IOC President Kirsty Coventry's good job is already being witnessed
▪️Eligibility for any female category event at the Olympic Games or any other IOC event, including individual and team sports, is now limited to biological females, determined on the basis of a one‑time SRY gene screening
March 26, 2026
International Olympic Committee
International Olympic Committee announces new Policy on the Protection of the Female (Women’s) Category in Olympic Sport.
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has announced a new Policy on the Protection of the Female (Women’s) Category in Olympic Sport and Guiding Considerations for International Federations and Sports Governing Bodies.
Following today’s approval of the policy by the IOC Executive Board, it will apply for the LA28 Olympic Games onwards, and is not retroactive
▪️Eligibility for any female category event at the Olympic Games or any other IOC event, including individual and team sports, is now limited to biological females, determined on the basis of a one‑time SRY gene screening.
▪️Evidence‑based and expert‑informed, the policy applicable for the LA28 Olympic Games onwards protects fairness, safety and integrity in the female category.
▪️It is not retroactive and does not apply to any grassroots or recreational sports programmes.
The policy explains that, for all disciplines on the sports programme of an IOC event, including the Olympic Games and for both individual and team sports, eligibility for any female category is limited to biological females.
Eligibility for the female category is to be determined in the first instance by SRY gene screening to detect the absence or presence of the SRY gene.
Based on scientific evidence, the IOC considers that the presence of the SRY gene is fixed throughout life and represents highly accurate evidence that an athlete has experienced male sex development. Furthermore, the IOC considers that SRY gene screening via saliva, cheek swab or blood sample is unintrusive compared to other possible methods.
Athletes who screen negative for the SRY gene permanently satisfy this policy’s eligibility criteria for competition in the female category. Unless there is reason to believe that a negative reading is in error, this will be a once-in-a-lifetime test.
With the rare exception of athletes with a diagnosis of Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (CAIS) or other rare differences/disorders in sex development (DSDs) who do not benefit from the anabolic and/or performance-enhancing effects of testosterone, no athlete with an SRY-positive screen is eligible for competition in the female category at an IOC event.
Athletes with an SRY-positive screen, including XY transgender and androgen-sensitive XY-DSD athletes, continue to be included in all other classifications for which they qualify. For example, they are eligible for any male category, including in a designated male slot within any mixed category, and any open category, or in sports and events that do not classify athletes by sex.
Speaking about the policy, IOC President Kirsty Coventry said: “As a former athlete, I passionately believe in the rights of all Olympians to take part in fair competition. The policy that we have announced is based on science and has been led by medical experts. At the Olympic Games, even the smallest margins can be the difference between victory and defeat. So, it is absolutely clear that it would not be fair for biological males to compete in the female category. In addition, in some sports it would simply not be safe.”
She continued: “Every athlete must be treated with dignity and respect, and athletes will need to be screened only once in their lifetime. There must be clear education around the process and counselling available, alongside expert medical advice.”
Why was the policy developed?
The IOC administration was tasked with drafting a policy on the protection of the female category in an Olympic context that would reflect the findings of the Working Group on the Protection of the Female Category, various IOC consultations, and consideration of recent developments, including in international human rights law.
The policy was developed on the basis that it is universally accepted that providing for a female category is necessary to allow both males and females equal access to elite sport. It was guided by the IOC’s modern goals relating to equality (equal opportunities for female athletes in finals, on podiums and in championships); enhancing Olympic value (featuring both women’s and men’s finals in every sport); and visibility and inspiration (celebrating female athletes on the Olympic podium to inspire and represent women and girls worldwide).
What were the findings of the working group?
The working group reviewed the latest scientific evidence, including developments since 2021, and reached a clear consensus. Male sex provides a performance advantage in all sports and events that rely on strength, power and endurance. To ensure fairness, and to protect safety, particularly in contact sports, eligibility should therefore be based on biological sex. The group also agreed that the most accurate and least intrusive method currently available to verify biological sex is screening for the SRY gene, a segment of DNA typically found on the Y chromosome that initiates male sex development in utero and indicates the presence of testes/testicles.
How was the policy developed?
The policy is the result of an IOC review between September 2024 and March 2026, and included consideration of the IOC’s policy goals for the female category, which are, in addition to ensuring fairness, safety and integrity in elite competition, to promote equality, enhance Olympic value and increase visibility for the female category. For these reasons, the Olympic Movement has a compelling interest in having a sex-based female category.
The review included consultations with a range of experts in relevant fields, and lessons learned and feedback from Olympic Movement constituents, including International Federations (IFs) and athletes from around the world, including athletes potentially impacted by any new policy.
As part of the review, in September 2025 the IOC established a working group to specifically examine scientific, medical and legal developments since 2021. The working group members came from all five continents and included specialists in sports science, endocrinology, transgender medicine, sports medicine, women’s health, ethics and law. As a separate part of the working group, International Federation Chief Medical Officers representing individual and team sports were also included.
In addition, athletes provided crucial feedback in three ways: through an online athlete survey that received over 1,100 responses; through in-depth individual interviews with impacted athletes from around the world; and via a presentation to and discussion with members of the IOC Athletes’ Commission. Feedback from the athlete consultation revealed that, although nuances exist across sex and gender, region and athlete status (active/retired), there was a strong consensus that fairness and safety in the female category required clear, science-based eligibility rules, and that protecting the female category is a common priority.
The policy has been developed through an athlete‑centred approach that prioritises athletes’ human dignity, physical and psychological health and well‑being, and safety. Their right to privacy and confidentiality should be respected. IFs and National Olympic Committees (NOCs) should lead the education of athletes and entourage members, with a particular emphasis on the responsibility of coaches, managers and entourage members to support the athlete’s autonomy, privacy and well-being, and to refrain from sharing information beyond authorised channels. They should ensure access to mental health and safeguarding support, provide clear early guidance on SRY gene screening and, where appropriate, align it with regular sports health checks. They should also maintain safe, accessible channels for information, concerns and reporting, with specific safeguards for minors. This education and guidance should provide reassurance that all athletes have a place in sport according to their age, sex and skill, and that biological sex-based eligibility criteria (including SRY gene screening) are not a judgement on, and do not question, the athlete’s legal sex or gender identity.
Who should adopt this policy?
This policy should be adopted by IFs and other sports governing bodies, such as NOCs, National Federations and Continental Associations, when exercising their responsibility in implementing eligibility rules in relation to IOC events only.
It replaces all previous IOC statements on this matter, including the Framework on Fairness, Inclusion and Non-discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity and Sex Variations.
It is important to note that this policy does not apply to any grassroots or recreational sports programmes.
Liz Andiego with national team deputy head coach David Munuhe at the Police Depot Gym in Mathare. She remains part and parcel of Kenya's national boxing team despite deciding to fight as a pro.
▪️With IBA now allowing boxers to fight in pro and amateur boxing Liz aka Mkono Chuma is infact looking forward to the Africa Championships to captain Hit Squad
March 26, 2026
Who said Liz Andiego has quit amateur boxing? And that she will not represent Kenya’s national boxing team nicknamed Hit Squad? Far from it.
As this picture shows, Liz is still part and parcel of Kenya’s national team and is looking forward to represent the country in the 2026 Africa Men’s and Women’s Elite Boxing Championships in which there’s a total of $1000,000 at stake, courtesy of IBA whose prize money tournaments have become very popular and useful to boxers worldwide in this era of commercialisation in sports with medals gradually losing their meaning.
I caught up with Andiego doing her workouts under the national boxing team deputy head coach David Munuhe who is also the Secretary-General of the Boxing Federation of Kenya.
“Andiego is still with us, huyu ni wetu,” Munuhe told boxersworld.co.ke.
“We allowed her to fight as a pro to maintain her shape and gain ring time because she has no opponents in Kenya,” said Munuhe as he held pads for Andiego at the Police Depot Gym in Mathare.
Andiego has not fought a Kenyan opponent for three years now. They’re all scared of her.
As Andiego prepares to take on Tanzania’s Nelusigwe Mdemu on Friday, March 27, 2026, in Kalakoda Promotions card at Masshouse along Ngong Road, she has also responded to some fans and former boxers who have been suggesting it’s time for her to call it quits.
“I advice them to let me decide on my own when I’ll quit boxing, surely I don’t know what’s itching them. They should let me do my job to make money when I’m still strong,” Andiego told boxersworld.co.ke in an interview.
“IBA rules specify clearly 40 years is the age limit, I’ve not reached there, and once I’m 40, I’ll still continue fighting as a pro until such a time I feel my mind is not coordinating well with my body.”
Andiego recalls at the 2022 Women’s World Championships in Istanbul, Turkey’s heavyweight Sennur Demir won gold at 39 years defeating Morocco’s icon Khadija Mardi in the finals. Andiego lost to Turkey’s Elif Guneri in the quarter-finals of the light-heavyweight berth.
Commenting on her pro debut against the Tanzanian boxer, Andiego said while she normally respects her opponents, Mdemu should be ready for her fists of stone.
“I’ll punch her hard she feels me, I’ll be in charge of the fight l’ll not let her play around with me,” said the 38-year-old Andiego, East Africa’s most decorated female boxer.
The last time Andiego fought a Tanzanian boxer was during the 2025 Africa Zone 3 Championships in Nairobi. She stopped Salma Changalawe in round two of the middleweight semi-finals, and in the finals Andiego dropped a suspicious points defeat to DR Congo’s Mwamba Lulua.
Andiego was due to have made her debut on February 27 against another Tanzanian boxer, Christina Raura, but the bout was cancelled just hours before the fight due a medical issue.
Word has it her pressure had exceeded the maximum allowed during a fight. Such cases are common in boxing when some boxers’ pressure shoots up especially if one is meeting a tough opponent.
Top left Marie Joelle Mwika and below is her middleweight opponent from Zimbabwe Monalisa Sibanda and the main poster with all the female boxers in action on April 18 in Lubumbashi.
▪️Marie Joelle Mwika, her younger sister Brigitte Mbabi, Nyembo Giselle and Diyoka Benedicte are among DR Congo’s female boxers to set alight Lumbumbashi
March 26, 2026
Reigning Mandela African Boxing Cup light heavyweight champion Marie Joelle Mwika leads an array of renowned DR Congo boxers for an all-female card on April 18 in Lubumbashi.
The 25-year-old Mwika will face Zimbabwe’s highly regarded Monalisa Sibanda (7-12-0), the first professional boxer from the southern African country.
In addition to Mwika, other leading DR Congo’s top boxers expected to set alight Lubumbashi are Mwika’s younger sister who is the reigning Africa and Mandela Cup welterweight champion Brigitte Mbabi, Africa and Zone 3 flyweight champion Nyembo Gisele and Africa, Mandela Cup and Zone 3 minimumweight champion Diyoka Benedicte will also be in action at the Attene Hewa Bora Arena.
Commenting on her Zimbambwean opponent, Mwika, making her second appearance in pro boxing, said she can’t lose at home.
“She cannot beat me at home in Lumbumbashi, this is where I was born,” Mwika told boxersworld.co.ke
“I’ve not seen her boxing but that’s not a problem, I’m better than her, I’m not aiming for a KO, if happens fine.”
Marie Joelle Mwika (left) is declared the winner in her pro debut against Eyenga Fila whom she outpointed in a four-round heavyweight bout on September 26, 2025.
Mwika is training at the Simba Ndoki Gym under coach Mathias Kitos.
Among other medals she has won for her country since making her international debut in 2018 are silver and bronze at the African Elite Men’s and Women’s Championships.
Mwika made her pro debut on September 26, 2025, outpointing compatriot Eyenga Fila from Matadi, the chief sea port of DR Congo and the capital of Kongo Central Province.
Owing to inactivity at home, Sibanda has mostly been fighting outside Zimbabwe. She is a regular feature in Kenya’s capital city Nairobi where she has fought Conjestina Achieng, Fatuma Zarika, Florence Muthoni and Everline Adero, her only victory being against Muthoni.
Mbabi, who is currently training in Kinshasa, said she has yet to be told the opponent she will fight.
“I’m ready for any boxer, I’m in top shape,” said Mbabi.
Mbabi and her elder sister Mwika started learning boxing in 2016 at the Muhammad Ali Gym under their father and coach the late Mwika Bamanya Emmanuel Blaise.
Their mum, Mbabi Brigitte, is their number one fan. She will definitely attend the show accompanied by her last born daughter Mulanga Meta.
The card was earlier scheduled for March 28th, but due to organizational hitches, the fights were postponed to April 18th.
A fierce exchange of gunfire looms between bitter rivals Kenya Police and KDF in the National Open Championships at Charter Hall from April 1-4. Among the highlights is the lightweight battle between KDF international Washington Wandera pictured in blue attire during the 2025 Men's World Championships in Dubai and stubborn newcomer Emmanuel Omolo (top pic right). He shocked Wandera with a points win in the 2025 national league final leg in Kisumu.
▪️KDF soldiers are reportedly “digging trenches at night” near Charter Hall preparing for the ambush and will use every arsenal at their disposal to win the National Open Championships.
March 25, 2026
The 2026 Kenyan boxing scene is set to explode with the continuation of one of the country’s most intense boxing rivalries between the Kenya Police aka “Chafua Chafua” and the Kenya Defence Forces.
A dramatic 2025 season saw Kenya Police reclaim the national league title and won the National Open Championships as well.
This year’s National Open, scheduled for Charter Hall from April 1-4, is therefore poised to be a high-stakes battle of power, technique, and pride.
Known for their aggressive boxing, “Chafua Chafua” will be looking to prove that their 2025 win was the start of a new dynasty while the challengers, KDF, will capitalise on their tactical proficiency, rapid adaptation and a never-say-die attitude.
Christened Operation Tame Chafua Chafua, KDF are using their skills in the battlefront to plot a well executed attack to flatten Police.
After narrowly losing the 2025 open title, KDF are expected to bring fierce competition to the 2026 National Open showdown to regain the title and pride to their comrades in the barracks.
Police won the overall National Open 2025 title with 24 points, KDF second on 23 and third-placed Prisons 11, Nairobi and Siaya a jointly fourth with 9 points, Kibra 6, Kisumu 4, Kongowea and Nakuru 2 each.
KDF will heavily rely on their women’s team which topped in the 2025 Open Championships with 7 points followed closely by Siaya on 6, Police and Kibra 3 each. Police’s only female boxer is African Games bantamweight bronze medallist Amina Martha.
Police however had an edge over KDF in men’s category winning on 21 points with KDF amassing 16 points to finish second. The 7 points from their women’s team shot them up to 23, almost toppling Police.
Among the key rivalries include bantamweight Dennis Muthama (KDF) vs Shaffi Bakari (Police), lightweight southpaw Emmanuel Omolo vs soldier Washington Wandera, African Games middleweight champion Edwin Okong’o vs cop George Cosby and world light-heavyweight quarter-finalist soldier Robert Okaka vs Humphrey Ochieng with “Man Man Ngori” enjoying five consecutive wins over Jakababa.
The lawmakers will miss the services of their promising flyweight Diouf Muimi who has been employed by KDF together with Nairobi County boxers, flyweight Faith Nafuna and Sheila Auma. They are still undergoing training in Eldoret.
New Police recruits, all Zone 3 bronze medallists, featherweight Paul “Pacman” Omondi, light-welterweight Caleb Wandera and welterweight Wiseman Kavondo will also miss the action as they’re still at Kiganjo Police Training College.
It is a matter of public record that the entity regulating professional boxing in Nigeria traces its informal origins to 1947—13 years before independence.
While claiming unbroken continuity, it was not formally established until registration as an incorporated trustee with the Corporate Affairs Commission in 1986. No statutory law, federal decree, or legislative instrument grants it exclusive or perpetual authority. The green-white-green flags are symbolic at best; they confer no governmental affiliation.
Criminal investigations are already underway into its operations, including allegations of financial misconduct, off-book accounts, and irregularities in licensing and sanctioning.
These probes—stemming from numerous petitions and insider disclosures—underscore the urgency for reform.
It is particularly lamentable that young boxers, who are the sport’s future, have aligned with this status quo through public demonstrations. Not all boxers are aware of the full extent, but some—especially those most favored by the NBBofC—are well aware, and their loyalty stems from it. Many of those visible in such protests hold records inflated by staged bouts from fabricated BoxRec accounts. (They are busy fighting old men and women in staged bouts) This is the tactics employed by the NBBofC to bolster these boxers’ records.
For example:
Ali Shaibu. https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/681815
A boxer who boxed in Ghana and won his first two bouts. He stopped since 2015 but his profile was revived from 2019 using different unknown persons to impersonate Ali. This account went on to fight against the following:
1. Taiwo Olowu – 2019
2. Riliwan Lawal – 2021
3. Suleiman Jafaru – 2021
4. Rasheed Adeyemo – 2021
5. Tunde Segun Adeyemi – 2022
6. Osita Umeh – 2022
7. Samuel Opaogun – 2022
8. Yusuf Adeniji – 2022
9. Yusuf Ayinde Ogunbunmi – 2022
10. Timmy Baimolda – 2022
11. Babatunde Oyesiji – 2023
12. Ayanfe Adeoye – 2023
13. Isreal Awodeko – 2023
14. Ibrahim Taofeek – 2024
15. Chigbo Elisha Obizulike – 2024
16. Abdul-Azeez Rilliwan Sarumi – 2024
17. Raheem Animashaun – 2024
18. Raheem Animashaun – 2024
19. Olalade Jamiu Oyesiji – 2024
20. Basiru Abdulwaheed – 2024
21. Alaba Babatunde Omotola – 2024
22. Emmanuel Abimbola – 2025
23. Alaba Babatunde Omotola – 2025
24. Moruff Akanji – 2025
25. Sodiq Oyakojo – 2025
26. Lucky Oyibo – 2025
27. Adeogun Awwal – 2025
28. Adekunle Opeyemi – 2025
29. Godwin Ezekiel Oparanusi – 2026
The links below show three of Ali’s fights being impersonated by three different boxers:
Further investigations show this profile has been impersonated by the NBBofC to build their favorite boxers—most of whom are on the list and members of the protest. This is just one out of numerous fake accounts on BoxRec. Some of these boxers whose profiles are being used are already dead, but Remi and his cronies don’t care.
When accountability prevails, those records will collapse, and individuals will face personal liability for fraud, bribery, and undue influence that have suppressed genuine talent.
Modern commissioning bodies worldwide—such as those aligned with WADA and international federations—mandate rigorous protocols: comprehensive pre-fight medical examinations (including brain scans, eye tests, and hydration checks), certified ringside doctors, emergency personnel, mandatory anti-doping testing (in-competition and out-of-competition), whereabouts reporting, education programmes, and strict sanctions for violations. Licensing is conflict-free, payments traceable, and results transparently recorded.
Contrast this with the current regime’s approach: medical clearances often reduced to a cursory “are you okay?” followed by a fist bump by Mr. Boxing laughable in any serious context, yet deemed sufficient for professionals risking their health. No brain scans, no anti-doping rigour, no verifiable safeguards. This is not oversight; it is negligence.
Listen, change has come to stay. The Nigeria Boxing Federation’s Professional Boxing Commission introduces licensing portals, national rankings, rulebooks, and dedicated directorates for medical safety, anti-doping, and integrity. This is not usurpation—it is alignment with global standards.
The era of archaic, unaccountable control ends here. Stakeholders must choose: defend relics, or embrace progress. Integrity will prevail over love for corruption.
▪️NBB have have accused NBF of interfering in pro boxing instead of concentrating on amateur boxing
March 24, 2026
Two bulls are currently locked in a pitched battle in Nigerian boxing.
In the red corner is the Nigerian Boxing Board of Control (NBB of C), and in the blue corner is Nigerian Boxing Federation (NBF) which has been accused of usurping the powers of NBB, the traditional authority regulating pro boxing in Nigeria in charge of issuing licenses and sanctioning pro fights.
NBF has estabilished a new Professional Boxing Commission to regulate pro boxing but the NBB are taking none of it, and are even ready to shed blood to defend their territory and daily bread. War is war!!!
Tension is high with NBB bigwigs accusing NBF of chewing more than they can swallow.
Top guns at NBB led by President Dr. Rafiu Oladipo want NBF to streamline amateur boxing first instead of involving themselves with pro boxing.
They claim NBF, under President Wale Edun who’s Minister of Finance,
have minimal knowledge on pro boxing, and should therefore concentrate on amateur boxing.
Guns have been uncorked! This standoff is shaping up into another marathon battle typical in African boxing characterised by power struggle at the expense of the boxers, the main actors in the sport.
One wonders why can’t African boxing leaders learn to sort out their issues with decorum. They ought to know that the boxing fraternity is fed up of their selfish struggle for power yet the continent has yet to make an impact at the global stage.
Kenya's 1990 Commonwealth Games heavyweight champion George "Foreman" Onyango blasts IOC for reducing to seven weight classes for the 2026 Commonwealth Games boxing tournament.
▪️The international Olympic body has reduced the number of weight categories to seven – men and women – in this year’s Commonwealth Games in Glasgow, Scotland
March 24, 2026
One of Kenya’s top boxers George “Foreman” Onyango has accused the International Olympic Committee (IOC) of discrimination by reducing to seven the number of weight classes in this year’s Commonwralth Games in Glasgow, Scotland, from July 23 to August 2.
“This is discrimination of the highest order, it’s unacceptable,” Onyango told boxersworld.co.ke in a telephone interview from his rural home in Western Kenya.
Onyango was reacting to IOC’s decision to reduce weight classes to seven in this year’s Commonwealth Games, accusing IOC of killing boxing in their competitions.
“Instead of adding more weights they’re reducing them, thus marginalising boxers whose weight categories are not included,” said Onyango who won heavyweight gold at the 1990 Commonwealth Games in Auckand, New Zealand.
“The IOC has made boxing meaningless and less competitive in their events, and also endangering the health of some boxers reducing weight to fit into the discriminatory seven weight divisions.
“These days winning medals in the Olympics is so easy compared to the tough and rigorous IBA World Championships, in Paris Olympics IOC cut the number of weights to 13.”
According to the IOC, the reduction to seven weight classes is meant to align with LA 2028 Olympics and ensure gender parity. It will be the Commonwralth Games men and women are competing in equal number of weight classes.
The Commonwealth Games boxing tournament will be held under the auspices of the newly-formed World Boxing (WB) which has already received provisional recognition from the IOC.
Expressing his views further on this reduction, Onyango said it means 11 boxers have been forcefully removed from Glasgow Games going by the usual IBA standard weight categories of 13 for men and 12 for women.
“I really feel sad for boxers thrown out of the Games by the IOC, even if it’s cutting costs why should they reduce the weights,” wondered Onyango.
“Reducing weights to accommodate this stupidity is unwise and unhealthy,” said a boxing official in the UK quoted on Facebook.
Many current boxers and coaches I have spoken to have expressed their displeasure at the IOC’s decision, saying it’s very demoralising for those boxers who weight classes have not been included.
“IOC can as well remove boxing in the Commonwealth and Olympic Games if they will continue leaving out some boxers in their competitions, we’re very disappointed,” said a top boxer in Africa.
The 2026 Commonwealth Games are being scaled back to cut down on expenditure and public funding. Total number of disciplines have been reduced to only 10 from 19 at the 2022 Commonwealth Games in Birmingham, England.
What is further annoying the boxers is that IOC is still offering no incentives other than their normal medals, making their events meaningless in this age of commercialisation in sports.
“Winning medals in the Commonwealth and Olympic Games is just for prestige, we’ve seen our former teammates hanging medals in their houses but were not even honoured by their governments,” said a furious female boxer.
They all praised IBA for offering prize money in their tournaments, urging the international body to àspeed up the process of staging the 2026 IBA Africa Elite Men’s and Women’s Championships.
“We want to fight for money now not mere medals which can’t put food on our tables,” said one of the boxers all of whom requested for anonymity.
International boxers from Kibra Youth Club are proud to have represented Kenya in Angola and Bangkok despite training in a gym without a single punch bag. Pictured at their gym in Kibra from left Ellah Demesi, Phelix Ochieng and African Youth Games bronze medallist Clinton Omondi
▪️The future stars are wondering how boxing comedians are getting a lot of financial support while no one cares about them at their Kibra Youth Club
▪️Know your future champions: profiles of Ellah Demesi, Clinton “Canelo” Omondi and Phelix Ochieng
March 24, 2026
The three promising boxers go back to their roots to share with us how and when they got involved with boxing, and to whom they attribute their success to plus the challenges they face.
Coach Edward Ogweno shows Ellah Demesi (right) and the junior boxer how to slip punches
ELLAH DEMESI
Age: 16 years
Stance: Southpaw
School: Shadrack Kimalel
Class: Grade 10
Favourite subject: Chemistry
Ambition: Achieve greatness in boxing by winning several titles up to the world level
Boxing idol: Veronica Mbithe and Caroline Dubois
Titles won: Junior championship 2025/2026 at Pal Pal
Where you started boxing: At Kibra Youth Club under coach Edward Ogweno
First coach and how you benefited from him: My first and current coach is Ogweno. He guided me well showing me various boxing skills and techniques on how to tackle different type of opponents. He is also good in giving me mental and emotional support during tough times. My second coach is Vincent.
To whom do you attribute your success to: Caroline Dubois because she inspires me through her dedication, techniques and mental toughness.
Toughest opponent: Stacy
Most memorable win: Nairobi junior championship
Boxing challenges in Kibra: Lack of modern facilities at our gym and equipment. I’m also appealing to sponsors to support us because we lack funds to compete in tournaments outside Nairobi. If SportPesa and prominent people are supporting boxing comedians they should also do the same to us
Hobbies: Travelling, listening to music and watching movies
Favourite food: Pilau, chicken and chips
PHELIX OCHIENG
Club: Kibra Youth
Age:16 years
Stance: Orthodox
School: Raila Educational Centre
Class: Grade 10
Favourite subject: History and English
Ambition: Winning many titles and become a world champion
Boxing idol: Paul Omondi who was my clubmate before joining Police
Boxing titles won: Nairobi junior featherweight title in 2025 and 2026
Where you started your boxing: I joined boxing in 2024 at St Martin School and the moved to Kibra Youth Club
Who inspired you to take up boxing: My grandfather
First coach and how you benefited from him: Coach Ogweno. Gave me mental support, motivation, taught me to respect my teammates and opponents. He also instilled discipline in me
Whom do you attribute your success to: I thank Paul Omondi for inspiring me and taught me a lot through hard sparring. I also admire his boxing style, discipline and he’s a hard worker
Toughest opponent: Ayub
Most memorable win: Nairobi junior championship
Boxing challenges in Kibra: Our club lacks a sponsor. We lack several things like punchbags, skipping ropes, pads, tracksuits and generally modern facilities. We also need funds to travel outside Nairobi during boxing competitions. Our coaches also need some allowance because right they don’t get any payment. What has surprised us is seeing boxing comedians promised a lot of money. We need that money also because we’re representing our country, comedians are just doing it for fun.
Hobbies: Playing volleyball ana riding bicycle
Favourite food: Chapati with beef, fried chicken, ugali, fish and vegetables
CLINTON “CANELO” OMONDI
Club: Kibra Youth Boxing Club
Age: 15 years
Stance: Southpaw
School: Mbagathi Junior Secondary
Class: Grade 9
Favourite subjects: Social Sciences
Ambition in boxing: To win major titles and make good money through by two fists
Your boxing idol: Alvarez Canelo
Which year did you start learning boxing: I started boxing in 2020 at Kibra Youth Boxing Club
Who inspired you to take up boxing: My father Jacob Aiden inspired me to take up boxing.
First coach and how you have benefited from him: Coach Ogweno. I benefited a lot from him because he was very patient with me showing me all the basics of boxing and what to expect ahead. He also instilled discipline in me.
To whom do you attribute your successful boxing progression: I attribute it to coach Ogweno
Toughest opponent: The DR Congo boxer I fought in the semi-finals of the African Youth Games in 2025. He was a difficult opponent because he was stronger than me, and we suspected he was not my age mate.
Most memorable win: Against the Malawi boxer in African Youth Games boxing quarter-final.
Boxing challenges in Kibra: The challenges we go through are lack of equipment such as punchbags, skipping ropes, speedballs, and several other modern facilities..Our club also lacks cash to enable us travel out of Kibra for tournaments held outside Nairobi. We urgently need a sponsor.
When it rains it becomes muddy in Kibra making it hard make it to the gym. There’s also thuggery but as a boxer I don’t fear anybody.
Hobbies: Reading books and watching pro bouts to learn new skills.
Favourite food: Chapati and beans.
International boxers from Kibra Youth Club are proud to have represented Kenya in Angola and Bangkok despite training in a gym without a single punch bag. Pictured at their gym in Kibra from left Ellah Demesi, Phelix Ochieng and African Youth Games bronze medallist Clinton Omondi
Jubilant Morocco boxers topped Africa and are likely to get more quotas for the Youth Olympics in Dakar, Senegal, from October 31-November 13, 2026.
▪️ Only 10 African countries took part in the Youth Olympic Qualification tournament in Bangkok, and this means fewer representation in this year’s Youth Olympics in Dakar, Senegal
March 23, 2026
With the Futures U19 Cup boxing tournament over, focus now turns to how many boxers from Africa will feature in the Youth Olympics in Dakar, Senegal, from October 31 to November 13.
The International Olympic Committee in conjunction with World Boxing will forward the quotas of the boxers selected to respective National Olympic Committees provided the boxers were in the Bangkok tournament.
Only 10 African countries took part with Morocco topping the continent by finishing 12th overall on four bronzes and therefore likely to get more quotas than any other country in Africa since the overall performance will be the criteria for a ticket to Dakar.
While Senegal sneaked to the semis and won a bronze through Mariame Sow at middleweight, their disastrous performance cannot be overlooked.
The West Africans were represented by 15 boxers – 8 male and 7 female – but none of them won a single fight. It will therefore be interesting to see their quota numbe for the Games they’re hosting.
North African countries are likely to get more quotas than the Sub-Saharan African countries because they did better with 10 boxers in the quarter-finals and four in the semis. Kenya’s Sonia Atieno and Senegal’s Soda Faye, both 65 kg, were the only boxers from Sub-Saharan Africa in the quarters.
It’s a cut-throat competition on the road to Dakar given that only 120 boxers – 60 male and 60 female – in five weight categories each for male and female boxers, will take part in the Youth Olympics.
Africa have themselves to blame for being represented by a skeleton number of boxers yet over 15 countries have already been affiliated to World Boxing, the body now in charge of entering boxers for the Olympics.
The eligible boxers are those born between November 14, 2008 and December 31, 2009.
Boxers from Europe, Asia and USA are likely to get a big chunk of the quotas for doing well in the Bangkok tournament, the qualifier for the Youth Olympics.
Uzbekistan won the Futures U19 Cup followed by rivals Kazakhstan, USA, India, Ukraine and France in the top six.
▪️Economists suggest cities planning to host the Games should ensure they fit into a broader strategy to promote development that will outlive the Olympic festivities while others propose one city be made permanent host
The costs of hosting the Olympics have skyrocketed, while the economic benefits are far from clear. The 2026 Winter Olympic Games in Milan and Cortina d’Ampezzo are focusing on long-term infrastructure and cutting unnecessary costs, despite construction delays.
▪️The massive costs and dubious benefits associated with hosting the Olympic Games have led to criticism of the host city selection process.
▪️Many economists have called for reforms to the process, including reducing the cost of bidding and encouraging cities to develop more sustainable development strategies.
▪️Organizers have sought to break the streak of financial strain. The 2024 Paris Olympics was the cheapest in decades, and the 2026 Winter Olympics will be the first to be cohosted by two cities.
▪️Observers have also criticized the IOC for not sharing more of the fast growing revenue generated by the Games.
When did the costs of hosting the Games become a concern?
What costs do cities incur for hosting the Games?
How do the benefits compare to the costs?
How did the pandemic affect the cost of the Tokyo Games?
Is the total spending for hosting the Olympics going down?
How could the Olympics be made more manageable?
The Olympics have evolved dramatically since the first modern Games were held in 1896. In the second half of the twentieth century, both the costs of hosting and the revenue produced by the spectacle grew rapidly, sparking controversy over the burdens host countries shouldered. A growing number of economists argue that the benefits of hosting the Games are at best exaggerated and at worst nonexistent, leaving many host countries with large debts and maintenance liabilities. These analysts suggest that Olympic committees reform the bidding and selection process to incentivize realistic budget planning, increase transparency, and promote sustainable investments that serve the public interest. Still, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and its supporters contend that hosting can raise a city’s global profile and generate economic benefits through tourism and investments in infrastructure.
Recent Games have highlighted the ongoing debate over the costs and benefits of hosting such a mega-event. The 2020 Tokyo Olympics continued a decades-long streak of overrunning costs, which rose more than expected after an unprecedented delay due to the COVID-19 pandemic. With other former hosts still struggling with the debts they incurred, some candidate cities for future Games have withdrawn their bids or scaled down their plans. In response to these financial pressures, the IOC has sought to loosen restrictions and reduce the burden on host cities.
When did the costs of hosting the Games become a concern?
For much of the twentieth century, the staging of the Olympic Games was a manageable burden for host cities. The events were held in wealthy countries, either in Europe or the United States, and in the era before television broadcasting, hosts didn’t expect to make a profit. Instead, the Games were publicly funded, with these countries better positioned to bear the costs due to their larger economies and more advanced infrastructure.
Munich may be a large, bustling city, but apparently no one has a need to go to the former Olympic Stadium where the Summer Games were held in 1972. Today, the former train stop is overgrown with weeds, littered with trash, and dotted with graffiti.
The 1970s marked a turning point, writes economist Andrew Zimbalist, author of three books about Olympic economics. The Games were growing rapidly, with the number of Summer Olympics participants almost doubling from the early twentieth century and the number of events increasing by a third during the 1960s. But the killing of protesters by security forces ahead of the 1968 Mexico City Games and the Palestinian militant group known as the Black September Organization’s fatal terrorist assault on Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Games tarnished the image of the Olympics, and public skepticism of taking on debt to host the Games grew. In 1972, Denver became the first and only chosen host city to reject the opportunity to host after voters passed a referendum refusing additional public spending for the Games. A 2024 University of Oxford study estimated that, since 1960, the average cost of hosting has been triple the bid price.
The 1976 Summer Olympics in Montreal came to symbolize the fiscal risks of hosting. The projected cost of $124 million was billions below the actual cost, largely due to construction delays and cost overruns for a new stadium, saddling the city’s taxpayers with some $1.5 billion in debt that took nearly three decades to pay off.
Los Angeles the first city in decades to turn a profit hosting the Olympics, finishing with a $215 million operating surplus.
Los Angeles was the only city to bid for the 1984 Summer Olympics, allowing it to negotiate exceptionally favorable terms with the IOC. Most importantly, Los Angeles was able to rely almost entirely on existing stadiums and infrastructure rather than promise lavish new facilities to entice the IOC. That, combined with a sharp jump in television broadcast revenue, made Los Angeles the first city in decades to turn a profit hosting the Olympics, finishing with a $215 million operating surplus.
Los Angeles’ success led to a rising number of cities bidding—from two for the 1988 Games to twelve for the 2004 Games. This allowed the IOC to choose the cities with the most ambitious—and expensive—plans. In addition, as researchers Robert Baade and Victor Matheson point out, bidding by developing countries more than tripled after 1988. Countries such as China, Brazil, and Russia have been eager to use the Games to demonstrate their progress on the world stage.
However, these countries invested massive sums to create the necessary infrastructure. Costs spiraled to more than $50 billion for the 2014 Winter Games in Sochi, $20 billion for 2016 Summer Games in Rio de Janeiro, and a reported $39 billion for the 2022 Winter Games in Beijing, according to Business Insider’s estimate. (China said the Games cost just $4 billion.)
These costs have led some cities to withdraw their bids for upcoming Games . In 2019, the IOC adopted a process to make bidding less expensive, extending the bidding period and broadening the geographic requirements to allow multiple cities, states, or countries to co-host. But this has not yet translated into more bidders. In 2021, Brisbane, Australia—the 2032 Summer Games’ host—became the first city to win an Olympic bid unopposed since Los Angeles in 1984.
To mitigate costs and support the creation of new facilities, the IOC has begun hosting Olympic Games across multiple cities within a host country, allowing greater use of existing facilities and housing. This year’s Winter 2026 Olympics in Milan and Cortina d’Ampezzo, Italy—known as the Milano Cortina 2026 Games—will mark the first-ever Olympics to be cohosted by two cities. The Games will also reuse materials from the Paris Olympics two years prior, including medical equipment.
What costs do cities incur for hosting the Games?
Cities invest millions of dollars in evaluating, preparing, and submitting a bid to the IOC. The cost of planning, hiring consultants, organizing events, and the necessary travel consistently falls between $50 million and $100 million. Tokyo spent as much as $150 million on its failed 2016 bid, and about half that much for its successful 2020 bid, while Toronto decided it could not afford the $60 million it would have needed for a 2024 bid.
Once a city is chosen to host, it has around a decade to prepare for the influx of athletes and tourists. The Summer Games are far larger, attracting hundreds of thousands of foreign tourists to watch more than ten thousand athletes compete in about three hundred events, compared with under three thousand athletes competing in about one hundred events during the Winter Games. The most immediate need is the creation or upgrading of highly specialized sports facilities such as cycling tracks and ski-jumping arenas, the Olympic Village, and a venue large enough to host the opening and closing ceremonies.
Tokyo spent as much as $150 million on its failed 2016 bid, and Toronto decided it couldn’t afford its 2024 bid.
There is also usually the need for more general infrastructure, especially housing and transportation. The IOC requires cities hosting the Summer Games to have a minimum of forty thousand available hotel rooms, which in Rio’s case necessitated the construction of fifteen thousand new hotel rooms. Roads, train lines, and airports also need to be upgraded or constructed.
Altogether, these infrastructure costs range from $5 billion to more than $50 billion. Many countries justify such expenditures in the hopes that the spending will outlive the Olympic Games. For instance, some 85 percent [PDF] of the 2014 Sochi Games’ more than $50 billion budget went to building non-sports infrastructure from scratch. More than half of the Beijing 2008 budget of $45 billion went to rail, roads, and airports, while nearly a fourth went to environmental clean-up efforts.
Operational costs make up a smaller but still significant chunk of hosts’ Olympics budgets. Security costs have escalated after the 9/11 attacks—Sydney spent $250 million in 2000 while Athens spent over $1.5 billion in 2004, and costs have remained between $1 billion and $2 billion since. (They were even higher during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2022, when Tokyo reportedly shelled out $2.8 billion for disease prevention alone.)
Almost all of the facilities built for the 2004 Athens Olympics, whose costs contributed to the Greek debt crisis, are now derelict.
General view of the former Olympic Village in Athens, Greece on July 31, 2014. (Photo by Milos Bicanski/Getty Images)
Also problematic are so-called white elephants, or expensive facilities that, because of their size or specialized nature, have limited post-Olympics use. These often impose costs for years to come. Sydney’s Olympic stadium costs the city $30 million a year to maintain. Beijing’s famous “Bird’s Nest” stadium cost $460 million to build, requires $10 million a year to maintain, and sat mostly unused after the 2008 Games, until the city used it again to host the 2022 Winter Games. Almost all of the facilities built for the 2004 Athens Olympics, whose costs contributed to the Greek debt crisis, are now derelict. In Montreal, the Olympic stadium known as the Big O is frequently stylized as the “Big Owe” for its massive costs; in 2024, Quebec’s government said it would spend $870 million to replace the rarely used stadium’s roof for the third time, leading critics to push for its demolition.
Servicing the debt that is left over after hosting the Games can burden public budgets for decades
Economists say the Games’ so-called implicit costs must also be considered. These include the opportunity costs of public spending that could have been spent on other priorities. Servicing the debt that is left over after hosting the Games can burden public budgets for decades *. It took Montreal until 2006 to pay off the last of its debt from the 1976 Games, while Greece’s billions in Olympics debt helped bankrupt the country.
The debt and maintenance costs of the 2014 Sochi Winter Games will cost Russian taxpayers nearly $1 billion per year for the foreseeable future, experts estimate. But while some in Sochi see the unused stadiums and overbuilt facilities as a waste, other residents argue that the Games spurred spending on roads, water systems, and other public goods that wouldn’t have otherwise happened.
How do the benefits compare to the costs?
As the costs of hosting have skyrocketed, revenues cover only a fraction of expenditures. Beijing’s 2008 Summer Olympics generated $3.6 billion in revenue, compared with over $40 billion in costs, and Tokyo’s delayed Summer Games generated $5.8 billion in revenue and $13 billion in costs. What’s more, much of the revenue doesn’t go to the host—the IOC keeps more than half of all television revenue, typically the single largest chunk of money generated by the Games.
Impact studies carried out or commissioned by host governments before the Games often argue that hosting the event will provide a major economic lift by creating jobs, drawing tourists, and boosting overall economic output. However, research carried out after the Games shows that these purported benefits are dubious.
In a study of the 2002 Salt Lake City Games, for example, Matheson, along with economists Robert Baumann and Bryan Engelhardt, found a short-term boost [PDF] of seven thousand additional jobs—about one-tenth the number promised by officials—and no long-term increase in employment. As a study by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development explains, the jobs created by Olympics construction are often temporary, and unless the host region is suffering from high unemployment, the jobs mostly go to workers who are already employed, blunting the impact on the broader economy.
Economists have also found that the impact on tourism is mixed, as the security, crowding, and higher prices that the Olympics bring dissuade many visitors. Barcelona, which hosted in 1992, is cited as a tourism success story, rising from the eleventh to the sixth-most popular destination in Europe after the Summer Games there, and Sydney and Vancouver both saw slight increases in tourism after they hosted. But Baade and Matheson found that Beijing, London, and Salt Lake City all saw decreases in tourism during the years that they hosted the Games.
Economists have found that the Olympics’ impact on tourism is mixed, given the security, crowding, and higher prices.
In Brazil, the first South American country to host the Olympics, the cost of the 2016 Games exceeded $20 billion, with the city of Rio alone shouldering at least $13 billion. Challenged by the country’s deep recession, *Rio required a $900 million bailout from the federal government to cover the cost of policing the Olympics and was unable to pay all of its public employees.* The city also had to invest heavily in a broad range of infrastructure, which was meant to reinvigorate some of its struggling neighborhoods, yet in the aftermath most venues have been abandoned or barely used.
The 2024 Paris Olympics focused on updating widely used city infrastructure ahead of the Games, including cleaning the city’s famously polluted Seine River, which French officials claimed benefited the overall public. Yet the Games’ effect on the country’s economy was lower than anticipated. A national audit [PDF] found that the 2024 Games brought only a “modest” 0.07 percent increase to France’s annual gross domestic product (GDP). One study estimated that the 2026 Winter Olympics will bring [PDF] roughly $6.3 billion to Italy through tourism and immediate spending—a revenue that narrowly exceeds the Games’ anticipated budget of $6.2 billion. Still, Italy’s economy minister hopes that the Games will boost Italy’s stagnating GDP, and its government hopes to reap longer-term economic benefits from tourism and updates made to the country’s travel infrastructure.
Ultimately, there is little evidence for an overall positive economic impact. The National Bureau of Economic Research has published findings that hosting has a positive impact on a country’s international trade. But economists Stephen Billings and Scott Holladay found no long-term impact of hosting on a country’s GDP.
How did the pandemic affect the cost of the Tokyo Games?
The Games cost $13 billion to host, according to an independent Japanese _government agency, more than double what organizers had projected when Japan won hosting duties in 2013. However, the final cost was still less than half of what the same auditors predicted in 2019, and in line with the costs incurred by other recent summer hosts. (Economists say this figure excludes land and transportation costs, with the true total somewhere between $19–$34 billion.)
Costs ballooned in part because pandemic restrictions required the omission of spectators, eliminating an estimated $800 million in income from ticket sales and triggering hundreds of thousands of hotel cancellations. *The city also had to invest heavily in infrastructure, much of which has dubious long-term utility. Building new venues cost an estimated $3 billion, including $1.4 billion for a new National Stadium that sat empty during the Games. Tokyo privatized the stadium in April 2025, having sold the right to operate it for thirty years in return for just a quarter of its construction costs.
Is the total spending for hosting the Olympics going down?
While the costs of hosting the Olympics has not seemed to significantly decline, recent host cities have sought to enact cost-saving measures, with support of the IOC. Paris budgeted about $8 billion for the 2024 Olympics when it won its bid in 2017. The French Court of Auditors, the country’s national audit body, estimated in a September 2025 report [PDF] that the French government had shouldered $7.85 billion for the Paris Games in total.
By these estimates, Paris hosted the cheapest Summer Games in decades, compared to the approximately $13 billion budget for the 2020 Tokyo Games and the more than $20 billion budget for the 2016 Rio Games. Organizers say the decision to rely almost entirely on existing venues in Paris and other French cities, such as those built for the annual French Open and the 2016 European Football Championship, helped keep costs low.
The 2026 Milano Cortina Games will be held across two Italian cities and mostly utilize existing venues. Its estimated total cost of $6.2 billion is one of the lowest price tags for an Olympic Games in recent decades. However, preparations to host were dogged with familiar obstacles. Several projects—including the construction of a new sliding center in Cortina and an ice hockey venue in Milan—ran over budget or faced delays. Still, the IOC has touted both the 2024 Paris and 2026 Milano Cortina Games as successes and examples of how the Olympics can be more sustainable.
How could the Olympics be made more manageable?
A consensus has grown among economists that the Olympic Games need reforms to make them more affordable for hosts. Many have pointed out that the IOC bidding process encourages wasteful spending by favoring potential hosts who present the most ambitious plans. This so-called winner’s curse means that over-inflated bids—often pushed by local construction and hospitality interests—consistently overshoot the actual value of hosting. Observers have also criticized the IOC for not sharing more of the fast growing revenue generated by the Games.
The massive costs and dubious benefits associated with hosting the Olympic Games have led to criticism of the host city selection process.
Many economists have called for reforms to the process, including reducing the cost of bidding and encouraging cities to develop more sustainable development strategies.
Organizers have sought to break the streak of financial strain. The 2024 Paris Olympics was the cheapest in decades, and the 2026 Winter Olympics will be the first to be co-hosted by two cities.
Corruption has also dogged the IOC selection process
Bribery scandals marred the 1998 Nagano and 2002 Salt Lake City Games. In 2017, the head of Rio’s Olympic committee was charged with corruption for allegedly making payments to secure the Brazil Games, and allegations of illegal payments surfaced in the 2020 Tokyo selection.
In response, the IOC under former President Thomas Bach promoted reforms to the process, known as the Olympic Agenda 2020. These recommendations include reducing the cost of bidding, allowing hosts more flexibility in using already-existing sports facilities, encouraging bidders to develop a sustainability strategy, and increasing outside auditing and other transparency measures. It was succeeded by Olympic Agenda 2025+5 in 2021, after the IOC concluded that 88 percent of the Olympics Agenda 2020 was completed. The Olympic Agenda 2020+5 focused on issues such as sustainability and revenue generation in a post–COVID environment. Current IOC President Kristy Coventry has begun reviewing the process of selecting host cities—including a pause on deciding the 2036 Games host to examine how the bidding process can be more inclusive, transparent, and cost-effective.
A stadium built for beach volleyball now sits abandoned, pictured back in 2018
Some think more drastic measures are necessary. Economists Baumann and Matheson argue that low- and middle-income countries should spare themselves the burden of hosting altogether and the IOC should instead “award the games to rich countries that are better able to absorb more of the costs.” Zimbalist, the Olympics cost hawk, has proposed that one city be made the permanent host, allowing for the reuse of expensive infrastructure. Barring that, many economists argue, any city planning to host should ensure that the Games fit into a broader strategy to promote development that will outlive the Olympic festivities.
A previous version of this article attributed the 1972 attack on Israeli athletes at the Munich Games to Hezbollah.
About CFR
The mission of the Council on Foreign Relations is to inform U.S. engagement with the world.
Founded in 1921, CFR is a nonpartisan, independent national membership organization, think tank, educator, and publisher, including of Foreign Affairs. It generates policy-relevant ideas and analysis, convenes experts and policymakers, and promotes informed public discussion—all to have impact on the most consequential issues facing the United States and the world.
