Rematches are as boring as Italian football generally. But Fury's third beating on street fighter gonna be tasty.
Yeah...they should be reserved for close fights...draws..and not be automatically written into contract's..they stop some fights from happening by like a year.. I know this isn't always the case...but on what planet does fury Vs wilder 3 need to happen. Aj Vs usyk 2... immediate rematch...at least get a few fights in between n fight some other people...what's gonna happen ..he's gonna get his ass pummelled again and then exercise his 3rd n 4th rematch clause til he beats usyk?
AJ only had to beat Usyk once, Usyk has to beat him twice and likely both times in AJ's backyard which really rankles with me and E-Hearn an co are going pull out all the stops to ensure that those belts end up back in AJ's possession even though Usyk outclassed him. No problem with AJ getting a rematch a fight or two down the line but allow Usyk the opportunity to fight for all the marbles next. The Tuscaloser should be 0-2 to Fury in his own backyard but he's being afforded a third and totally undeserved opportunity in his backyard to try and beat Fury legitimately after getting taken to slick school by Fury's drug-ravaged ghost in the first fight and having his soul beaten out of his body in biblical fashion in the rematch. This ain't MAB vs Morales, Ali vs Frazier or Zale vs Graziano that skinny-legged super noodle dosser bum won a couple of rounds in two attempts and he should've been sent hurtling back down the rankings and have to work his way back up them to earn another title shot and if he was a real man he would've got his passport out.
This is a boxing forum, as such we care about boxing, leave business and it's ability to corrupt and make impure our sport to the Eddie Hearns of this world. AJ was obligated to face Usyk, anything less than taking the fight should be considered less-than in the spirit of the sport. Dont legitimise money decisions as being more important than the honour and glory of the sport. And dont legitimise vacating belts as a viable strategy it is USUALLY the cowardly decision and a purely a tactical one made with ones career in mind. We should shun fighters who use this tactic to duck mandatory challenges except in very particular/unique circumstances, eg. Fury v Wilder 3, where I dont think anyone could be too harsh to Fury if he vacated the belt to fight AJ given the fact he had already destroyed Wilder once.
Rematch clauses are for one purpose only, that is to benefit the champion should they lose title, it solely a business decision, it has zero benefit to the sport. I know of few sports where if you lose then you get a second bite of the cherry in immediate rematch, thus freezing out number one/mandatory contenders and other challengers. Things won't likely change until folk are not coughing up the cash to watch these bouts, or other revenue options around these fights are not keeping the money rolling in to high enough level.
I don't have an issue with rematches and trilogies per se, I have an issue with "immediate" rematches and trilogies. If they fight, then go on to fight after both have a couple more guys under their belts, I'm all for that
Definiteli tired of this rematch clause BS. Some fights deserve it, some don't. I think AJ deserves a rematch but not right away. I think first we should have the Fury-Wlder winner vs. Usyk to unify.
I don't mind rematches or trilogies when they involve two of the top four or five boxers in a division. I don't know why it's necessary for people to fight an unranked journeyman (with nearly a dozen losses like Chisora) a couple times. That seems like a waste of time. I'd prefer the rated fighters take on other rated fighters. People were super excited after Gatti-Ward 1. HBO wanted to do it again because Ward was basically unranked and won and they (HBO) were hyping Gatti. The rematch was kind of dull. Then they did it a third time, which was totally unnecessary. Ward wasn't a factor in the division at all.
whining about rematches? boxing has ALWAYS had them! robinson and lamotta, 4 fights is one example. schmeling and louis, 2 times willie pep fought MANY men more than once. marciano had two fights a piece with charles and walcott the difference is when the best fight the best while they are at their best!
Fury Wilder 3 is the first heavyweight Trilogy since Bowe Holyfield. 1995, almost before I was born. Get over it.
I might imagine A.J vs Usyk II with such undercard: Okolie vs someone, doesn't matter who. Buatsi vs someone, doesn't matter who. Campbell Hatton vs TBA. Conor Benn vs someone. Plus some other fighters on undercard. Benn and Hatton, Buatsi and Okolie are future Eddie ppv stars, they need more exposure in world scene level. Usyk vs A.J already will sell this one with 0 doubts. If Usyk vs Chisora looks that had approx 1.059m ppvs and vs Bellew approx 0.819m ppvs.
I totally agree with this post. I want to see the defeated fighter prove he is still worthy to fight at the highest level. It would be different if they fought four or five times a year. But a rematch these days will tie up both fighters for a year or more.
