10/30/2024
The ongoing dispute between the WBA and BoxRec is escalating and the Association of Boxing Commissions (ABC) has decided to play referee.
The two essential entities, the World Boxing Association (WBA) and BoxRec, a leading record-keeping website for boxing, have been embroiled in a months-long dispute. This escalating conflict prompted the Association of Boxing Commissions (ABC) to step in as a mediator.
On October 29, during the World Boxing Organization (WBO) Convention in Puerto Rico, Pat English, legal counsel for the ABC, addressed BoxRec’s owner, John Sheppard, stating bluntly, “You could consider this an ABC inquiry.” This pointed exchange highlighted growing tensions around the recent removal of the WBA’s records from the public portion of BoxRec’s website—a move rooted in a deeper conflict between the organizations.
The controversy began on August 9, when Brunch Boxing reported that the WBA had been removed from BoxRec’s public listings. This unprecedented decision came in response to actions by the WBA, which allegedly scraped fight data, layout, and fighter photos from BoxRec’s website in an attempt to launch a rival record-keeping entity. The WBA, boxing’s oldest recognized sanctioning body, had been listed on BoxRec since the website became the sport’s official record-keeper in 2016. However, the WBA’s sudden push to replace BoxRec with a lesser-known, lower quality alternative, Fight Fax, sparked uproar within the boxing community.
BoxRec’s decision to remove the WBA records reflects its frustration over what it sees as a unilateral action by the WBA to withdraw from their relationship. During the WBA Asia Convention in Vietnam, the WBA announced its decision to reestablish Fight Fax, which had largely been inactive since 2011. Hints of the WBA’s plan surfaced earlier in 2024 when Fight Fax quietly relaunched its social media accounts in January and later its website in April. Coincidentally, on the same day Fight Fax’s website went live, the WBA announced a partnership with Turki Alalshikh, a powerful Saudi sports promoter and advisor to the Saudi Royal Court. This move raised eyebrows across the boxing world, sparking concerns about the WBA’s motivations and future role in the sport’s record-keeping.
Upon its return, Fight Fax’s website struck many as a near replica of BoxRec’s, leading to allegations that Fight Fax had copied data, including photos of lesser-known fighters, directly from BoxRec. These accusations intensified scrutiny of the WBA’s involvement, raising questions around intellectual property, data legitimacy, and the WBA’s transparency. To compound matters, Brunch Boxing reported in June 2024 that the Saudi-backed Public Investment Fund (PIF) was interested in a potential buyout of BoxRec, possibly to reorganize the sport. However, this possibility seemed less likely when Alalshikh, acting through the WBA, pursued an approach to replace BoxRec entirely.
This proposed overhaul to boxing’s record-keeping landscape has troubled many within the sport, especially given BoxRec’s longstanding commitment to independence. Since becoming the official record-keeper in 2016, BoxRec has operated without alignment with any of boxing’s four major sanctioning bodies, including the WBA. In addition, BoxRec’s partnership with the ABC, the U.S. governing body for boxing, has solidified its position as an unbiased and trustworthy source of boxing records.
At the WBO Convention, BoxRec’s John Sheppard addressed the dispute for the first time publicly. Sheppard clarified BoxRec’s position, saying, “We want to have good relationships with everybody, but if you don’t want to work with us, we can’t force you to work with us.” He continued, “The WBA has decided to go their own route. That’s their choice. We can’t force them to cooperate with us.”
Sheppard acknowledged the challenges posed by the WBA’s actions, adding that BoxRec’s responsibility is to maintain records for commissions with which it holds contracts. He emphasized that BoxRec has not erased the WBA’s records but has simply removed their titles from public listings on the site. “We haven’t deleted anything. The information is still there for the ABC. They can all see it,” Sheppard noted, underscoring that BoxRec remains transparent with its contracted entities.
One of the unintended consequences of BoxRec’s move is the erasure—at least publicly—of the WBA championships won by the fighters themselves. Former four-weight world champion Nonito Donaire and his wife, Rachel, have been at the forefront of the discussion, championing the fighters’ cause. Both expressed dismay that their children and future grandchildren might not readily have access to the information that Nonito was a WBA champion. In their estimation, the fighters are collateral damage in this dispute.
ABC counsel Pat English responded by voicing concern for fighters caught in the dispute. English pointed out that WBA titleholders should not be penalized for decisions beyond their control. “It should not be a situation where retroactively their titles are no longer listed on BoxRec,” he said, challenging Sheppard’s stance and questioning why fighters with legitimate accomplishments should suffer due to the WBA’s actions. The exchanges between English and Sheppard underscored the complexity of the issue, especially as it relates to fighters’ legacies.
This is not the first time the WBA has faced scrutiny from the ABC. In August 2021, ABC president Mike Mazzulli sent a letter to WBA president Gilberto Mendoza, addressing serious concerns about the WBA’s practices. The dispute arose following a controversial scoring decision in an interim title fight between Gabriel Maestre and Mykal Fox. The decision in favor of Maestre was widely condemned, particularly after it was revealed that one of the judges, Gloria Martinez Rizzo, had a history of racist social media posts. Mazzulli’s letter to Mendoza demanded explanations for the WBA’s proliferation of titles and its appointment of officials like Rizzo, urging the WBA to be more transparent and ethical in its operations.
Mazzulli warned that if the WBA failed to address these issues, the ABC might recommend not honoring WBA titles within the U.S., effectively ending the WBA’s ability to generate revenue through U.S. sanction fees. While the WBA initially promised reforms, including a reduction in titles, these commitments were ultimately left unfulfilled, with Rizzo eventually returning to officiating. This history of unfulfilled promises by the WBA has left some questioning why the ABC’s current inquiry seems to focus on BoxRec rather than directly addressing the WBA’s conduct.
For now, BoxRec and the WBA remain at an impasse. Sheppard’s final words at the convention summarized the tension: “We’re just a website. We haven’t erased the WBA. The WBA still exists. They’ll carry on without us and we’ll carry on without them.” With both the WBA and BoxRec holding firm, the boxing world is left to wait and see how the ABC’s inquiry will impact the sport’s future. Whether this dispute leads to a reshaping of boxing’s record-keeping or simply adds to the sport’s long history of controversies, the outcome will likely influence the future of boxing’s integrity, transparency, and historical preservation.
The WBA’s actions and BoxRec’s response have far-reaching implications for boxing. Should the WBA’s relationship with BoxRec remain severed, the sport’s historical record-keeping could face fragmentation. Moreover, if the ABC continues its inquiry into BoxRec, it could set a precedent for sanctioning bodies influencing how historical records are maintained, potentially impacting the accuracy and independence of the sport’s archives.
Subscribe to the Brunch Boxing website, Twitter and Podcast for more updates and in-depth coverage of the world of boxing in and out of the ring.
Brunch Boxing Support Links:
The ABC should focus on why the WBA have begun sanctioning 'interim' title fights again. And did they ever complete that proposed HQ relocation to Houston or was that just more bluster in an attempt to appease US authorities?