?We don?t go with our whims and won?t be swayed simply by popular opinion,? says Springs Toledo. ?There is danger in applause??
?The man who stands neutral stands for nothing.??Archie Moore
The democratization of writing has been both a boon and a bust. On one hand, it allows everyone to express his or herself, his or her opinion, without restraint. On the other hand, the opinions expressed are often as unrestrained as they are unreadable.
Boxing attracts writers with many concerns. These writers, not beholden to boxing?s power elite, can look beyond self-interest to see a sport in serious trouble. The trouble may be inherent, since the excellence required to compete gets consumed in the competition. But the problems boxing faces are real, and by all appearances everlasting, as real and everlasting as the fights themselves.
Listing all the fight game?s ills requires time. Things change of their own accord, but human intervention, responsible for boxing?s evolution, is responsible for its devolution as well. Pointing fingers is counterproductive. Suffice to say that old-school truths have been replaced by new-school ?innovation? and the sport of sports, ever flexible, reliably unreliable, has misshapen over time. Boxing is still recognizable, it could be nothing else, but something has been lost. Whether that something can be found again is open to debate.
One writer engaged in this debate is Springs Toledo. Born and raised in Boston, Massachusetts, the 43-year-old Toledo is among the finest writers to grace our sport. Eloquent and precise, more intelligent than egomaniacal, his work, whether one agrees with it or not, is never less than compelling, never less than a joy to read. In addition, he is one of the founders of the Transnational Boxing Rankings Board (TBRB), an organization created to right some of the wrongs that boxing endures.
Having never met and eager for some background, I ask Toledo when he was first attracted to boxing and why.
?I was a child when Muhammad Ali lost the heavyweight crown to Leon Spinks,? he says, ?but can recall how devastated my mother was; and of course, like most of my generation, I remember when Ali ?whipped Superman? later that year. When Duran beat Leonard in June 1980, my uncles talked about Duran like he was something from Creature Double Feature. The talk was that Duran somehow ?wasn?t supposed to do that.? Throughout the eighties I watched him do what he wasn?t supposed to be able to do again and again; to poor kids from broken homes, that meant something. I grew up in a rough neighborhood where you had real problems if you didn?t know how to fight; I learned when I was 12?first the jab, then the straight right and soon saw firsthand that those two punches alone made life much easier.?
Having established that a one-two can make life easier, I wanted to know about that which hasn?t made life easier, focusing specifically on the TBRB and its creation.
?The idea germinated in an article I did in May 2012 called ?Occupy the Ring.? It came on the heels of The Ring?s decision to revamp its championship policy that prompted Cliff Rold, myself, and Tim Starks to resign from the ratings advisory panel. The title of the article was a nod toward the ?Occupy Wall Street? movement and was really an exhortation to boxing purists and fans (?boxing?s 99%?) to push for reform and clarity in the sport. Cliff Rold and Tim Starks published their own takes on The Ring?s change and I saw kindred spirits in them. Now, I had never met either of them but knew of their reputations, and knew that they were not comfortable with Golden Boy?s ownership of The Ring, never mind the new fast tracks to the championships. I reached out to them to see if they?d be willing to at least discuss starting up a new ?international rankings board? that would build on and improve upon the efforts of the past. They liked the outline. I then drafted a charter which we spent a lot of time debating and amending. Meanwhile, the late, great Joe Rein called me about Stewart Howe. Stewart had read ?Occupy the Ring? and was interested in joining. He is a web designer by trade and his entry was critical to our formation and progress. Rein, a graduate of Stillman?s Gym no less, was something of a consigliere whose experience and insights were invaluable.?
I wanted to hear more.
?The idea of an uncompromised, internationally-represented rankings organization is not new,? continues Toledo.? In 1981, Marc Maturo and Joe Bruno (who were behind the International Boxing Writers Association) sought to create an honest ratings system and made some headway for a few years. Charles Jay also saw clean rankings as a critical step toward boxing?s reform. In 1980, when The Ring was still smarting from the ratings scandal in the 1970s, editor-in-chief Bert Sugar set up the 50-member strong ?International Ratings Panel,? that used a mail-in ballot system to wide acclaim. He later used it for Boxing Illustrated?s ratings.
?The Transnational Boxing Rankings Board is in some ways a salute to efforts like those. It recognizes that boxing is a global phenomenon and always has been, so recruiting members representing as many nations as possible is only sensible. We have plans to go further still by finding a way to make the website accessible in several different languages. We know that the initiative must be protected from competing interests that can compromise and kill it; and that modern technology is a great advantage: Members aren?t mailing in ballots every month with ratings placements added up accordingly to come up with divisional top-tens. Instead members log in to our forum and confront proposed rankings changes generated by the chairs for the week. They then approve, reject, and debate them as well as make their own suggestions that often carry. The published weekly rankings are the product of the membership at large. The Board isn?t an advisory panel and the chairs are members too with votes of equal weight. I fill the role of ?Oversight,? which means that I keep watch over the initiative and make sure that the charter is respected; but I?m a member too and my vote on the rankings is one member?s worth. The intention is to produce democratic results out of a deliberative process, with the charter serving as a check.?
If that sounds complicated it is, especially when balanced against soundproof rooms in developing countries.
?The idea of a full, functional, public charter for something like this is probably original. Other rankings systems have a few statements of policy, but none that I know of had a full charter before us. The charter keeps us consistent, but like the U.S. Constitution, it also leaves enough room for discretion. When a fighter fights in two divisions, announces his intention to fight in a new division, or is inactive, for example, we go to the charter first for guidance and consistency. We don?t go with our whims and won?t be swayed simply by popular opinion. There is danger in applause. If we were seeking applause, we would have installed Wlad Klitschko on the heavyweight throne long before we did. There was a lot of pressure?inside and out?to do so because he was recognized as champion long before he fought the next-best contender in his division (Alexander Povetkin, by our reckoning). That?s one of the advantages of steering clear of the money game. We didn?t do this to profit by it and so aren?t subject to the temptations and the pressures that go with it. Our rankings have no hidden motives.?
Pressure, the money game, hidden motives?those are catchwords for the sport we love so well. But there are more.
??The robbery clause? of the charter is perhaps the most eyebrow-raising addition to efforts of the past. It may generate applause at some point but the intention behind it is to stand in rebuke to one of boxing?s most obvious flaws?inept decisions that rob hardworking fighters of clear and rightful wins. We don?t use the clause often (a hurdle is built in before it?s activated), but it?s there to right wrongs in non-championship bouts.?
The TBRB has made significant headway in a very short time. One needn?t be an idealist to support their efforts. Being a fight fan is enough.
?We are lucky to have attracted and recruited members who are not only exceedingly well-informed, fair-minded, and opinionated, but who want to contribute. We have record keepers who track fights around the world in every division, who keep us up to date on any contender who is approaching the one-year mark of inactivity, and we have several members keeping an eye on fringe contenders in 15 different countries who may break into the top-ten in a fight or few. It is gratifying to know that no complaints have been lodged by members about how it operates; there are individual problems with specific rankings to be sure?that?s good and healthy?but no one feels that it is a top-down thing. It?s really a collaboration of strangers who happen to love boxing and who agree on a set of correctives that will help the sport reclaim its former glory. I think a major reason why we?ve progressed so far thus far is because every member knows their input is valued and feels respected.?
One of boxing?s mover and shakers, ESPN?s Teddy Atlas, has thrown his considerable weight behind the TBRB. I ask Springs how valuable his imprimatur has been.
?It was critical. Atlas, to my way of thinking, represents the best in boxing. He loves boxing for what it is, not for what it can do for him. He?s direct, not indirect. He is connected with the past, but not duped by it. His eyes are wide open. He thought our rankings were worth a closer look and that?s really all we need because what we have is pretty persuasive. He took a closer look and he likes what he sees. But he?s exceptional. Most of the establishment, the ?names? and ?faces? in boxing or any field are naturally and understandably conservative. Most aren?t very willing to step back and take a good, hard look at the status quo because they are often too invested in it to lend a hand in effecting change. They are also well-versed in fly-by-night failures, which is why Atlas wanted to see all of the literature before making his decision. We hope that others shake off the doldrums and come around to see that we are not revolutionaries and we?re not going anywhere. Our objectives aren?t even very ambitious when you get right down to it: We?re traditionalists who think that boxing needs trustworthy rankings and a good old-fashioned scythe to cut through the nonsense and the confusion to find the true champions?I call them ?kings.? By our count, that number stops at 17.?
Listening to Springs Toledo, so positive and engaged, I know there?s a rose in Spanish Harlem; and others must feel the same.
?Fans aren?t shy about weighing in on the feedback tab of the website and the response has been overwhelmingly positive. That surprised me. I expected that we?d be ignored to death or, if/when we gained momentum, attacked by those invested in the status quo. Boxing fans are rightfully cynical considering that the sport has been a playground for pimps and grifters from round one, but the general sense I?m getting is that we?re doing right by them. We?re fans too, after all. When a criticism does appear on the website, I?m usually the one answering it. Tim Starks does the same on Twitter and on his blog, Matt McGrain, Vittorio Parisi, and Cliff Rold on internet boxing forums. There are some critics out there, but we welcome them one and all?so long as they keep it civil and have something like an open mind.?
Civility in boxing is like red meat to a shark. But we should keep an open mind, just not so open that our brains fall out.
?My only expectation is that we do the best we can,? Toledo says. ?My hope is that fans will stand with us and tell their friends about what we are trying to do for boxing; that writers and media figures will take a closer look and be persuaded by what they see to use our rankings exclusively; and that eventually, fighters themselves will covet the true divisional throne and aim for it, without the distraction of what used to be called trick titles.?
I offered Springs a platform, and he earned the last word.
?I?m broke and this thing is sapping my time, but it feels right. I don?t want to sound all maudlin, but way back when I was groping my way through adolescence, boxing gave me something to hold on to. I feel like I owe it and it?s good to know I?m not alone.?
