THE BOXING TRUTH: Will “The Real Deal”

In this edition of The Boxing Truth Beau Denison examines the controversy surrounding the WBA Heavyweight championship fight between Nickoli Valuev and Evander Holyfield and the protest that followed.



It is just one of those things that seems to go together, boxing and controversy. In the sport of boxing the year 2008 ended with a bitter controversy and hotly disputed decision in the Nickoli Valuev-Evander Holyfield WBA Heavyweight title fight.



This fight featured intriguing story lines leading in. Would the 46-year-old boxing legend Holyfield be able to contend with a 7ft. 320lb giant in the champion Valuev? If Holyfield were able to contend with the obvious height and weight disadvantage, would he be able to pull off boxing history in what most would consider an upset victory by gaining his fifth heavyweight title.







Lets consider that it was not so long ago that Holyfield was not allowed to fight. The powers that be suspended his license for his protection for they believed that he was finished due to the amount of punishment his physical being had taken throughout his career. In a legal bout Holyfield won out!







Going into the fight Holyfield was attempting to set two records. One winning a record fifth Heavyweight title, breaking his own record of being the only man to win four separate heavyweight titles in his career. It would also mark the sixth title over all for Holyfield who began his career as a Crusierweight and became a unified world champion in that weight class before moving up to Heavyweight.







All the intrigue and suspense leading into the fight turned out to be a bit of a let down when the two fighters met in the ring on December 20 in Zurich, Switzerland. From the opening bell, Holyfield to the surprise of almost all observers’ experts and fans alike, in spite of his age and the physical disadvantages was able to out box the slower lumbering Valuev with relative ease.







Holyfield was able to time and pick his spots while using the entire ring to avoid being a stationary target for Valuev. This ended up being the consistent pattern of the fight, at times this fight appeared so one sided in Holyfield’s favor that it looked like a glorified sparing session and not a Heavyweight championship fight.







Valuev appeared very sluggish and almost disinterested in engaging Holyfield in any offensive way. The little offense Valuev did put forth had little to no effect on Holyfield who most of the time countered effectively while in close. The one bright spot for Valuev came in round nine when a left hook knocked Holyfield slightly off balance due to Holyfield moving away from the hook. Valuev, however did not press forward to attempt to make any effort to put pressure on Holyfield.







The one sided fight seemed to have an academic outcome of Holyfield boxing his way to a unanimous decision in a fight that this observer scored nine of the scheduled twelve rounds in his favor and thus rewriting the boxing history books. Then again, in the sport of boxing sometimes nothing is as it seems. To the surprise of all in attendance Valuev was deemed the winner via majority decision. The decision met with outrage from the crowd in attendance that immediately booed Valuev and outwardly praised Holyfield.







Now in the wake of the controversial decision, the question now becomes what if anything will the WBA do in the wake of a Holyfield protest and public outcry over the decision? The announcement of an official review by the WBA of the fight had been announced however almost six months later after the controversial fight nothing has been released from the WBA regarding this fight. Why is that the case?







It appeared that the WBA was prepared to take quick and decisive action in the wake of Holyfield’s protest of the decision. Why has the boxing world and boxing fans not heard a word from those in charge of the WBA on this matter?







Let’s consider one scenario Could the WBA be giving the illusion of acting quickly on a protest and then quietly letting time pass in the hope that boxing fans, media and, Holyfield himself would simply let a decision that most feel was a clear injustice slide without demanding any sort of accountability or potential legal action on the part of Evander Holyfield against the promoters that put on the fight and or the WBA.







It would truly be despicable if this were the case. Holyfield is a fighter who has been through many hardships throughout his entire career and has successfully overcome those hardships. Therefore, he should not be subjected to any sort of potential political posturing to keep him from reaching his illusive goal of a record fifth Heavyweight championship.







Further troublesome is the ongoing posturing between the champion Valuev and the undefeated former champion Ruslan Chagaev. Chagaev beat Valuev for the WBA championship in 2007 but was forced to relinquish his title do to injury allowing Valuev to meet and defeat John Ruiz for the second time and subsequently face Holyfield in his first title defense of his second title reign.





The posturing between Chagaev and Valuev stems from a supposed agreement that the winner of the Valuev-Holyfield fight face Chagaev who had been designated as the mandatory challenger but What About Holyfield? Further evidence of possible political posturing by the WBA to simply let time pass in the hope that the injustice suffered by Holyfield will be forgotten is the recent announcement that former two-time Heavyweight champion John Ruiz will be designated as the next mandatory challenger for the winner of the upcoming rematch between Valuev and Chagaev.











What about Holyfield? Further posturing on behalf of the Valuev camp has surfaced as Valuev has formally requested to the WBA to be allowed to make an elective title defense against an opponent of his choosing. The Valuev camp contending that Chagaev voided the agreement stipulated on his mandatory title shot by taking a fight in February of this year a technical decision win over unknown contender Carl Drumond when the fight was stopped due to an accidental head butt suffered by Chagaev.







Once again, I am compelled to ask the simple question What About Holyfield? Here is another scenario suggesting the promoters of this fight and perhaps the WBA are not on the up and up in terms of properly taking action in the wake of a Holyfield protest.









Wilfred Sauerland, the promoter of Valuev displayed the body language of someone who’s fighter was losing the fight in the mid-late stages of the Valuev-Holyfield fight. Valuev seemed to concede the fight after the final bell was rung ending the fight by bowing to Holyfield clearly a sign of respect if nothing else.







In the wake of the decision Sauerland was initially very forthcoming about offering a justifiably disgruntled Holyfield a rematch however, almost immediately reseeded his offering in light of comments made by Tommy Brooks the trainer of Holyfield. “I think it was just some home cooking for a promoter’s fighter. I think somebody was just greasing somebody’s palms.” Brooks said in an interview with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.







 

Upon hearing of Brooks’ comments Sauerland said “I can understand his disappointment, After all, his fighter put on a an impressive performance for which he deserves our respect. However, I cannot comprehend his remarks at all. They are derisive, outrageous and absolutely untrue. I would not have expected such unsporting behavior from him. We offered Holyfield a rematch straight away but now we will have to reconsider it.”







WHY?! You know the decision was unjust or at least feel your fighter did not perform enough deserving of the title of champion. What about Holyfield?







How can a promoter possibly justify comments suggesting that they will keep their fighter away from a rematch based on the comments of the trainer of the other fighter. What about Holyfield?







 

Mr. Sauerland if everything was on the up and up and there isn’t any reason for Holyfield to feel disgruntled or feel like the victim of a miscarriage of justice then, why were you so quick to dismiss the protest? Then more or less threaten Holyfield with no rematch when in reality it should be the boxing fans world wide and the WBA that demand it and not a promoter?







At the risk of stating something that may be taken out of context by the promoter in question and or the fans of Nickoli Valuev. Sauerland making a statement like that it makes me as a journalist and more importantly a boxing fan and historian think that things were not on the up and up and instead we are now dealing with a situation in a cover up.







It would truly be unfortunate and despicable if this were the case but what are the boxing fans, media, television networks, or even Evander Holyfield himself suppose to think? When a controversial issue has the illusion of being dealt with quickly and decisively by a legitimate well respected sanctioning organization only to have nothing done or even stated on the status of the official review that the WBA itself initiated? Cover up? What’s up?







Equally unfortunate is the apparent sign of the times of the state of the heavyweight division. Where most of the cream of the crop of the division are mostly eastern European fighters showing a clear reluctance to fight anywhere but near or around their native soil.





This could be due to not necessarily the fighters themselves but rather their promoters who may feel more favorable to promoting their fighters on their native soil and not taking their fighters around the world or mainly America where most of the top heavyweights remain largely unknown due to not fighting on U.S. soil and, as well the inability of U.S. television networks and pay-per-view distributors to gain adequate television access rights to showcase these fighters to the American public.







 

Lets consider for a moment that we are talking about a controversial outcome in a fight for a version of the World Heavyweight Championship involving a fighter Nickoli Valuev a man who has won the heavyweight title twice, a man who has enormous size that automatically makes him an imposing figure to any fighter who challenges him. This is a fighter with a natural sales hook that could garner a tremendous amount of attention merely based on his size; promoter Don King has likened Valuev to a real life version of King Kong.







Despite the fact of this fighter being a two-time world champion and despite having the attention grabbing sales hook he has only fought in the United States once and thus is largely considered outside of hardcore boxing fans and experts alike as an unknown outside of Europe. Could Valuev’s lack of United States exposure be an act of protection on behalf of his promoter? Perhaps, but from my perspective the outcome of Valuev-Holyfield could have been different had this fight been fought on neutral territory not necessarily on U.S. soil.











This is a matter of speculation of course but, the question I am really interested in is When will the WBA get their act together and say something regarding this issue? If I were Evander Holyfield I would certainly not be waiting patiently for the WBA to issue a statement and or render a ruling on this manner I would force the issue…







Whether or not Holyfield decides to force the WBA to act on his protest legally or let it go is really up to him despite the public outcry. Regardless Holyfield should get back in the ring. In the ring Holyfield can not be ignored. Continuing to fight and especially win will only further support his case, and this the WBA can not ignore. After all, The Valuev-Holyfield fight was only a twelve round distance yet we still await a six month decision.







Was the Valuev-Holyfield fight a product of home cooking as Tommy Brooks claims? Perhaps… Has anything been documented and proven to suggest such despicable conduct? If there has been it certainly hasn’t been made public.







To the WBA I can only say. On fight night, two warriors went into battle only one should have been victorious. Who was that man? The crowd knows, the ringside reporters know, the media and ringside announcers know. Both corners know and I truly believe you gentlemen of the WBA know. Unfortunately for you gentlemen I know…







So “What’s the Real Deal”?







And That’s The Boxing Truth!