History and Issues Surrounding
Colorado Promoter
Keith Schmelzer
(Right)
History and Issues
Surrounding
Colorado Promoter
Keith Schmelzer
(Right)
MONDAY, October 25th, 2004, AT 8:30 PM, PT
|
|
|
Results From The
Rocky
Mountain Bad Boyz
Golden,
Colorado, USA
IKF:
This could of and should have been a great event. However, greed and lack of
respect for "Rules and
Regulations" put a sad and ugly twist to the end of this event.
Some of what happened could mean trouble if not the END, for Amateur
Fight Sports in the State of Colorado. It's terrible how some choose not to
follow rules and regulations thinking "What some don't see, don't
matter." However the fact is, "Many DID SEE and IT
DID Matter... A LOT!" Sad that the actions of a few could
mean the end for many now. Lets hope not...
We will explain
more about this at the end of this article. For now, here are the nights
Kickboxing Results below.
Records are after this event.
An Ugly Ending...
Well
we waited all day for a return call that never came so it appears the story
needs to be told...
Amateur fighter Nouton Herr was scheduled to
fight fellow amateur fighter Travis Sherman. However, Herr came
in at 125 lbs and Sherman came in at 135 which was
6 lbs out of the regulated weight
spread. When asked to lose weight by IKF
Representative Dan Stell at the weigh-ins, Sherman's trainer and
event promoter Keith Schmelzer refused, saying his fighter came in at
weight while Herr didn't and was suppose to come in at 132. Stell
told them the weight spread was out of the regulated weight spread limit of (4 lbs.) but Schmelzer
insisted "The bout has to happen because Coor's is my sponsor and they
need to see that bout and it's the main event!" Still, Stell
said there was no way the bout could take place with such a spread.
Wondering
how he could assist Schmelzer, Stell called IKF President Steve Fossum on the phone.
Both Fossum and Stell assured Schmelzer the bout could
not take place due to the weight spread however they gave Schmelzer
approval for the two fighters to do only a Light Contact "Exhibition"
bout. Fossum made sure over the phone to Schmelzer that if the
contact was too hard, the "Exhibition" would be immediately
stopped. Schmelzer agreed and assured him and Stell this is all
it would be.
At the end of the IKF Sanctioned kickboxing bouts, Stell was told that some amateur MMA bouts (Not sanctioned by the IKF or officially by the ISCF either.) were going to happen and the exhibition would be last on the night so he stepped away from ringside. So Stell stepped away from ringside to take care of some other event related duties.
However while away, Herr and Sherman were brought to the ring by the event promoter and Sherman's trainer, Keith Schmelzer and his partner, Vic Brabo, without Stell at ringside. However again, this turned out to be no "Exhibition" bout. It turned into a REAL bout fought without headgear for one of Schmelzer's own "Rocky Mountain Titles". The bout ended quickly in round 1 with Sherman kneeing Herr in the HEAD "TWICE" in an International Rules bout (NO Knees - Still, knees to the head are not legal in amateur competition.). Before Stell returned to the ring, Schmelzer's fighter was awarded his Title Belt even though he fouled Herr to end the bout...
Stell found out the bout had happened as he was walking back to the ring and met Herr and his trainer half way with Herr's head bleeding from the knees he took. By then, there was nothing Stell could do other than call Fossum by phone back in California. Fossum spoke to Stell several times to try and find out what happened. He finally spoke to Schmelzer who had no logical explanation for his actions and had to get off the phone to corner for his other fighters doing MMA bouts. In the end, Schmelzer left Stell at the venue and never returned any of Fossum's calls that night. Making it worse for himself, Schmelzer never picked Stell up to take him to the airport Sunday morning forcing Stell to pay a $60 cab bill.
Several calls were made by Fossum today to Schmelzer but none were returned. "He seems to think we are just going to let this go I guess." Said Fossum. "However we are far from done with what he did and there will be a lot of action taken in regards to it. What he appears to hope go away is just getting started. It would be in his best interest of his promotional future to return our call."
The Common Solution Is
To Just Jump Ship...
Why not, so many tend to do it. Find an
organization that will allow him to do as he pleases, regardless of fighters
safety and other rules or regulations. In Schmelzer case, he only has
one other organization to try in Colorado. He is probably already thinking he
will just turn to ISKA to sanction his Colorado events since the IKF and ISKA are the only State approved
sanctioning bodies for amateur kickboxing in Colorado. However, he may find a
closed door there too. "ISKA respects rules as much as we do and it
would be a surprise to many as well as a shame to the safety of the sport if
they accepted sanctioning for any future event(s) of his before this is cleared
up." Said Fossum. "Doing so would hurt them more than
Schmelzer has hurt himself here because it will tell other promoters
that they can 'Do as they please, not as the rules regulate'. There are a reason
sanctioning bodies have rules. The bottom line is he needs to be held
accountable for his actions, but the bigger question here is, 'How do you unring
a bell...?'"
Don't Know What You
Have Till It's Gone...
For those in Colorado thinking this is
just an IKF issue think again. Schmelzer's
actions may bring harm to ALL Amateur fight sports in the state. If rules cannot
be followed by promoters and enforcement of such rules are ignored by a
promoter, the State may decide to take over all amateur fight sports as they do
in California. Lets take a look for everyone here what it takes to be an amateur
fight promoter in the state of California and you decide if you have it good in
states outside of California...
First, "IF" you are accepted as a Promoter (After
a full background/credit check) the State charges you a promoters fee of
around $100.
Next there is the expense of your promoters bond. For an
amateur promoter this fee is around $2,500.00.
When your event is over, now
you have more checks to write. A $500.00 tax fee from every event.
They
regulate all officials fees which can cost the promoter another $500.00.
Don't
forget the state requirement for fighter medical insurance which is $50,000 per
fighter (as compared to $2,500 from the IKF).
Going by the regulated scale,
this is an expense of between $950 and $4,250.00, depending on what deductible
you choose ($500 or $5,000.00).
So did you do the math? If you are an amateur promoter in the State of California, expect to pay out between $4,600.00 and $7,800.00 on your first event. Those IKF and or ISKA sanction fees don't sound so bad now do they...
APPRECIATION?
This
is of course a far difference than the few hundred dollars promoters like Schmelzer
paid to have his event IKF Sanctioned.
Schmelzer fees to the IKF were
only $150.00. Yes... One hundred
and fifty dollars....
Since the regional representative could
not attend his event and Schmelzer was a first time promoter, he agreed
to have Mr. Stell come in from California, so he had a plane ticket to
pay for him. Stell's IKF Event
Representative fee for an
amateur event is suppose to be $150.00. However Stell wanted
to help Schmelzer out and only charged him $100.00 and was only given
$40 for food instead of the required
3 day perdiam of $120.00.
However, after spending $60 of that on
his cab to the airport, Stell came back with $90 for his work and time
of 3 days away from his family.
This is something some promoters like Schmelzer don't realize. He looked at Stell as a "Problem he had to find away around" instead of an assistant to his event, which he was. Here, Stell, like other IKF Event Representatives, was away for 3 days, yet some promoters still think a $100.00 Representative event work fee is too much. How many of you would be an event representative for $100.00? "It's a thankless job sometimes." said IKF President Steve Fossum, who often waives his event work fee to save promoters money. "We are there to try to bring order, safety and credibility to an event not to mention, we are the event news source most of the time too. All this along with bustin our butts to help the event succeed in any way we can and sometimes, promoters think we are the bad guy, as did Schmelzer here with Dan. It's a shame to be treated that way for what we do to help some promoters. However, on the other hand, it's greatly appreciated when we work with a promoter who fully appreciates when we are there to help them with their event and getting paid pennies, if that, for our time."
Where Do The Fighters Play
Into This?
Need we even go into an explanation here? With a high
cost of promoting, there would be far less events. Far less events mean far less
opportunities for fighters. Sure it's true that without fighters there would be
no events. However, without promoters, GOOD Promoters, there would be no event
to fight on either. This is not just an IKF
story here everyone (fighters, trainers & Promoters). This is an issue that
concerns all of kickboxing, no matter what ABC you attach to it.
What are your thoughts on all this? Share them with everyone on the Kickboxing Message Board
For more info on this event please contact us here at the IKF at (916) 663-2467 or by e-mail at main@ikfkickboxing.com
February, 2005
When the IKF was informed
Schmelzer was Promoting Another Show in Colorado, but this time using the ISKA,
the IKF wrote the following e-mail to Cory Schafer
of The ISKA:
TO: Cory Schafer, ISKA
RE: ISKA Sanctioning of
Keith Smeltzer in Colorado on March 19th, 2005
www.iska.com/kickboxing/events_files/frame.htm
Dear Cory,
I hope this mail finds you well. Sorry to bring you negative news but I
must say that MANY of us were surprised that you are sanctioning Keith
Smeltzer's upcoming Colorado event, Rocky Mountain Bad Boyz.
I say this
because of what all transpired on Keith's last show in which he sanctioned with
us. Due to what Keith pulled, we suspended him as a promoter until he pays what
he owes and sends us a video of what all happened that night for review. Mr.
Smeltzer is listed on our suspension page as follows:
Keith Schmelzer, Amateur Promoter: Fine Confirmed - 11-25-04
It's very sad when a promoter can break the rules in one
organization and simply hop over to another organization to avoid his
disciplinary actions.
To bring you up to date, here is the article posted in full of what all
happened on Mr. Smeltzer's last event in Colorado.
I will cc this e-mail to Mr. Smeltzer as well, however, since he has NEVER replied to any of our e-mails since November 4th, 2004, or returned any of our numerous phone calls since then either, I doubt he will respond here. However, I fully expect for him to come up with some kind of excuse as to why he broke the rules as noted above as noted in the below article.(Above article was sent with this e-mail.)
I will also cc this mail to the IKF event Representative who was in attendance for Mr. Smeltzer's event, Mr. Dan Stell. Since you work with Mr. Stell often I am sure his word on the incident would hold greater value than even mine.
I am also cc'ing this e-mail to Mr. Joseph Mason of the Colorado State Athletic Commission for his review. He and I have discussed the issues surrounding Mr. Smeltzer.
I am also cc'ing this e-mail to our web-news staff because if Mr. Smeltzer's event goes on as planned on March 19th, we here at the IKF feel it is important to inform the many kickboxing fighters, trainers, officials and fans in Colorado, as well as around the world, how Mr. Smeltzer was accepted as a promoter by the ISKA after breaking several strong rules in regards to fighter safety on his last event under IKF Sanctioning. I would hope that a sanctioning fee is not more important than fighter safety and the following of "SET" rules and regulations of a sanctioning body, however, the actions that follow this e-mail will answer this question.
Others associated with Colorado Kickboxing, the ISKA and the IKF are also being cc'ed in this e-mail.
In reading the below article taken from our October 2004 News
page, Please take the time to read in full the section entitled, "The Common Solution Is To Just Jump Ship..."
I stress this section because it details what we thought you and the ISCF would
NEVER do, but sadly to say, it appears you already have. Hopefully no future
news story on our site will have to explain that this has actually happened.
We
here at the IKF look forward to your reply.
Sincerely Steve Fossum
February 23, 2005
What
shocked us here at the IKF was that
Schafer did EXACTLY what we
thought would be the worst thing to do... Allow ISKA Sanctioning on Schmeltzer's
event. The same thing they did when the IKF
denied Lane Collyer IKF Sanctioning after being convicted with a felony.
(This story can be found by clicking HERE.
Here is Schafer's response from the ISKA sent on February 23, 2005
Dear Steve,
It is the ISKA's strict policy to honor all
suspensions levied by state appointed athletic control boards or presiding
athletic commissions.
In this case however, the nature of the circumstances that you have described better reflect a contractual dispute between your organization and Mr. Smeltzer's promotional company that should be resolved solely between the two entities.
The timely delivery of a video, and the required use of headgear in all amateur bouts (exhibition or otherwise) are clearly policy's specific to your organization. ISKA rules (as approved by the Colorado State Athletic Commission) require neither a video nor the mandatory use of headgear in bouts involving experienced amateurs. The alleged failure of Mr. Smeltzer to comply with your policies clearly falls under the heading of a "contractual dispute" rather than an inherent compromise of either the safety or fairness protocols that might disqualify him from receiving an ISKA promoter's license.
Mr. Smeltzer has a good reputation in the Colorado martial arts, kickboxing and MMA community. I sincerely hope that your organization and his company can find a way to equitably resolve this dispute.
Please feel free to contact me if you think there is anyway
that we can be of additional help.
Most Sincerely,
Cory Schafer
ISKA
President
In the end, this was more about MONEY than it was about SAFETY. Money from a sanctioning fee instead of assuring Safety for Amateur Fighters in the sport.
However,
we did send a reply to Schafer of the ISKA, which as of this posting (March 2nd,
2005), has not been responded to.
Here it is below
SENT ON February 23rd, 2003
Cory,
Thank you for finally returning my second e-mail in
regards to Mr. Keith Smeltzer in Colorado. However, I must say I am disappointed
in your decision here. In your message you wrote;
"Mr. Smeltzer has a good reputation in the Colorado martial arts, kickboxing and MMA community."
I can see you really DO NOT know the whole story here
despite what I explained in "DETAIL" to you in my e-mail I sent to you
last week.
I am very sorry that you have taken the decision you have...
VERY SORRY. It appears this turned out "EXACTLY" how we did not want
it to. Mr. Smeltzer CLEARLY BROKE A SAFETY RULE, and when we took a disciplinary
action against him, all he did was "JUMP SHIP" to another organization
who will basically allow him to do as he pleases. However, what's new right? All
for a sanctioning fee and when ETHICS compare to MONEY, It's clear here, Money
won hot at the simple price of a sanctioning fee. For reference, will remember,
this was a decision "YOU" made, and will have to accept in the future
as well as today, which again, we are very sorry for.
As for this comment you made in your e-mail as a defense of your position:
"ISKA rules (as approved by the Colorado State Athletic Commission) require neither a video nor the mandatory use of headgear in bouts involving experienced amateurs."
That's strange...
I would like to bring attention to the
official ISKA Rules as found on this page on the ISKA website:
http://www.iska.com/kickboxing/rules.htm
According
to your own ISKA Rules for "ALL AMATEURS"
that reads:
6. AMATEUR MATCHES
Amateur matches will usually be
sanctioned under Full Contact and Freestyle rules only. All
amateur fighters are required to wear approved headguards, shinguards and
foot pads, in addition to standard equipment. Pre-made hand wraps approved by
the ISKA representative may be allowed. If pre-made hand wraps are used, the
fighters may not put any tape over the pre-made hand wrap. All other rules apply
as per professional Full Contact and Freestyle matches. Most amateur matches
will consist of three rounds of two minutes each, with a one minute rest period.
With the approval of the ISKA, amateur title matches may be of 4 or 5 rounds
duration. Novice fighters may be permitted to fight rounds of one and a half
minutes per round, with the approval of the ISKA representative. Under no
circumstances may amateur fighters receive a purse.
Cory,
These are the Official ISKA Rules correct?
If so, than please show me what I do not see. Show me where it says as you
have noted to me in your e-mail I received today where it says:
"ISKA rules (as approved by the Colorado State Athletic Commission) require neither a video nor the mandatory use of headgear in bouts involving experienced amateurs."
Also, much more importantly here, if this truly is the rule, than maybe you can explain to us why in the state of Florida, the OFFICIAL ISKA RULES you gave to Mr. Jason Penley clearly say that in "ALL" ISKA Sanctioned matches, ALL AMATEURS MUST WEAR HEADGEAR.
Cory, it appears very clearly to me that your rules change from state to state. However, we both know that ISKA has "NEVER" made the requirement for amateurs to wear headgear "MANDATORY". Since this is true, I am now very curious how the ISKA was accepted as an approved AMATEUR Kickboxing Sanctioning body in the State of Florida... and how "WE" the IKF were asked by the Florida State Commission to meet the Rules and Regulation minimums of the ISKA Rules to be accepted as an Amateur Kickboxing Sanctioning Body in the State of Florida, when ISKA doesn't even uphold their own Minimum standards?
In addition, according to your AMATEUR MANDATORY RULES as noted above that are publicly posted on your web site, they also say:
"Amateur matches will usually be sanctioned under Full Contact and Freestyle rules only."
If this is true, than how come you also allow Muay Thai and San Shou amateur bouts under ISKA Sanctioning? I would also like to point out another part of your rules where it reads:
"All amateur fighters are required to wear approved headguards, shinguards and foot pads, in addition to standard equipment."
Cory, this we both know is not always happening either. I have seen "MANY" iska sanctioned matches where no shin pads are worn. If this has changed, maybe a webpage update would be a good decision since the public who reads your publicly posted information on your web site are clearly lead to believe exactly what they read. If these are "NOT" your rules, maybe you should take some time to update them. If the iska headgear rule is as you have said in your e-mail below, than maybe you should make that clear on your web site too. And if so, I would like to know if iska would still be an accepted amateur kickboxing sanctioning body in the state of Florida.
In the IKF Rules, we clearly state that Amateur International
Rules:
http://www.ikfkickboxing.com/RulesIR.htm
MuayThai
Rules:
http://www.ikfkickboxing.com/RulesMT.htm
and San
Shou Rule bouts:
http://www.ikfkickboxing.com/SanShouRules.htm
Shin
pads are only required in a TOURNAMENT, but not in single bouts.
Only in Full Contact Rules: http://www.ikfkickboxing.com/RulesFC.htm are shin pads "AND" foot pads mandatory in the IKF.
However, is ALL IKF Sanctioned AMATEUR Bouts, HEADGEAR is
Mandatory. In addition, the TYPE of headgear is important as well:
http://www.ikfkickboxing.com/OpinionLegalHeadgear.htm
Thank you for your official response Cory. It will be noted in
the article we will be running in regards to the update on Mr. Keith Smeltzer
and his IKF Suspension and fine that is still due.
Sincerely
Steve
Fossum
IKF & ISCF World President
Keith Schmelzer
It has been strange that the "ONLY" IKF Promoters the IKF has lost to other organizations, like the iska are those who did not want to follow the Mandatory IKF Rules for Headgear for Amateur fighters. Those promoters who no longer sanction with the IKF that have either broken the IKF Mandatory Headgear Rule for Amateur Fighters or just did not want to be bound to it include:
|
HOME - NEWS - EVENTS - RANKINGS - SANCTIONING - JOINING - RULES & REGULATIONS - MERCHANDISE - ISCF - MMA |
