Australian Boxing: $10,000 Winner Takes All Bout This Friday in Melbourne, Australia by Srithar Visuasam - East Side Boxing - 1st March 2011 A unique concept in boxing is being staged in Melbourne, Australia this Friday night, 4 March 2011, where two of Australia’s best light heavyweights take to the ring in a winner takes all bout. Victorian Blake Caparello (5-0-1, 2 KOs) takes on Michael Bolling (12-1, 10 KOs) of New South Wales in a 12 round showdown, which will see the winner take home $10,000 for their efforts and the loser leave empty handed. With a large bounty being thrown for whoever emerges victorious, the concept of handsomely rewarding the winner and not paying the loser has proved effective in getting both fighters into the ring to face each other.. Bolling, 26, the more experienced fighter, is coming off the first loss of his professional career, a unanimous decision defeat to Isaac Chilemba (16-1-1, 8 KOs) in South Africa, which was for the vacant IBO super middleweight title, his first attempt at a world title. Caparello, 24, with only six fights to his name, most recently fought Shane McConville (7-0-5) to a draw for the Australian super middleweight title, the first bout in which he hadn’t emerged victorious. With both fighters at exciting stages of their careers and a matchup that pits two of Australia’s premier light heavyweights against each other, this fight should bring out the best in both of them and be a treat for all those in attendance. Other fights on the night see Kiwi Steve Heremia (16-5-1, 7 KOs) take on Victor Chernous (11-1, 4 KOs) in what should be a tough welterweight encounter. Also at welterweight, Samuel Colomban (19-3, 9 KOs) will hope to add to his 9 fight winning streak when he meets the always cagey Rey Anton Olarte (12-16-4, 2 KOs). And at heavyweight, Michael Kirby (7-3-1, 5 KOs) tackles Kiwi American Clarence Tillman (7-6-1, 5 KOs), which will provide no shortage of fireworks. The nine fight card also sees Pat Rullo, Lauren Eagle and Sarah Howett in action, in what promises to be an entertaining night at The Melbourne Pavillion, Flemington, Victoria. The night is promoted by Barry Michael Sports and tickets can still be purchased for the event by phoning +61 413 654 999. ...winners are certainly grinners sometimes.
The judges are there to do their job to the best of their ability - but you can't help wondering if it places just a bit more pressure on them when, depending on their decision, one guy won't be paid a cent. A KO would be a good result for everyone eccept for the guy sitting on his arse.
There should be more of it When you have 2 fighters very confident of winning a fight and then they wont fight because of the purse, well this effecctivley doubles the purse and makes a hard to get fight a reality, as Adam says a close points loss to the promoters boy could cause a few problems however i think this would make a lot more fights then trouble it would start
I just think it's a good promotional spin, but not actual reality... NO fighter I know would ever fight for free. They might say it boasting about a particular opponent ("I'll fight the ____ for free!") but when posed about taking a fight with anyone, the first words always uttered are - "What are they offering, how much am I getting paid?"
I agree in principle Ced, albeit slightly different. Pay each fighter a 'agreed simple' purse and then the major chunk, if the concept is legit and both fighters are keen is to have the bulk as the reward.
Must admit, it was the first thing I thought too. What you said above is true though - if fighters are competing to get paid it means they come to fight, and brings out the best in them. My son was asking about the PacMan v Sugar Shane bout after hearing on the radio that PacMan would get $15Mil and Mosley $5Mil. His question: 'What does PacMan get if he wins?' I told him $15Mil. He then asked: "What's in it for PacMan to win? He gets the $15Mil anyway.'
We both know that. But the current generation of kids don't think that way - hence my son's question.
Fairly strong statement - perhaps you should spend the 2 seconds you reckon it would take and then tell us all the answer - your time starts now....
Oops! Didn't see any reason to re-read my post, so didn't notice the underline you'd added. Took it that you were suggesting I should take 2 seconds to find out whether the fight was actually winner take all. Apologies again Adam.
i wasnt have a dig, you didn't write the article though did you? just annoys me to read obvious mistakes in "journalism" news.com.au is shocking for it.