could a contract say if "whoever" wins he gets 60% and loser gets 40%?

I would assume it "could" since everything is negotiable, but I doubt a contract ever reads that way.

 

It can be set to where the winner gets the more money.. They can do it however they want, just as long as both sides agree..

 

They used to all the time. That's why the term "prizefighting" was coined.

 

Sure they could. But the purse should be 50/50 since Floyd draws more PPV and Pacquiao draws more media exposure.

 

theyve stopped doing it since all the promoters rule the sport and are so tied in with ppv costs, etc. the culture has changed- in UFC i think they have bonuses and stuff like that that reward wins and kos, but boxing has an attitude thats like movie making- where if you got brad pitt and jonah hill in a movie- brads the star- he s getting 30 mil, and jonah s getting 5 mil. it dosent matter if jonah wins an oscar or anything- its economics - who brings in the money- gets the money-
not a performance based thing. which is probably more fair - in a single fight case.

 

A contract can say what ever the two parties want.

 

It can say it, but such a stipulation invites corruption.

 

60/40 I kick yo ass.

 

it's normally split 40-40 with winner getting extra 20.

 

This.

 

Yeah those just seem iffy. Looks great to the fans as it appears they'll fight harder for the win, but so much **** going on behind the scenes I'm not sure it's advisable.

 

Would be better, screw the "bigger draw," should be the better fighter.

 

Indeed, we already have enough conspiracy theorists on ESB atsch

 

Within reason, I dont think a contract can violate the law or human rights. other than that though its clean sailing