Yes i agree with this point. After beating Wlad, then from where a sudden enthusiasm comes into the mind of Fury to sign a rematch with Wlad. IBF had their own rights, so they did it.
the IBF will see how this will reverberate across all belt holders ...they will lose respect by all fans ...sad times a head for IBF they soiled the whole weight division reputation .....this is because the heavyweight champion is in a more prestigious position and gives stature to the name of the IBF....now it's just a name....I lost respect for them ..first time I ever lost respect for organisation .
The WBO and IBF strippers are working overtime lately, probably saving up for the holidays. But like most already saw coming, the end of the Klitschko era is going along with the shattering of the belts and we get much lower level fighters getting their hands on them for the time being
I don't mind to be honest. As I stated elsewhere, it might be positively inciteful. Destroy worlds, create worlds. The rubble may produce a fertile climate in which real contenders will fight for belts often and eventually the belts will be unified via a truly worthy journey. Perhaps that's novel or idealistic. That's my intuition, however.
Well, **** the IBF then. Bunch of buffoons. Stripping the lineal unified champion a week after he schooled the previous hall of famer champion. Meanwhile bums like Wilder are fighting their 3rd or 4th voluntary defense against complete cans and avoiding the mandatory since a year or so.
You're right, the more the belts are scattered around, the higher the possibility of interesting matchups for them. And the more meaningful the quest for undisputed champion. But it's the act that is shameful for the ibf, stripping after a week for a contractual rematch clause with the guy that held the belt for years atsch
It's a difficult situation because the rematch clause is a private agreement between two individuals and should not concern the IBF. I'm all for following regulations (which most organisations don't), but the IBF should have taken a step back and used some common sense in this case. Still prefer IBF to the WBA and WBC who let certain belt-holders keep their titles forever without ever enforcing mandatories.
It's a shame as I think the IBF are the least ****tiest but there is no common sense in stripping Fury 10 days after winning the title. Wlad is ranked only behind Glazkhov in the IBF rankings so you'd think the IBF could give a little leeway and allow the next defence to be against their #1 contender.
What is the point of stripping Fury? Glazkov or Martin won't pay many sanctioning fees. However Klitschko - Fury II would... Hard not to think Haymon was involved in this.
That's total bs. They were either aware of the contract talks or should have been. They could have refused to sanction the fight under those circumstances if they were intellectually honest. But no, they were corrupt, and wanted the money. Moreover, its an absurd rule. It led to the fractioning of the belts, the robbery of a belt from the rightful champ outside of the ring, and arguably the worst title fight in hw boxing history.
Glazkov fights for Kathy Duva. Charles Martin fights for Don King. Haymon was involved, in that Martin pulled out on four days notice of a nationally televised fight against Dominic Breazeale that Haymon already paid for. I'm sure Haymon wasn't too thrilled that the triple-header time slot he paid for now has two featured fights.:roll: Glazkov was the mandatory. Kathy Duva was behind this.
What really sucks is Glazkov isn't very good. Fury would beat him. Wlad would beat him. Wilder would beat him. And Charles Martin is going to beat him. These orgs try to flex their muscles to prove they have some power, and they just screw things up. Glazkov was next up after the Wlad-Fury rematch. He couldn't wait to fight until late summer for the real championship? Glazkov is a fraud.