Muhammad Ali’s Grandson Defends Boxing In Congressional Hearing

Muhammad Ali’s grandson, Nico Ali-Walsh, was considered one of 4 to testify before a hearing chaired by Senator Ted Cruz regarding the House-passed Muhammad Ali Boxing Revival Act. 

Cruz convened the hearing on Wednesday to deal with proposed reforms to the present Ali Act of 2000, reasoning that he desired to bring American boxing back to a unified direction for the good thing about the game each for fighters and organizations. 

Also present on the hearing were TKO and Zuffa Boxing representative Nick Khan, Golden Boy Promotions’ Oscar De La Hoya, and Florida State Athletic Commission Executive Director Timothy Shipman.

“I’m here as someone whose name is directly tied to the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act, not only as a fighter affected by it, but as a part of the legacy that law represents,” Ali-Walsh opened his testimony. “Fighters are labeled independent contractors. Because of this, people will say fighter’s have options. That we are able to just go elsewhere. But when the identical company controls who you fight, how you might be promoted, and whether fans ever see you, it is not much of a selection.”

He continued, “When one system controls access, selection becomes theoretical, not real. The Ali Act was built on an easy principle: the people controlling fighters mustn’t also control the whole marketplace those fighters rely on. That separation exists to forestall conflicts of interest and exploitation. The brand new Muhammad Ali Boxing Revival Act would undermine that principle.”

Ali-Walsh reasoned that allowing one entity to operate promotion, management, and matchmaking for a fighter removes independence and the flexibility to barter. 

He pointed to the UFC for instance of that: “This sort of centralized system is already seen in mixed martial arts, particularly within the UFC… In that model, fighters typically receive 20% of the revenue. In comparison with boxing where fighters can earn as much as 80%. The newly proposed Revival Act pushes that centralized model onto boxing, behind the claim that boxing is broken.” 

Ali-Walsh continued to beat back on the concept that boxing is broken, making the case that so many former UFC fighters trade the Octagon for a squared circle. 

“Boxing shouldn’t be broken,” he affirmed. “If it were, UFC Champions at the peak of their careers wouldn’t be actively targeting boxing fights due to fair pay. That movement isn’t seen in reverse as a consequence of the UFC’s centralized pay structure.”

He continued to say that when all competition has been consolidated to 1 system, leverage disappears and in consequence, so does fair market value. He argued that while the proposed laws covers provisions for fighters, there are already provisions inside the current laws that he himself as a fighter have benefited from. 

“Protection needs to be strengthened, especially around health and safety. But not used as justification to restructure the game in a way that removes power from fighters,” he said, before happening to easily say his grandfather’s name has no place on the proposal because it stands. 

“The bill that the House has passed mustn’t be adopted. We could protect fighters more effectively than we do today without concentrating control over them. If this bill is passed in its current form, it mustn’t have my grandfather’s name on it.”

He said it might betray the principles that the Ali Act was created to guard, and fighters mustn’t have to choose from their careers and their rights. 

Ali-Walsh later touched on what Zuffa Boxing has already shown itself to be, and he feels it’s just trying to duplicate the UFC model in a boxing setting. 

“I do not know for those who’ve seen the Zuffa Boxing events. But when you might have seen the events, it, from my perspective, looks very plain. It looks very corporate,” he opined. “In current boxing you might have the liberty to have those sponsorships. Unlike in Zuffa where you are forced to wear their trunks, otherwise you’re forced to not have specific amount of sponsors of whatever their rules they might be of their contract.”

He said as a fighter he knows having those sponsorships, and the autonomy over which and where, provides the chance to earn more money. 

He concluded, “They’re moving that very same UFC model over to boxing. You possibly can see it of their events already. And if that model was truly for the fighters you would not see the $375 million antitrust lawsuit that the UFC needed to settle. You would not see former UFC fighters complaining about pay. You would not see current UFC fighters begging for raises of their pay. If that model truly worked and it was truly for the fighters, you would not be hearing a lot about money from these UFC fighters.”

Fighter pay has been a continuing discourse for UFC over the past few years particularly, given the corporate’s consistently touted business success. Officials have all the time pushed back against that narrative, however the likes of former UFC Heavyweight Champions Francis Ngannou and Jon Jones have each had public falling outs with the promotion over it. 

Ngannou particularly went on to fight in boxing against former World Heavyweight Champions Anthony Joshua and Tyson Fury. He can be fighting Philipe Lins on the MVP MMA card streaming on Netflix on May 16, headlined by Ronda Rousey against Gina Carano. Each of which have their very own grievances with the UFC after failed negotiations.