Down with the Count: Do Weigh-In Procedures Actually Endanger Boxer Safety

It goes without saying that the boxing is a dangerous sport. In 1997, Congress enacted the Professional Boxing Safety Act, 15 USC §6301 et seq., which mandates physical examinations of boxers before competition, ambulances on-site and certification from a medical doctor that the boxer is physically able to compete. State boxing commissions have much more detailed rules regarding boxing competitions, including detailed weigh in procedures. If fighters do not meet their weight, the commission requires corrective action to be taken and may prohibit the fight from taking place if the weight disparity is too great. See Nev. Admin. Code §467.476(2), §467.522. Nevada also limits fighters on losing additional weight after weigh-in. Nev. Admin. Code. §467.476(3). In 2000, the Boxing Task Force of the National Association of Attorneys General recommended that commissions require two separate weigh-ins to occur seven days and eight hours before the fight. Additionally, the Task Force recommends the commission limit the amount of weight a fighter can lose in the interim.

While the Boxing Commissions have regulated on the basis of losing weight surrounding weigh-ins, real dangers come from boxers who meet their contract weight at the weigh-in, but then gain weight prior to the bout. As noted by L. Jon Wertheim in last week’s Sports Illustrated (When a fighter packs on 20 pounds after the weigh-in, two people can get hurt, Sports Illustrated, April 3, 2006), as a follow-up to a story from the March 27, 2000 issue by Hoffer, Lidz, and Llosa (Inside Boxing), it is common practice for boxers to dehydrate themselves prior to weigh-ins, and then put the weight back on after weigh-in by rehydrating thru a variety of methods as simple as drinking water and as complex as blood transfusions and IV injections. When one boxer uses this technique and the other does not, then boxing matches can take place with weight differences at levels that state commissions have deemed otherwise dangerous and prohibited.

In a February 2000 junior-welterweight bout (one of six bouts before a fight between de la Hoya and Derrell Cooley at Madison Square Garden), Joey Gamache and Arturo Gatti each met their 141 pound weight requirement eight hours before their fight. Thereafter, Gatti, using a rehydration strategy, ballooned to 160 pounds. Gamache did not use this strategy and fought at 145 pounds. HBO weighed both boxers prior to their fight, but the results were immaterial according to the governing rules. The fight was stopped after lasting only 20 seconds into the second round. Gamache was allegedly left with severe and permanent neurological injuries that ended his boxing career.

Gamache initially filed suit against Gatti and New Jersey Sports Productions, Inc. with a demand of $10 million, which was voluntarily dismissed by the Plaintiff. On February 26, 2006, the matter was refilled in the Southern District of New York (06 CV 1338) before Judge Laura Taylor Swain (check PACER for a copy). The suit alleges that Gatti and New Jersey Sports Productions, Inc. breached the contract for the fight as Gamache “failed to satisfy the maximum weight limit requirement set forth in the contract,” and as a result Gamache lost the fight, was hospitalized for two days, and has ongoing pain and suffering. The complaint also includes a loss of consortium claim by Sissy Gamache, Joey’s wife.

State Commissions have allegedly given this issue a priority in their July meeting, so what should be done? Should the Commissions adopt standards to address the concern of weight gain, as opposed to weight loss, prior to competition? Should boxers be prohibited from using these techniques? Should medical examinations be tailored to address hydration issues? The simple solution would seem to require fighters to meet a contract weight moments before their fight, but this has been abandoned due to rapid dehydration techniques that would leave fighters dangerously dehydrated prior to a bout.

Hat tip: to uber law clerk, Jim Ryan, for his help researching this.

Posted in: