Are the countless rematch clauses ruining boxing? Seems like fights are made and will keep rewatching until the fighter billed to win actually does. Tonight's Whyte Povetkin fight was billed as a big threat to Whyte with a title fight looming. Povetkin pulls it out the bag and stops him in doing so taking mandatory spot. Whyte took the risk but took the pay day that goes with it and it backfired. But now we have to see the fight again until we get the outcome that was meant to happen. Same with Wilder Fury. First fight was a clear Fury robbery and warranted a rematch. Second fight he battered him. But now we have a contractual obligation to watch the third fight.
Rematch clauses are okay, when there is a title fight and a long reign champion like Klitschko was for example. Joshua - Ruiz rematch clause was okay as well. Whyte - Povetkin is a complete joke. They were looking ahead of Povetkin and Eddie and Dilian were saying how he is putting everything on the line, and how he is fighting only dangerous boxers(i agree with that), and that if Povetkin won he will go for a title fight. Now rematch clause b.c. Povetkin should not accept the rematch. He is pushing 41. He is just going to get worst and worst. No sense for him to fight another fight with the same fighter. He just need a tune up fight, then title fight and retire.
I agree that rematches should only happen in title fights and probably only if it was close or stopped on an injury when the loser is a champion and established name. Matchroom bs.
I dont mind the AJ ruiz rematch as it wasn't a mandatory and was a last minute replacement. IMO you have 2 options when no 1 in line for a title shot. You cherry pick fights to keep active and protect your title shot. Not ideal, but you make poorer money in smaller fights in the process. Or you risk it with a live opponent but get the pay day to reward the fight. Whyte risked his mandatory position.for a pay day today and it backfired. Doesnt deserve a rematch
Its a fighting and everything could happen, from having a terrible night, wrong strategy, one shot KO and so on. For me such clause should be there for a long reign champion, late replacement, and maybe for undefeated fighter with solid record(but he also got to have a belt). Wilder - Fury 3 has zero sense. This one between Whyte and Povetkin as well. Whyte was not a champion, he was a mandatory and just like he said he was putting his mandatory on a line, which mean if get sparked he is out of the picture. Now we understand their dark secret. They did well to hide it. Zero sense, as Whyte is not even undefeated ....
Ironic that without the Fury-Wilder rematches, Whyte should have had his belt fight by now and wouldn't have been taking a fight risking a mandatory. I can understand Whyte-Povetkin rematch in this context. But it's basically the WBC allowing a 2nd rematch to trump a deserved mandatory which is the problem. Boxing really needs some kind of enforced structure if it wants to regain the mainstream sport status it had in past decades. Soccer is the best example of a sport which has a clearly defined structure which is almost never compromised. Biggest sport in the world.
That's ridiculous. Top guys should face each other multiple times anyway. Champs and contenders used to face each other three or half a dozen times and boxing was so much better for it. It shows that fights don't always repeat themselves and anything can happen when two competitively matched opponents enter the ring together. If two guys have an entertaining fight, then they should fight again. That's how you get rivalries like Pacquiao vs Marquez, or Vazquez vs Marquez.
If whyte doesn't win again Eddie will make a third just to be sure and then one more because we'll just because
It's only Povetkin haters or Whyte fanboys who seem to be against this rematch from what I've read on the forum. The first fight was a very good fight to watch, was between two top contenders. Since all the big names are tied up I don't see a problem with them doing it again. A wise person said last night, the time now is for Povetkin to have a tune up and then face the winner of Fury/Wilder. I agree with that, let the tune up be Whyte and give us an amazing fight again.
I don't think so but a rematch should only happen if the first fight justifies it. Fury v Wilder 3 is a great example of a fight being won so convincingly so why after 2 fights should their be a third when Wilder hasn't won either fight. If povetkin would have dominated and then koed Whyte I would say rematch clause or not a second fight wasn't necessary.
