WPKL Strips Mary Hart.


Heres the story:

In a videotape replay of the Soumia vs Mary Hart WPKL World Title fight
which originally took place in The Netehrlands back on April 15th, 2006,
The WPKL has reversed the original fight judges' decision
which had awarded the WPKL Title to Mary Hart by unanimou8s decision.

The new judges decision reversed the original decision made at ringside,
on April 15th, 2006 and awarded the WPKL Title to Soumia
after the newly appointed judges viewed a taped copy of the fight.


3 new officials who were not present
at the actual fight on April 15th, including 2 board members/promoters, and the WPKL chairman and Soumia’s team were present at the videotaped replay. Mary Hart’s camp was invited, but didn’t attend. After watching the video of the fight, the new judges scored the fight as follows::



Judge 1: 46-49 Soumia
Judge 2: 46-49 Soumia
Judge 3: 49-50 Soumia



-The World Title was awarded to Soumia as of April 15th. (Day of the fight).
Soumia is now officially WPKL-World champion -54Kg

The board further ruled that:

1. Mary Hart must give back the belt

2. At the first upcoming WPKL event, Soumia
will receive the WPKL belt.

3. The first challenger, if interested, will be Mary Hart.

Is a reply and revaluation a good way to handle a protest of
a juries decision? Or is a remacth the better answer?

I am of the opinion that a world title fight ought to consist of five three minute rounds for muay thai-whether the fighters are male or female.
This fight was 5x2-since it was women.

Had it been 5x3 instead of 5x2, is it possible that perhaps one or the other fighters may have with an extra five minutes of fighting been able to assert dominacne in the fight, and perhaps the outcomne would have been less in doubt?

any thoughts on how an org should handle protests about jury decisions?

Dan Green was one of the original judges, and I would be especially interested in his views-IF he is free to comment, that is. :)
dan