Post by TD on Aug 20, 2007 15:51:40 GMT -5
Bernie supports women's boxing while dissing a woman boxer???
" Could the Jeri Sitzes imbroglio been handled better, by the NABF, by the various promoters, by the involved management personnel, even by the fighters? Absolutely! Everyone was operating within their own sphere of self-interest, which is, today, what passes for the American way. As complications arose and multiplied, the situation got uglier until, finally, instead of a very good bout between two good fighters, Jeri Sitzes and Melissa Hernandez, boxing fans were figuratively dragged through the cancellation of another good match-up and sat through a six round bout between Sitzes and a boxer who had not been in the ring in three and a half years, with predictable results. Who was at fault? Not the person who had the floor, at any given moment, extolling his or her side of the story. Who was at fault? Nobody! Everybody! There was not a white hat in the group. The NABF lost a champion and didn't crown a replacement. Jeri Sitzes had a title vacated and didn't add to her highlight reel with her win on ESPN. But, the real losers were the fans of the sport of Women's boxing since all they got was another "one good fighter" bout on television, when what was originally scheduled was a rare "two good fighters" bout. "
Ada Velez was and is a great fighter. Jerri Sitzes continues to be a great fighter. So why try to deminish their recent fight? To support Jill Diamond?
Camon Bernie, think. One minute you say you want everybody in the ring who is great to fight, then, when two of them do, you deminish that fight. How does a writer maintain credibility when he write things like that...?
And Super K's point RE: the every 6 month manditory required by the NABF should be looked at much closer.
Predetory promoters, knowing Super K has to defend to keep her title every 6 months, can throw "dog food" purses at her, and she would have to take them to keep the title.
The sanctioning body should insure that their title bouts can't be had for peanuts. That would be fair clause to place against a 6 month manditory. IMO.
Somebody who puts up decent title purses, gets decent title fights. DUH?!?!?! Sorta like in men's boxing. Make any sense Bernie?
Camon, Bernie, get it straight!!!!
TD
" Could the Jeri Sitzes imbroglio been handled better, by the NABF, by the various promoters, by the involved management personnel, even by the fighters? Absolutely! Everyone was operating within their own sphere of self-interest, which is, today, what passes for the American way. As complications arose and multiplied, the situation got uglier until, finally, instead of a very good bout between two good fighters, Jeri Sitzes and Melissa Hernandez, boxing fans were figuratively dragged through the cancellation of another good match-up and sat through a six round bout between Sitzes and a boxer who had not been in the ring in three and a half years, with predictable results. Who was at fault? Not the person who had the floor, at any given moment, extolling his or her side of the story. Who was at fault? Nobody! Everybody! There was not a white hat in the group. The NABF lost a champion and didn't crown a replacement. Jeri Sitzes had a title vacated and didn't add to her highlight reel with her win on ESPN. But, the real losers were the fans of the sport of Women's boxing since all they got was another "one good fighter" bout on television, when what was originally scheduled was a rare "two good fighters" bout. "
Ada Velez was and is a great fighter. Jerri Sitzes continues to be a great fighter. So why try to deminish their recent fight? To support Jill Diamond?
Camon Bernie, think. One minute you say you want everybody in the ring who is great to fight, then, when two of them do, you deminish that fight. How does a writer maintain credibility when he write things like that...?
And Super K's point RE: the every 6 month manditory required by the NABF should be looked at much closer.
Predetory promoters, knowing Super K has to defend to keep her title every 6 months, can throw "dog food" purses at her, and she would have to take them to keep the title.
The sanctioning body should insure that their title bouts can't be had for peanuts. That would be fair clause to place against a 6 month manditory. IMO.
Somebody who puts up decent title purses, gets decent title fights. DUH?!?!?! Sorta like in men's boxing. Make any sense Bernie?
Camon, Bernie, get it straight!!!!
TD
