. Olympic Silver Medallist Kenneth Egan felt that Khytrov had won by three or four points. Certainly on countback one would have thought the Ukrainian would be definitely ahead.

That there is a long history of questionable judging and poor refereeing in amateur boxing, as well as accusations of outright corruption, is undeniable. There were unproven allegations that Azerbaijan was offered two gold medals in exchange for a loan to the AIBA. This is completely unproven and has been hotly denied.

To be fair, it is hard to see punches landing cleanly at normal speed with the naked eye. It is understandable that judges could be swayed by an excited crowd cheering every near hit or wayward punch.

Often the only person who knows whether a clean punch has landed in real time is the guy on the receiving end. Still, judging controversies don’t arise with the same regularity in Gymnastics.

These latest episodes only serve to cast a further shadow on such a wonderful sport, practiced at its best by courageous athletes that deserve so much more.

On Wednesday, August 1, United States bantamweight Joseph Diaz Jr. saw his Olympic aspirations end in the second round of competition, as he dropped a 21-15 decision to defending world champion and gold-medal favorite Lazaro Alvarez of Cuba.

It was an impressive effort in defeat for the 19-year-old from El Monte, Calif., one that will ensure his eventual professional debut will be highly anticipated by boxing writers and fans. 

It was a rematch of their round of 16 bout at last year's world championship, won by Alvarez 19-10.

This time around Diaz's improved confidence and experience were evident, as he gave the Cuban a tough, competitive fight from bell to bell. In a tournament during which questionable judging has now become a theme, many viewers were left feeling that the fight was much closer than the final score would indicate.

Both men started fast at the opening bell, determined to give everything they had. For most of the round Alvarez employed his exceptional reach to control distance and score, but Diaz mounted a tough pressure attack and displayed strong defensive skills inside close range. At the end of one, Alvarez led 7-6.

The second round was frankly a mystery to me. Diaz launched an aggressive, valiant attack, and to my eyes seemed to score on the Cuban at least as evenly as he did in the first. But the judges somehow saw it as 7-4 for the Cuban, putting him up 14-10 going into the final frame. 

The final round provided another full three minutes of action, with the world champion again edging the upstart American teenager, this time by a 7-5 count.

While the fight truly did seem closer than the final score, a decision for the Cuban still seemed just.

If this had been scored on professional criteria, however, a strong argument could have been made for a Diaz shutout. He pushed the action and landed the much more significant punches in all three rounds.

The southpaw has an intelligent but aggressive pressure style that will translate very well to the pro game. He showed signs of a body attack that, while not always useful under the amateur scoring system, will pay valuable dividends when it comes time to break down professional opponents in the future. 

Until a generation ago, Olympic success was a fast track to professional acclaim. Under the current scoring system, though, it is no longer seen as the same kind of gold standard, and for good reason. The kind of style and strategy that wins amateur fights is likely to be completely ineffectual against a rugged, heavy-handed pro. 

What is still potentially invaluable is the opportunity to be showcased on what remains a very prominent international stage. Joseph Diaz Jr. will go home this month without an Olympic medal. But he will return to a nation of boxing fans very excited to see him take his next step. 

As the 2012 London Games is underway, Olympic boxing may grab more attention than prizefighting in the coming weeks.

China, the biggest winner at the previous Olympic boxing tournament, is a hot favorite to shine in the brightest spotlight.

On a hot afternoon four years ago in August, at the Beijing Workers' Gymnasium, China closed its 51-gold solo Olympic show with two golds, one silver and one bronze medal in the square ring, emerging as the new king in the amateur boxing world.

The Asian giant smashed the triopoly of Cuba, Russia and the United States, each of whom had ruled the tally table in boxing at every Olympics since 1942.

However, only two decades ago, during the 1992 Olympics in Barcelona, competitors were delighted to face off against Chinese boxers. The best that the Chinese coaches hoped for was that each of their fighters might stay on his feet a bit longer than the one before him.

In the following decade, no Chinese boxers had ever stood on an Olympic podium.

By the close of the 2008 Summer Games, China had ruled the roost in boxing gold medal tally.

This sports documentary series is conceived to reveal the hidden secrets behind China's pugilistic success and uncover the untold stories of the noble art in the exotic ancient land.

The first episode — The Evolution will take you on a journey from the age-old Shang Dynasty to the epic battlefield of China's Anti-Japanese War.

The Evolution

China has a centuries-old boxing history, yet it was rather different from boxing today.

The history of China's boxing dates back 3,700 years, when China was in the Late Shang Dynasty, and the sport was one of the subjects for military training conducted by aristocrats.

By the Han Dynasty (206 BC - AD 220), boxing became the mandatory subject for soldiers.

Unlike boxing of the early-times in western countries which was a mixture of both the boxing and wrestling, boxing in China was apparently distinct from wrestling as early as 3.7 thousand years ago.

The book, The Combat Arts of Two Hands, which was written exclusively for boxing, appeared around 2,000 years ago.

Unfortunately, this book was not handed down from generation to generation.

Moreover, wearing boxing gloves and protection started in China approximately 700 years ago.

The above shows that China has a long boxing tradition.

Modern day boxing in China, which was initially called "western boxing", was first introduced in the late 1920s in the port city of Shanghai, along with a book, titled The Technique of Western Boxing, which was then translated into Chinese.

In the '30s, some sports academies put boxing classes in their major curriculum and fostered a number of Chinese boxing talents.

At this stage, the sport of boxing was mainly carried out in the city's western rental area, where the majority of players were western sailors, soldiers and merchants, only a handful of Chinese took part.

Before the Anti-Japanese War, boxing became prevalent in some port cities of China when the middle schools and colleges founded by Christian and the Catholic Church listed boxing as one of the major subjects in their physical education classes.

In the 1936 Berlin Olympics, China assigned 69 participants, two of which participated in the boxing competitions. However, they were all eliminated in the qualifying matches.

By the start of the Japanese invasion, western professional boxers began to withdraw from China, and the number of local fighters grew.

The professional bouts at the time were limited to four, six, eight or ten rounds, at maximum, which was for the championship fight.

In the early 1940s, boxing agents began to show up.

It was reported that one local fighter received a maximum premium of 4,000 yuan (approximately $570 US ) for a single bout.

After the liberation war, various forms of boxing matches were held in such big cities as Beijing, Shanghai and Tianjin.

Probably one of the grandest boxing pageants in Chinese history — 20-city boxing championship with the total number of competitors of 142 was staged in Beijing in 1958. 

Judging from the case in this period, the number of athletes taking part in assorted boxing matches was growing, and the host region of boxing was becoming larger and larger.

Although there were no international Chinese boxing champions up until the '60s, the national tournaments held in this period laid the foundation in China for future development of the sport.

In 1959, the first National Games — which was the biggest domestic sports event in China — was held, and the Committee once listed boxing in the National Games' lineup.

However, due to the Great Leap Forward of this sport and its violent nature, a number of incidents concerning serious physical injuries of participant occurred. After several incidents, the committee felt that it was not the right time to develop boxing in such a large scale. Consequently, they temporally removed boxing from the National Games.

In March of the same year, boxing was outlawed by the government as a result of several unannounced reasons.

As Hong Fan, a scholar who specializes in China's athletic history, puts it, "People believed that boxing was very brutal, very ruthless. So it was banned."

Two decades later, boxing was revived in China. The philosophy of the "Ping Pong Diplomacy" triggered the restoration of the fight game.

In December 1979, the former undisputed heavyweight champion Muhammad Ali paid a visit to China at the invitation of Chinese Chairman Xiaoping Deng. The little giant man hugged the boxing titan. They sat, and the word that boxing could also be the factor to push for the understanding and friendship between the Chinese and the Americans went out. 

Right after that, boxing began to regain its status and exhibition matches were carried out.

The year 1986 and 1987 are two significant years for Chinese western boxing.

In March 1986, boxing officially returned to validity. The next year in April, the China Boxing Association was officially founded. In May, the first national boxing championships was held and in June, the China Boxing Association was officially admitted into the International Amateur Boxing Association as the 159th member.

From then on, China began to appear on the international boxing stage.

Another two decades has passed and China has experienced even more great changes in the sport of boxing.

The hidden Eastern Dragon finished the evolution and is now set to soar into the heaven!

* * *

Zhenyu Li, a boxing historian and contributing columnist for some of the world's leading boxing publications, authors the "Beyond Gold" column for People's Daily Online in China.

Even though Japanese boxer Satoshi Shimizu knocked down his opponent, Magomed Abdulhamidov of Azerbaijan, six times in the final round, the judges still awarded the round and the win to Abdulhamidov.

But the decision was overturned by the AIBA, who awarded Shimizu with the win (per NBCOlympics.com).

Shimizu entered the final round trailing Abdulhamidov by seven points in their Round of 16 bantamweight bout, but Shimizu mounted a great comeback as Abdulhamidov did everything he could to hold onto the large lead he had without much offense.

The six knockdowns that Abdulhamidov suffered should have halted the bout—after three standing eight-counts, a bout should be stopped, per AIBA rules. Instead, in a round clearly dominated by Shimizu, judges decided it was a 10-10 round, giving Abdulhamidov the undeserving win.

Luckily for Shimizu, the AIBA reviewed the bout after his camp protested the decision and clearly saw what the entire world watching the bout saw; the fight should have been stopped after the third-of-six knockdowns.

The AIBA released a statement addressing the bout and said (per The Independent):

The boxer from Azerbaijan fell down six times during the third round. According to our rules, the referee should have counted at least three times. In this case, following the AIBA technical & competition rules, the decision should have been RSC (referee stop contest);

- Therefore the protest lodged by the Japanese corner is accepted and the result of this bout overturned.

It is great that justice was ultimately served in the end here, but the fact that such a shady decision occurred makes me wonder if any other bouts were affected by rotten judging. 

The controversy is the latest scandal to rock the 2012 Olympic Games; the Chinese women's badminton members were accused of throwing matches (per SI.com), a Chinese swimmer is involved in a doping scandal (per nytimes.com) and an Iranian boxer is calling foul after he was disqualified in a match that he was leading in the scorecards.

Controversies are nothing new to the Olympic Games and they will continue to rear their ugly heads in the future. At least in this case, justice was served for Shimizu, allowing his Olympic journey to continue.

As the world will be introduced to women’s boxing at the 2012 Summer Olympics, viewers will also feast their eyes on Marlen Esparza.

The U.S. flyweight boxer and Cover Girl model has been turning heads as the first Olympic women's boxing tournament nears. This 23-year-old is not just doing it in the boxing ring, though. Her fighting chops have turned the Pasadena, Tx. product into an influential figure leading up to the Games.

She is the first Hispanic Olympian to represent Cover Girl, has already been featured in Vogue Magazine, and has inked commercials with Olympic sponsors Coca-Cola and McDonalds, among others.

Seems like this young fighters stock is rising faster than a haymaker. Esparza is the best hope for American boxing gold in inaugural Olympic competition.

Esparza's resume features a glut of dazzling qualifications, boasting a 67-2 record, a 97 percent winning percentage, and the distinction as number one in her weight class for seven years.

In comparison, Mike Tyson, Floyd Mayweather Jr., and Cassius Clay (Muhammad Ali) all had more blemishes on their record at 23 than Esparza. Her confidence eschews from her past success and it shows in the ring.

You can imagine how glossy her trophy room looks. A six-time national champion on different levels, a world championship bronze medalist and Pan American Games gold-medal winner from 2008 stand out.

The young fighter has used her winning ways in boxing and converted them to success in the classroom as well; she was class president and finished in the top two percent of her graduating class in high school.

The road to the Olympics wasn’t as easy as her record would indicate. At only 23, she had to grow up fast in order to earn a berth to the first women’s Olympic boxing tournament

For starters, Esparza had to gain six pounds in order to qualify for the lightest Olympic boxing weight limit. In addition, she had to abandon her traditional boxing style to adapt to international fighting, which relies on quickness and odd punching angles rather than clean shots and knockout blows. She ran three to four miles every day and never takes a sip of alcohol.

Through the guidance of her father David and trainer Rudy Silva, Esparza has ascended the worldwide ranks at ninth in the world. In March, she qualified for the Olympics at the U.S. Boxing trials, earning herself a first-round bye. As a result, she will only need to win one fight to earn a medal.

Former Olympic boxer and Houston native Maurice "Termite' Watkins, who lives nearby where Esparza trains and has become her staunch supporter and mentor, had this to say of the flyweight boxer (from Vogue Magazine):

“I’ve never seen anyone work harder than Marlen,” Watkins says. “I was an amateur with some of the best amateurs in history, and I was a pro with some of the best pros in history—Leonard, Ali, Frazier, Foreman. I put her in that caliber of fighter. She is already going to go down in history as one of the great amateurs. And in the last six months I’ve seen her reach another level. She and Rudy are bringing it all together now. She’s unreal.”

Similar to Esparza, women’s boxing had an extended journey to Olympic recognition at this year’s games. In 2008, the sport was up for inclusion, but the overall sentiment was that women getting hit in the face was too barbaric for the Olympic aesthetic.

Four years later, the sport gained steam worldwide, especially abroad in the United Kingdom. The sport was awarded Olympic competition for the first time and will have the world's outright attention in mere hours.

The boxing match that it seems Esparza has been training all her life for comes just a few days later on August 5^th. Even if she falls short, not all will be forgone. She has already earned the distinction of women’s boxing pioneer.

If she can capitalize on gold, though, the young fighter can already claim her place in American boxing lore. This is the biggest moment for a women's sport in America as any.

For a girl from Pasadena, Texas who just wanted to box, that’s worth all the hits.

As pundits and fans continuously recycle the argument that boxing is a dying sport, the U.S. amateur boxing program has become an easy target and scapegoat for the slowly crumbling the foundations of American prizefighting.

Boxing fans are certainly nostalgic types, and longing for the glory days of the 1976 or 1984 Olympic boxing teams has become more prominent in light of recent international failures.

While it would indeed be wonderful for Americans if the current U.S. boxing team (or any future team) could recapture the glory and success of the young fighters from ’76 or ’84, the reality is that this simply isn’t realistic. Amateur boxing has changed drastically, and expectations must be altered.

This is obviously a difficult pill to swallow, especially for a country that has historically dominated amateur boxing the way the U.S. has. However, while it is no longer realistic to expect the U.S. to win, say, nine gold medals, like they did in ’84—or even replicate the five gold medals from ’76—year-in and year-out, it is reasonable to expect the team to perform better.

At the 2012 Olympics in London, the U.S. has thus far had mixed results after the Round of 32. They are as follows:

Winners

• Joseph Diaz (bantamweight): 19-9 vs. Ischenko (Ukraine)
• Jose Ramirez (lightweight): 21-10 vs. Azzedine (France)
• Errol Spence (Welterweight): 16-10 vs. Carvalho (Brazil)
• Terrell Gausha (middleweight): RSC 3 (13-12) vs. Hakobyan (Armenia)

Losers

• Jamel Herring (light welterweight): 9-19 vs. Yeleussinov (Ukraine)
• Marcus Browne (light heavyweight): 11-13 vs. Hooper (Australia)

The U.S. will especially be disappointed with Browne’s early exit after the young light heavyweight dropped a razor-close decision. Still, having advanced four boxers thus far, the Americans have reason for hope.

Furthermore, flyweight Rau’shee Warren received a first-round bye, and heavyweight Michael Hunter and super heavyweight Dominic Breazeale will start their Olympic run in the Round of 16.

Much will be decided and determined over the next several days. As the fate of the 2012 U.S. boxing team still hangs in the balance, one must ask: What has happened to U.S. boxing?

A Disconnect Between Amateur and Professional Boxing

The Olympic preview issue of The Ring cites Roy Jones Jr.’s shocking defeat to Park Si-Hun in 1988 as the reason amateur boxing shifted to a computer-based scoring system for the 1992 Olympics in Barcelona.

The 20-year failed experiment with computerized scoring will mercifully come to an end at the 2016 Games in Rio de Janeiro, and perhaps no single element has contributed more to the U.S. boxing team’s failure than the flawed amateur scoring system.

Of course, the system isn’t actually computerized. The flawed human element remains, but now the judges can hide behind their keypads. It is not uncommon to see one fighter get no credit for clear scoring blows while another accumulates points for punches that don’t land.

Furthermore, of the five judges scoring a bout, points are tabulated by eliminating the scores from judges who credit a fighter with the least and most points for a given round, and a final score for a round is attained by averaging out the middle three scores.

Confused? Despite all this addition, little actually adds up.

This system encourages a specific kind of fighting that is counter to a boxer groomed with a professional style—i.e. one who commits to the body and tries to establish a solid base to throw power punches. In the Olympic preview issue of The Ring, Teddy Atlas sums up the flawed scoring system as only he can:

“It [Olympic boxing] began to look like fencing with boxing gloves on. It just mattered if you touched the guy. Power didn’t count. Body punches didn’t count. You couldn’t throw combinations because the punches landed too fast to hit the buttons so you got no points.”

Americans are taught to throw power punches in combinations and to go to the body, two of the elements Atlas specifically says do not count for anything of substance in amateur boxing. If a clearly landed jab counts just as much as a crisp left hook, there is no incentive for a boxer to actually fight.

Instead, Olympic and amateur boxing becomes an exercise in scoring single shots from the outside and then running and holding once a lead is established. 

This is the type of system that can be circumvented and adapted to—fighters can be trained and manufactured to score blows and dance in an amateur style. For better or worse, the U.S. has not adapted to this change.

1988

As mentioned above, the rule changes and structural reform in amateur boxing came as a result of Roy Jones Jr. controversially losing to a South Korean in the 1988 Olympics in Seoul.

The Seoul Olympics have, in many ways, become emblematic of the shifting fortunes and downward spiral of U.S.A. Boxing’s amateur system. 1988 was by all accounts an accomplished American team, perhaps even the last truly deep and quality squad the United States has fielded.

The team won eight medals (three gold, three silver, two bronze) and included Hall of Famer Michael Carbajal, future Hall of Famer and pound-for-pound great Jones, bantamweight titlist Kennedy McKinney and heavyweight champion Riddick Bowe, who happens to be the last quality American heavyweight to emerge from the Olympic Games. 

Since Seoul, there have only been three American gold medalists in a span of four Olympics: Oscar De La Hoya in 1992, David Reid in 1996 and Andre Ward in 2004. To further compound this disappointment, in 2008 the U.S. fielded its least successful boxing team in Olympic history; only super heavyweight Deontay Wilder won a medal, and it was a bronze.

The Olympics were once seen as the ultimate stepping-stone for a boxer to achieve rapid professional success and notoriety. After the 1988 Olympics, the new scoring system and tarnished integrity of Olympic boxing sullied the glamour once associated with entering the professional ranks with gold-medal pedigree.

As of 1992, it seemed that fighters willing to hang tough and vie for an Olympic spot were training for a tournament that negated every tool and skill needed to be a successful professional boxer. 

This sense of distrust in amateur boxing is further explained by a less publicized controversy at the 1988 Olympics. The aforementioned Carbajal also seemed to be the victim of a corrupt decision when, according to The Ring, Vladimir Gordienko, a member of Olympic boxing’s 1988 executive committee, had a heated argument with American officials and stated, “You will lose 5-0 to the Bulgarian.” Naturally, Carbajal lost 0-5 to Ivailo Marinov of Bulgaria.

While the 1988 U.S. Olympic boxing team was outstanding, these instances of distrust, fraud and manipulation have been, through no fault of their own, their lasting legacy.

The Rise of Other Nations

At London 2012, Cuba, Ukraine and Great Britain, among others, have fielded teams with more concrete medal hopes than the United States. Cuba and Ukraine especially are at the top of the amateur boxing heap, and the 2011 World Championships were a telling litmus test, as Ukraine captured five medals (four gold, one silver) while Cuba tallied three (two gold and one silver).

In terms of all-time medal counts, the United States’ 109 (including 48 gold) are well ahead of Cuba’s 63. Of course, this discrepancy does not do justice to the power shift in amateur boxing that has prominently occurred over the last 20 years.

At the 2008 Olympics in Beijing, Cuba won eight medals, followed by China’s haul of four. Russia, Italy and Great Britain were all tied at three total medals, and the way top honors were spread out suggests that other countries are becoming more competitive.

Ukraine, which enters London 2012 as one of the strongest teams, only won two medals in 2008, but their gold medalist, Vasyl Lomachenko, won the Val Barker Trophy as the tournament’s most outstanding boxer.

The U.S. has only won a combined seven medals in the past three Olympics, and four of those came at the Sydney Games in 2000. As stated earlier, it is unrealistic to expect current and future U.S. teams to match the success of the 1976 or 1984 squads, but the fact remains that especially over the past two Olympics, the U.S. has not even been contending for more than a couple of medals.

While an average of three medals seems to be respectable in terms of a quality team performance given the current landscape of amateur boxing, the U.S. should expect to have most, if not all, of their fighters make deep tournament runs.

One and Done 

When watching the Olympics, one thing that stands out is how many fighters compete into at least their mid-20s. While the U.S. always fields an undeniably talented team, most of the squad’s potential is generally viewed in terms of possible professional success.

This year’s U.S. team actually features more boxers in their early to mid-20s than seems the norm, but the deep-seeded problem lies in retaining boxers for multiple Olympics. Whether it’s by choice or not, successful Olympic boxing nations are the ones able to retain and continue to develop their athletes by having fighters compete in multiple World Championships and Olympic Games.

The U.S. squad is often littered with 19- and 20-year-olds, which is fine and a credit to their respective skills, but it also represents a wasted opportunity.

Take someone like current team member Joseph Diaz, a 19-year-old who won his first round bout impressively by a score of 19-9 (over a Ukrainian!). Diaz has a steep uphill battle to win a medal—his next bout is against Cuban sensation Lazaro Alvarez—and he’ll likely turn professional after the Olympics. If the U.S. team was able to bring someone like Diaz back in 2016, he would, as a 23-year-old, be that much more experienced with a greater chance to medal.

While it makes sense for young boxers to turn professional for both the glory and financial compensation, this reality does nothing to help the U.S. amateur boxing system. Perhaps with the switch back to pro-style scoring in 2016 and organizations like the World Series of Boxing (WSB) that allow fighters to make some money while retaining their Olympic eligibility, some U.S. boxers will elect to remain amateurs.

Then, perhaps, U.S. boxing will return to form and resume spoiling their fans rotten. That, or Americans will just have to curb their expectations.