Wondering why the recent fights of two-division unified world champion Marlon Tapales and boxing prospect and IBF Pan Pacific Lightweight champion Criztian Pitt Laurente have yet to appear on BoxRec, the internationally recognized boxing record database, even though the fights took place about two weeks ago?
You might assume it is simply because hundreds of fights take place around the world and there is a delay in updating the records. However, a recent post from Sean Gibbons on X, president of MP Promotions, international matchmaker, and known supporter of Philippine boxing, as well as a post shared by JC Manangquil Manager of the boxers on Facebook, suggests there may be more to the story.
Sean Gibbons Wants BoxRec Investigated
The outspoken Gibbons did not hold back in expressing his opinion, calling out the well-known boxing record database over how it has handled the situation. He even went as far as posting photos of people associated with BoxRec and accusing the organization of being corrupt.
“Somebody needs to investigate Box WRECK!! They are deciding that they are God and they are not counting fights in Thailand that are legitimate fights promoted properly against legitimate fighters. They are corrupt. Box is corrupt.”
— Sean Gibbons via X
Filipinos Marlon Tapales and Laurente Fought in Thailand and Won
On September 26, 2026, FCC promoted a boxing event featuring two Filipino fighters along with professional boxers from several countries, including Mexico, Australia, and China.
I personally watched the fight on social media, and the event was also carried by TrillerTV, a well-known sports streaming platform.
Marlon Tapales won via second-round TKO against Nirun Baonok to capture the WBF International Featherweight title, while Laurente also won via third-round knockout against Benchalong Tanbu to get the WBF Intercontinental Lightweight title.
They were relatively easy victories for the two Filipino fighters, but they were still professional boxing matches that took place and were sanctioned.
Why Hasn't BoxRec Recorded Them?
BoxRec is highly influential in boxing. From hardcore fans to people working within the industry, many use it as an important reference. However, this is not the first time BoxRec has been involved in controversies or disagreements within the boxing world.
BoxRec previously had a disagreement with the WBA that resulted in WBA title information being removed or no longer recognized on its website. To this day, the situation remains unresolved.
BoxRec has also had disagreements with the WBC after declining to recognize the Bridgerweight division created by the organization.
I was in Thailand during a WBC convention when I was introduced to Dr. Marina Sheppard, one of the people behind BoxRec. She seemed nice, although we never had the opportunity to have a proper conversation, and I doubt she remembers me. I was even asking about getting one of their shirts at the time.
BoxRec has been part of the boxing industry since it was established in 2000. Over the years, it has become an important tool for people working in the sport because it has consistently been one of the most up-to-date and reliable boxing record databases online.
BoxRec Overstepping or Simply Trying to Make Boxing Better?
Some would argue that BoxRec may simply be trying to improve the sport by refusing to recognize questionable matches or fights involving possible irregularities. From their perspective, perhaps they believe they are taking actions that are ultimately good for boxing.
And, in fairness, why else would they do it?
However, that also raises another question: What exactly is BoxRec's role?
Is it simply a boxing record database, or is it gradually evolving into something closer to a global boxing authority? Does it want to determine which fights should be recognized? Is that even within the scope of its responsibilities?
BoxRec has long been praised for being one of the most complete and up-to-date boxing databases. However, some of its recent decisions have also resulted in significant information being left out of its records.
The WBA, for example, is one of the oldest and most established sanctioning bodies in professional boxing. Not recording its champions or title information means that a significant portion of boxing history is absent from the database, which could also affect BoxRec's reputation as a comprehensive historical reference.
There have always been good fights, bad fights, mismatches, controversial fights, and even allegations of fixed matches throughout boxing history. From my understanding, the responsibility of regulating these matters primarily falls on promoters, boxing commissions, and sanctioning bodies.
We can appreciate BoxRec's concern if its intention is to protect the integrity of the sport. At the same time, everyone involved in boxing should also understand the limits of their respective roles.
One possible solution would be for BoxRec to continue recording all officially sanctioned professional fights while adding notes, remarks, or disclaimers whenever it believes there are irregularities or concerns surrounding a particular event.
Those concerns could remain permanently attached to the record as a footnote. That would preserve the historical information while also allowing BoxRec to document its concerns for fighters, officials, media, and boxing fans to see.
However, deciding which professional boxing matches deserve to exist on the historical record based on BoxRec's own qualifications could reasonably be viewed as going beyond the traditional role of a record-keeping database.
I intend to reach out to BoxRec to get their side of the story. After all, my job is to report boxing news, ask questions, look for the facts, and share what I find. Nothing more and nothing less.
I am also not claiming that my opinion or suggestion is unquestionably correct. There may be information or reasoning behind BoxRec's decision that has not yet been made public.
I know my role, and I believe it is only fair that BoxRec be given the opportunity to explain theirs. They can reach out to me at media@powcast.net
Discussion & Comments