Boxing: IBF blocks Lewis bout

Thursday 23 December 1993 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

(First Edition)

THE divisions that militate against a return to the simple days of undisputed world champions resurfaced yesterday when the projected heavyweight reunification bout between Lennox Lewis and Evander Holyfield next April was jeopardised yesterday by the International Boxing Federation's sense of fair play.

Lewis, the World Boxing Council champion, and Holyfield, who beat Riddick Bowe last month to regain the IBF and World Boxing Association versions, were about to sign a contract worth pounds 27m. The last obstacle looked to have been removed when Michael Moorer, ranked No 1 by both the WBA and IBF, volunteered to waive his rightful challenge to Holyfield provided he would meet the winner. Instead, the IBF president, Bob Lee, has declined the offer.

'The object is to have the No 1 challenger fight for the title,' he explained, 'not sell that right to someone else.' Bowe, Lee insisted, had requested to fight Holyfield rather than Moorer. 'That was agreed to, provided the winner agreed to fight Moorer next. You have to have your rules stand for something. You can't have cherrypicking going on.'

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in