Should boxing banned rematch clause in title fights?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by rayhogan, Aug 12, 2010.


  1. rayhogan

    rayhogan Dont worry Pac, you wont Full Member

    22,780
    350
    Aug 26, 2006
    I say yes cause first off the big time favorite fighter will finally be focused on his opponent instead of talking about some other fighter with talking ****. And second off, if the big time under dog fighter wins it lets easily then a favorite to win in a first fight won't have a rematch clause to use it. I think also this is better for the sport cause now the big time favorite will be more focused on that fight and not other thing else. What you people think honestly?
     
  2. techks

    techks ATG list Killah! Full Member

    19,779
    701
    Dec 6, 2009
    It depends on what happens in the first fight. I feel rematch clauses should not be mandatory but if both fighters still want a rematch after their first fight I say go for it. Love the girl in your avatar btw:hey.
     
  3. Hermit

    Hermit Loyal Member banned

    44,341
    3
    Jan 29, 2008
    Much ado about nothing. You can only force a rematch clause on a voluntary challenger. Champ has earned the right for a rematch if he choses.
     
  4. renyo

    renyo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,417
    332
    Jul 21, 2007
    Champs deserve a rematch if they desire.
     
  5. booradley

    booradley Mean People Kick Ass! Full Member

    39,848
    16
    Aug 29, 2006
    A champion always deserves a rematch if he wants it. Imagine if there had been no second Forrest/Mora fight!
     
  6. hussleman

    hussleman Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,976
    18
    Jun 14, 2006
    If the first fight was competitive or if the fight can sell. I didn't like the Dawson vs Tarver 2 , rematch clause. That was SOOO unnecessary.
     
  7. Boxed Ears

    Boxed Ears this my daddy's account (RIP daddy) Full Member

    56,168
    10,614
    Jul 28, 2009
    I'm more of the Boo, Hermit and renyo philosophy on this one, Ray.
     
  8. Atlanta

    Atlanta Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,688
    6
    Dec 26, 2009
    Rematch clauses aren't mandatory, just smart champions have them in their contracts.

    But they serve a purpose of keeping guys who win on a lucky shot, corrupt judge, etc. from running away with someones belt. Look at Forrest-Mora, Lewis-Rahman, Jones Jr.-Griffin, Cunningham-Wlodarczyck, etc. If there wasn't a rematch clause those fights would never have been set straight.

    Now some guys abuse it, like Tarver when he activated his clause to get a rematch that he had no chance in hell of winning.
     
  9. Caelum

    Caelum Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,404
    51
    May 16, 2010
    I've always thought so too. Specifically Lineal established Champions.
     
  10. sp550i

    sp550i Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,149
    95
    Dec 8, 2009
    no... what if a ref makes a horrible decision... or you hurt your self from an un fight related event
     
  11. techks

    techks ATG list Killah! Full Member

    19,779
    701
    Dec 6, 2009
    I didn't say they were I just mean to say I don't think immediate rematches should be forced especially when the other fighter wants more options but then again, it takes two to sign contracts. As for the fights I highlighted, I'm sure with the competitive nature of Lewis & Jones that those fights would've happened anyways. Like I said earlier, it depends on what happened in the first fight amongst two fighters.
     
  12. rayhogan

    rayhogan Dont worry Pac, you wont Full Member

    22,780
    350
    Aug 26, 2006
    Awesome she's one of the sexiest female. :)
     
  13. timeout

    timeout Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,718
    3,533
    Jun 15, 2010
    No. A champ deserves a rematch clause. Epecially with the number of doggy decisions that have happened in us...
     
  14. Boom_Boom

    Boom_Boom R.I.P Boxing 6/9/12 Full Member

    38,291
    23
    Sep 21, 2006
    I think champions can only demand it if its not a mandatory.

    If it is a mandatory the champion can ask for a rematch clause just in case in exchange for a bigger purse split for the challenger.
     
  15. Zacker

    Zacker Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,833
    16
    Jun 24, 2009
    I'm against rematch clauses. Only makes making fights in boxing more difficult. Klitschkos are a good example of why not.