This is boxing’s fight of the year and it’s not even in the ring

As is often the case in sport and the wider world, it comes down to money, and whether boxers’ earning opportunities would improve or suffer in a brave new world.

The Revival Act seeks to allow the creation of Unified Boxing Organisations (UBOs), which would serve as alternatives to boxing’s current sanctioning bodies (for example, the WBC, WBA, IBF), but there is concern that UBOs could dwarf them completely; and under this new proposal, a UBO could act as both promoter and governing body, giving a single entity sway over rankings and matchmaking – perhaps reducing meritocracy. One UBO would be Zuffa Boxing, which launched in January and is overseen by UFC president Dana White and Saudi adviser Alalshikh.

To simplify last week’s proceedings somewhat: in one corner you had Nick Khan, a board member at TKO, the UFC’s ownership group, which has now crossed into boxing by helming Zuffa; in the other you had boxing legend-turned-promoter Oscar De La Hoya, along with Ali’s grandson Nico Ali Walsh.

Ali Walsh’s argument was that “when one system controls access, choice becomes theoretical, not real.” He suggested “boxing is not broken” and that “if it were, UFC champions […] would not be actively targeting boxing fights because of the fair pay.” Indeed, the UFC has been criticised over fighter pay before, and the UFC last year settled an antitrust lawsuit, which claimed the mixed martial arts promotion suppressed fighters’ ability to negotiate; it was suggested that the UFC had essentially forged a monopoly.

It should be said that this lawsuit pertained to years before TKO acquired the UFC. And for his part, Khan said last week: “If you want a chance to be something bigger over a shorter period of time on a platform, we were able to secure a deal with Paramount, a platform that has almost 80m subscribers worldwide and has a network partner in CBS. If you want that exposure, if you want trading-card deals, if you want merchandise deals, if you want video-game deals – of which the fighters would all participate financially... If you want all of that, plus some more, come this way. If you don’t, that’s your choice.”

Nick Khan (right) and Nico Ali Walsh (AFP/Getty)

De La Hoya argued: “This is a fundamental shift in power that […] would put corporate profits first, fighters second [...] Fighters deserve real protection ‌and real ⁠opportunity, not to have to fight the system as well. If this bill passes, fighters will have fewer choices, less leverage, and less control over their careers. And when that happens, it will not be the sport that failed them; it will be us.”

De La Hoya’s heart may well be in the right place. The American, now 53, was one half of numerous big-time bouts in Las Vegas during his prime, including against Mayweather and Pacquiao, and when you hear him speak, it does seem that he truly loves boxing like few do.

But speaking of hearts: the issue at the heart of this hearing, and in conversations around the Revival Act itself, is one of transparency.

Indeed, it was just three months ago that De La Hoya’s Golden Boy Promotions were sued by one of his fighters, Vergil Ortiz Jr, who alleged that the promoter had breached contract and interfered with his earning potential – namely preventing him from a much-craved fight with Jaron “Boots” Ennis.

De La Hoya with Vergil Ortiz Jr last year (Getty)

Ortiz signed a new three-year deal with Golden Boy in May 2024, but – per The Guardian – the contract allowed the 28-year-old to leave the company if its broadcast deal with Dazn ended. That partnership ended in December, but Golden Boy argued that Ortiz’s place on its roster was secure due to the promotion’s ongoing discussions with Dazn over a renewal (which was confirmed in March). Ortiz’s counter was that a pending deal with Dazn was not a completed one, and not enough to keep him tied to Golden Boy. At the time of writing, though, he is a Golden Boy fighter as the lawsuit rumbles on.

This is not the first time that De La Hoya has been sued by one of his fighters, either; arguably the biggest star he has ever promoted, Canelo Alvarez, did the same in 2020.

So, De La Hoya has found himself as a kind of figurehead speaking against the Revival Act, arguing for transparency. His criticisms might be fair, and he might be speaking sincerely, but when it comes to transparency, his own allegedly-complicated track record might cost him in this particular bout.