Ali Act and rematch clauses

Rather that, I think.

I understand it that a boxer cannot be coerced by his promoter to do something (fight someone he doesn't want to fight, etc.).

So, theoretically, Ruiz could try to sue Al Haymon (or whoever is his promoter) into forcing him (or being negligent and not reading it completely) to sign.
But it was completely voluntarily for them (Ruiz + his promoters) to sign or not to sign the contract (for the AJ fight and the rematch). Nobody forced/coerced them to do that.

So, again, in my humble opinion, the only way for Ruiz and his side to play this, is to try claiming that Saudi Arabia is not completely safe for them. Probably, the fight will still be there, but Ruiz might receive a million or two more on top of the offered 9.

 

An interesting use case would be if the winning boxer suffered significant damage during the win and did not want to rematch for health reasons.

 

They are offering him $9 million? Haymon is about to milk about 3 to 4 more million out of this.
Eddie out here paying that type of money for a rematch I would fight Joshua in his living room with his family as judges and Eddie Hearn as guest referee.
For $9 million Joshua could have Panama Lewis and Alex Ariza in his corner loading his gloves and feeding him unmarked "shakes" and "drinks" with Mrs. Byrd and CJ Ross at ringside filling out the cards in advance.
For $9 million dollars Joshua could have a full medical team in his locker room re-hydrating him right before the fight through IV bags filling out TUE papers 30 minutes before ring time, while Margarito wraps his hands with plaster dipped in glass like kickboxer.

This content is protected

 

If Ruiz doesn't play it right, he could lose his stock as a cinderalla, fateralla well, a guy who is pushing more than he should. Talks soft, but doesn't come across as humble based on his instant videos he's been sending out. Take the fight, even if they take a lot, I can't envsion Fury nor Wilder having the stock AJ has to make such offers.

 

what i got from that is that no promoter can be granted rights to a fighter, if the fighter is required to give up those rights, in order to fight that promoters fighter. in other words, the contract is not enforceable because hearn cant have the right to ruiz's next fight, because ruiz had to waive those rights to face aj. so he was coerced. this fight is getting completely renegotiated.

 

Seems like the Ali act is completely toothless as the Haymon construction has shown.
But if rematch clauses were outlawed for some reason it would probably be quite bad for boxing.
In that case everytime a challenger wins by luck, a blatant robbery or just having everything fall into place at one great night, you can be certain you can be certain the previous holder will have to pay a motherload (which might not even be possible) or just be avoided like the plague after. Take (or even steal) the title and run.
Of course that already happens now, but then there won't be a method in place to prevent it from happening much more often.

 

I think you got it wrong.

The main point is it's wrong to change the rules of the game during the game (only morons do that). Ruiz and his promoters read the contract before signing it, nobody was forcing them to do that. A lot of other top heavyweights would be happy (so as was Ruiz, just watch some videos of him before the first fight — he was over the moon with joy) to get a "crooked as hell and completely ridiculous" opportunity to fight AJ two times for 15 million dollars.

From how I understand it, the Ali act is not even applicable here, in fact. It's very applicable in the Canelo case, when his promoter (Oscar) contractually signed Alvarez to fight another fighter (Golovkin) without Alvarez' consent or even knowledge.

 

let me write that section the way i read it.
A coercive provision described in this subparagraph is a contract provision that grants any rights between ruiz and hearn, or between hearn and haymon with respect to ruiz, if ruiz is required to grant such rights, or haymon is required to grant such rights with respect to ruiz, to hearn, as a condition precedent to ruiz’s participation in a professional boxing match against aj who is under contract to hearn.

i dont think im wrong.

​

 

Yeah the more I think about it the more I agree with this school of thought, the assumption that the previous champion should be allowed an immediate rematch under any circumstances, The complete and utter control they have after the champ loses does feel like a rigged game. I guess this has always happened to an extend but is becoming farcical where Joshua is concerned. Next Ruiz will probably see he has signed an agreement to lose the fight after 3 rounds...

 

What's so rigged about it, omg? Hasim Rahman knocked out Lennox Lewis. Did it make Rahman the "true champion" and Lewis a "fraud"? Was it "ridiculously rigged and unfair" that a rematch was in the contract back then?

Too much hate for Joshua, really. And no logic. If Joshua is a fraud, and Ruiz is so good, then it's easy 9 million dollars for Ruiz. And after that second fight he's free to fight whoever he pleases.

 

The whole thing is written in legal lingo. Makes my tiny brain hurt.

 

If I were hearn I wouldn't give an inch on the contract, he doesn't have a business if his contracts aren't enforceable.

I would however offer Ruiz jr a good DAZN offer should he lose the following rematch. This would make sense for both parties. Hearn has the HW stable and the dates to fill. Ruiz can deliver new viewers. Give him a path to fighting usyk, hunter and all being well another title shot.

All of which depends on him honouring his commitment under the rematch contract.

 

We know that doesn't always happen. Certainly when the new champion is from the same country as where the org is from, is having a powerful promoter and/or lands the organisation more money in their fights.

What I mean is that some fights the obvious outcome changes due to sheer luck on the side of the lesser fighter, or misfortune on the side of the better one.
A headclash turning the fight around.
A freak injury.
A lowblow or multiple missed by the referee.
Missed knockdowns.
Having the best night of his life and win a "could go either way" type decision that 80% or more of the viewing audience saw the other way around.
And many more instances where everyone wants to see the rematch, and the new champion obviously doesn't want it because he knows he'd probably lose.

Not at all. It are voluntary defences, and the contract should reflect that.
The challenger gets a shot despite there being more deserving challengers already.

Yes it should, but how many times did that happen in reality when there's no rematch clause? Certainly when the new champion doesn't want the rematch to happen, due to the risk involved.
We now see that even with a rematch clause in effect they might not even get the chance. Think about Golovkin vs Canelo, Vitali vs Lennox, Hagler vs Leonard, Tyson vs Douglas, Whitaker vs Chavez, DLH vs Trinidad... all fights that demanded a rematch which never happened.

I strongly disagree.

 

Yes, Ruiz can be useful for DAZN, for sure. I'm not sure at all he would accept such an offer from them, though.