Rule Proposal to allow NCBA Boxers to compete in Olympic Trials Qualifer without losing eligibility,

Update:  The NCBA Executive Committee agreed to permit NCBA boxers to compete in the Olympic Trial Qualifers. However, any boxer that advanced beyond the first round would be up for eligibility review. Example considerations would be number of bouts won and the level of competition.

Jim McNally and a few other coaches have expressed a desire to create a rule allowing NCBA Boxers to compete in the Olympic Trials Qualifer without losing NCBA eligibility.  Our rule in the past has been that NCBA boxers that compete in an advancing tournament or any event that might result in any national ranking would make that boxer ineligible for the NCBA (specifically regional and national championship participation).  Please see the proposal that Coach McNally provided:


Proposal:  To allow NCBA boxers who still have eligibility to compete in Olympic qualifying tournaments every four years when they come up.

For example, USAB is hosting Pathway to the Podium Olympic qualifying tournaments this spring and summer.

Rational: it would be great for a collegiate boxer to say they qualified for the Olympic trials.

However, if they were to win and make the Olympic team, they forfeit the rest of their NCBA eligibility. This does not allow them to compete in any other open class national tournaments like the Golden Gloves, US Championships, national PAL or the Ringside Tournament.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Rule Proposal to allow NCBA Boxers to compete in Olympic Trials Qualifer without losing eligibility,

  1. Tom Barile says:

    I believe we had a rule which addressed this issue in the past. We allowed boxers to compete in these types of tourneys in Olympic Qualifying years only… Which this is. I believe we should continue with the rule we previously had and allow boxers to compete in this tournament.


    • ncbaboxing says:

      Talked to Coop and he does not recall any rule allowing this. It is an advancing tournament and we have always prohibited this.
      However, because of the short time frame we have, we may consider approving this by either overnight vote or executive committee but adding language that would require a review of the performance of any one that competes, i.e., what was the record of any competitor that an NCBA athlete beat. We also have to consider the message we send about safety when we allow an “Olympic trial caliber” boxer to compete in our regionals and nationals. We want to support the participation and success of our athletes but there are other considerations at play here.

      Eager to see other comments.


  2. Dan Holmes says:

    I am in favor of letting a college boxer have the opportunity to compete in an Olympic Trials qualifier event
    It is essentially the same as having a cross over bout
    also feel the skill level of college Boxing has improved dramatically over the years and this gives us an opportunity to showcase that so it is good for college boxing as a whole


  3. Brandon Lial says:

    I would like to see it allowed. It’s truly a once in a life time experience / opportunity for our student athletes. It could bring positive exposure to our organization and shools. I understand the outside perception of safety which we all proudly hang the hat of our org, but I think we all can agree that if they don’t compete in events like this just to remain eligible….they will be just as good when they compete in our tournaments. I guess as least as fellow coaches if an NCBA boxer does compete in a tournament like this and does pretty well, at lease we will know what our members are up against and make educated decision to stay clear of that weight class. Ie…I had a middle of the road 147 the year that Mims and Moorehead were in our Nationals….for safety reasons I had to exclude him from our nationals team that year.
    I will listen to and respect the concerns of our executive group and fellow coaches should anybody feel differently on the subject, so if you have thoughts, please sound off so all can be considered.


  4. Josh Sokal says:

    With that limited scope, I support the proposal.


  5. Ralph Garcia says:

    I agree with the proposed rule change.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s