…ja titteleitä kaikille
- Tämä aihe on tyhjä.
-
Artikkelit
-
@pertsa wrote:
thaimaalaista Lumpinilla, vaikka Aalto onkin käynyt ottelemassa tähän mennessä amatööriotteluita Tanskassa asti.
LOL
En ota osaa vedonlyönteihin enkä uhkapeleihin yleensäkään, mutta jos Pertti olet vakavissasi sponsoroimassa junnuthain kehittämistä, otamme kiitollisina vastaan kahdet punaiset ja siniset 12 oz. Blue Corner -hanskat. Ne tulevat varmasti käyttöön junnujemme harjoitusotteluihin ja myöhemmin toivottavasti syntyviin junnukilpailuihin. Yhteystietoni löytyvät alta.
Rikulle kiitos haasteen heittämisestä ja Pertsalle kiitos haasteeseen vastaamisesta. Toivottavasti muutkin seurat ja maahantuojat lähtevät aktiivisesti tukemaan juniorityötä.
Terveisin Turun vanhin juniori,
Topi Räsänen
Turku ThaiBoxing Club
Artturinkatu 2 /
Saippua-Center
20200 TurkuTäällähän meno mennyt taas samanlaiseksi kuin Vantaalaisen taloyhtiön hiekkalaatikolla 🙂
Josta tulikin mieleen mitä tänään tuli mailissa…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0Z5cDhB3HA&feature=related
@sm wrote:
Täällähän meno mennyt taas samanlaiseksi kuin Vantaalaisen taloyhtiön hiekkalaatikolla
Tupla LOL
Täällä voimme ottaa kantaa ihan äänestyksen muodossa: https://muaythai.fi/forum/viewtopic.php?p=34825#34825. Jännityksellä odotamme miten tilanne kehittyy.
Kiitos Pertsa kannatuksestasi ja vaivannäöstäsi.
Ja oli mukavaa, että saimme vierailijan Tampereelta. Tulemme vastavierailulle, kunhan saatte oman juniorimyllynne pyörimään.
– Topi Räsänen, TTBC –
melko vanha junnuksiWomenkickboxing.com:n keskustelusivulla asiallista tekstiä nykyajan naisammattilaisista ja -amatööreistä heidän mantereellaan.
http://womenkickboxing.proboards76.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1195965067
@Dan wrote:
Did you know: A person can apply for a professional boxing or kickboxing license in the USA without having ANY amateur fight experience whatsoever? Its true, all you have to do to get a “pro” fight license in the USA is pass a physical exam, be legally an adult, (age 18) and have the money to pay for the license fee.
less than $100.00 in most statesMeanwhile, a person can fight “amateur” for years in the USA and have accumulated 20, 30, or even 40 fights like Victoria Beltran and then be matched up in their “pro debut” against another so-called “professional” who has no amateiur experience and maybe two or three “pro” fights in their entire life-and no amateur experience whatsoever. Male amateiur boxers often 75-150 fights befoire they turn “pro” and make their debit agaunst another “pro” who has no amateur experience (since it is not required) and hweo has maybe 3-4 fights to his credit.
So that means pro- am distinction-is meaninglessnothing -except that the so-called “professional” is paid and the so-called amateur” is not paid.
And of course being paid or not, says nothing about a fighter’s actual training or fight experience-which can actually be none at all.
Why is this situation allowed to exist in America?
Pro boxing promoters have an interest in having a ready supply of tomato cans (aka Profesionals) who have no amateur expericne to fight up and coming “amateiurs wh may have 3-75 fights experience making their “pro” debiyt aguanst sme porplky sliled “pro” who is short on skills and far less experienced than his/her “amateur” opponent.
ask yourself how does that pro vs am distinction “protect” inexperienced fighters from being overmatched? The answer is obvious: it doesn’t. And pro boxing is worse about mismatches than kickboxing. I am sure Victor Beltran knows this.
But the boxing promoters and KB sanctioning bodies rule, and they like this system for reasons already explained- so we will be probably be stuck with this harmful system for a long time.
What’s really bad is the pro vs am distinction particularly hurts female fighting, because they have far fewer available opponents to begin with. And then when they divide those available opponents into “pro” and “amateur” divisions , they have even fewer available opponents available.
As result many women quit the sport in frustration because they can’t find enough opponents to stay busy.
We need to end this method for classifying fighters- in the sport of kickboxing. and in themeantime, , there also needs to be a minimum number of amateur fights before a fighter is allowed to to turn “pro”-if we are going to keep this “pro vs amateur” distinction in place.
Now that sounds reasonable doesnt it??
Of course, its reasonable. But… the promoters are against it because isn’t profitable or expedient for boxing promoters who want and “need” poorly skilled fighters to turn pro and be misused as “tomato cans” for young up and coming “amateurs” and even Olympic champions to beat up in their pro debuts, and pad their records.
The very fact that none of the state commissions in the USA require amateur fight experience before they allow a fighter to turn “pro” should make it obvious to ANYONE that they dont make the distinctions between amateur and pro for “safety reasons”. In fact that necessarily guarantees that the distinction will be meaningless.
If they made the distinction for safety reasons, they would require a certain minimum number of amateur fights before a fighter coud turn pro and be issued a pro license-right?
But, as I already said, the reason for the pro/amateur distinction is motivated by money and matchmaking expediency -not the safety or protection of fighters.
Its primarily pro boxing promoters who want lots of marginally skilled tomato cans for star making purposes. And since we have only one commission that governs both kickboxing and boxing-the boxing promoters decide the commission rules because they have all the money and influence-because KB promoters just arent as business savy and sadly dont know how to market their sport nearly as well.
It’s a shameful situation in the USA and in Canada that cries out for a change. Let your state commissioners and any sanctioning body officials that you personally know, exactly how you feel.
Ja Dan jatkaa.
That way I am more focused more on the fact that you can turn “pro” right out of the gym and be pro for your first ever fight in a ring.
…OR conversely, one can fight as an “amateur” for years and collect several dozen fights and be considered an “amateur”—yet in reality, that “amateur” will be a far more skilled and sophisticated fighter than the person who turned “pro” right out of the gym.
That is why these labels “professional” and “amateur” in the USA are totally deceptive and meaningless.
And that is why the “amateur” making his or her pro debut with 20 or more fights to their credit often KO’s
his/her “professional” opponents who may have a “professional” record of say 5 wins 2 losses-but no amateur fight experience.anecdote: when i first became interested in boxing, it always amazed me how the young amateur making his/her “pro debut”, and being praised lavishly by the TV commentators, always seemed to KO his/her much more experienced “professional” opponent.
The amateur would be introduced to the fans as “making his professional debut tonite”, and his doomed opponent is introduced as having a “fine professional record of 5 wins against only 2 losses”…
Then one day, I realized the ring announcers were omitting the amateur record of the debut fighter, and also conveniently omitting the fact that his “professional ” opponent with 7 fights had not amateur fights at all-and was thus a huge underdog-who really didnt even need to be in the ring with this up an comer with 75 amateur fights. Doh!
I am not saying that happens everyday with such extreme disparity in the number of fights, but it does happen often enough, with definite experience disparity in favor of the amateur to make the terms “am” and “pro” very deceptive and totally unreliable as an indicator of the comparative skills of the two fighters.
Bottomline: its how much experience one has that matters-not how much money one has previously been paid.
In contrast, the class A, B,C, D, N, sytem takes experience into account when classifying fighters-it isnt perfect but it sure beats our American/Canadian/sytem.
Oh yea, we also need to do something about these perpetual *amateurs* who fight for years in amateur tournaments accumulating huge numbers of fights and beating up on *legitimate* amateurs who enter with only a few fights (if any) to their credit.
So, if we simply MUST keep this antiquated pro vs am system in America , at least make it mandatory that a person has a minimum of say 10 amateur fights before he or she can get a pro license.
and also make it mandatory that after an amateur accumulates say 20 fights, that on their 18th birthday they MUST turn pro-and no longer be allowed to fight in amateur tournaments against legitimate amateurs.
Hello,
I’m looking for an opponant against Brice Guidon for a french show February 6, in 2 weeks.
The fight is in full muay thai rules, 5×3 and for a WPMF european title. Its in the heavyweight division.
Brice previous opponent (Martin Jahn from Germany) got hurt during training tonight…
Tell me.
contact: alkermor@msn.com
ps: obviously the opponent has to be european, since its an european title!
-> http://www.k-1fans.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=49475&sid=032c8b60e46b00d00415c2cb673c0aef
Tuli tämä ketju mieleen, kun täältä näppiksen takaa maailman menoa katselin.
Että ihan keskustelufoorumeilta etsitään vastustajaa em-otteluun… just, just 😥
Onkohan toi juttu ihan tosi vai pelkkä läppä?
- Sinun täytyy olla kirjautunut vastataksesi tähän aiheeseen.