The Nevada Athletic Commission will no longer disclose purse amounts as of this past July as the administrative agency cites an amendment to its Nevada statutes prohibiting the release of such information.
The new amendment to NRS 467.1005 prevents the media and/or public from obtaining purse information disclosed by promoters prior to bouts. The information is usually obtained in Nevada and other states that allow for the disclosure of such information. States such as Washington, California and Florida have released this information upon request. Tennessee requires an individual with a mailing address within the state to make the request. Other states such as New York do not disclose this information. It appears that this new rule implemented in Nevada impacts combat sports which includes boxing and MMA.
The NAC referred MPO to this release regarding what are confidential per statute:
The new amendment allows for the Commission to keep confidential “[a]ny information that is submitted or disclosed to the Commission or otherwise obtained by the Commission pursuant to the chapter or the regulations adopted…” One can tell that this is a sweeping change that allows anything filed with the NAC to be considered confidential.
Some combat sports writers believe this does nothing to impact reporting as obtaining this information is “lazy journalism.” The Athletic’s Mike Coppinger claimed that the payouts were incorrect citing the fact that boxers such as Deontay Wilder made more than what was claimed on the payout sheet provided to the commission. He also claimed that this new measure would require journalists or “journalists” to source its own information on pay. While Coppinger’s detesting of the online writers may be warranted to some extent, it also reflects the fact if one were to obtain everything through sources, those items would be skewed as well. Because, the sources are serving their own interests.
The key to public records is at least twofold. First, it serves as a general baseline for fighters. We are not talking about top-of-the-card fighters but the fighters starting out with their careers. Without knowledge of what other boxers are being paid, what independence do they have in negotiating with promoters. Obviously, they can sign on with an established management group that has information on pay but the overarching theme is that information is being withheld to constrain the fighter. The Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act was set up to prevent such things. As I have suggested in the past, the Ali Act could be amended to mandate the public disclosure of such information such as pay to allow fighters to see what the market is for them. And, of course, if that information is false, there would seem to be civil and/or criminal penalties associated with that misdeed.
Secondly, as a public record, the information would feasibly be considered admissible under a hearsay exception per the Rules of Evidence. Why is this relevant? If fighters ever wanted to assert their rights in court as it might relate to a bad contract, dispute with promoter or other grievance and they would need fighter purses as a means to prove information, the public record would be easier to admit than a story citing sources about fighter pay. The reason why this is true is that a story about pay contains inadmissible hearsay (i.e. information used to prove the truth of the matter asserted). You would have to obtain the source of the writer to declare the veracity of the pay. Even then, that is questionable. However, with a public record, the hearsay exception provides an easier path to use as evidence.
Payout Perspective:
It is worthy to note that the commission had been sending out paysheets for Top Rank’s summer series without having to request them as many outlets had made the requests in the past. This past July, not knowing about the rule, I had requested the paysheet. I was asked to fill out a Public Records Request which was swiftly denied. Perhaps for the record. The new rule appears bad for fighters and those that like the freedom of information. It would seem that this allows promoters the opportunity to control the pay budget as the information on fighter pay is a secret and only hearsay if you do not know the right people. MPO will continue to follow this.
Leave a Reply