Anyone else tired of rematches and trilogies?

You mean about future sales potential in U.S evaluation?
Sadly for A.J everyone knew that Ruiz Jr was late replacement on short notice. This is point one.
Point 2: Ruiz Jr was very huge underdog in pre fight predictions and for bookies. If someone had lost vs such underdog, it hurts PR value a lot.
Point 3: with undefeated fighters to sell ppvs is easier.
Therefore I think today JT does have a bit more ppvs sales potential in US for ppvs if there will be good marketing, PR campaign and so on.
Boxing fans are unforgiving vs boxers who had lost fights. Especially if vs huge underdog.

 

The whole point of becoming mandatory is so you don't have to agree to a rematch clause when you face the champ. If blokes want to give that away to land the fight, that's on them.

I'm actually looking forward to both the end of the trilogy & the alphabet championship rematch. One good right hand from Wilder could change the H/W landscape completely. And AJ is a cornered cat. There could be more twists & turns & unexpected thrills & spills to come.

What I would like to see though is the winners of these fights face each other for the Undisputed championship in the second half of next year. Boxing fans deserve it.

 

Regrettably certainly the World Heavyweight title has been used as the personal money maker for many of the champions, to the detriment of challengers, the sport and the public.

This has occurred from first gloved championship bout to the present, be that putting the title in storage and earning big bucks off the fact of being the champ defending rarely, picking and choosing easy or only big money defences, or as title of this thread says rematch clauses.

While the sanctioning bodies and boxing authorities continue to allow such behaviours to happen, then champs and their teams will carry on doing it unabated.

 

It's definitely getting rather tedious of late, we've had so many. But I get why we have them and in some cases it's really warranted but do we really need a 3rd Fury/Wilder or even a 2nd Parker/Chisora?

Would be nice if they allowed a voluntary between even if it has to be OK'ed by the other party first and maybe an agreed step aside fee and guarantees for a match with the winner or loser if there is an upset. That might help the division move on, would of maybe allowed Fury/Joshua but Wilder still gets a guaranteed shot at either fighter.

 

The last trilogy at Heavyweight was Holyfield and Bowe,the first fight was held on 13th November 1992 and there last fight was back on 4th Novemember 1995. Defo far too many trilogy fights at Heavyweight .

 

100% agree with the OP, but there is cases where long reigning champion simply doesnt deliver for x or y reason or cause of robberies and rematches are good/nec.
Its simple tho. Allow rematch clause only for champion that have atleast 5 title defenses.
But we alao need a way better organization, and as well as ranking. And boxers to be pretty much obligated to fight solid opposition if they want to be in the top 10.
I also yhink 1 or 2 titles are enough, not 10.
Situation at UFC is way better and bwat fight the best all the time.
We also need the Champs and top fighters to fight more regularly. At top level 2-3 matches per year should be a must. 3 matches with 3 week prep, and you have 3 off months. If you get injured or so 2 matches.
Sry for errors, from the phone.

 

Rematches should only happen when a fight was ultra close, Usyk vs AJ wasn't so there should be no rematch.

 

Contrarily, seems like an easy argument to make that in an era where such few top dudes fight that a rematch or trilogy is usually infinitely better and more warranted than unproven new blood. Right or wrong.

Either way, I see both sides of it. Ultimately its a case by case basis.

 

I love series that are spread across many years, like Pacquiao-Marquez. Of course to have a series like that you have to not only fight someone interesting before age 30, but that interesting opponent has to be young too!

You can't just transition from journeymen to aging contenders/champs to becoming an old champ yourself, you have to fight a peer. Of course, that's part of why a great series is rare.

Seeing an unproven fighter face their make or break moment is the best part of boxing. Sometimes they win, but even better is when they lose and come out stronger on the other side. Again, a rare thing but like @IntentionalButt said you watch a hundred fights to see the one that makes the rest worthwhile.

But yeah, some cases just call for an instant rematch.

 

I agree. In an ideal world of boxing was just about seeing who was the best we really wouldn't need rematches. The thing is these guys depend their livelihood on it and when you are the boxer taking on the risks and bringing in the big bucks I think the rematches are warranted. AJ has been the most deserving heavyweight champ in the sense that he has taken on the most risk and top 10 guys in the division. I'll be interested to see what kind of champ Usyk will become. I'm sure he is itching for some pay days himself.

 

Boxing has a history of multiple rematches. But yeah they fought way more often

 

Reasonable points. I am FOR rematches, but in between the rematches there should be one or two tune up fights, this way the rematch fights can be even more hyped by one or two good comeback performances for the boxer that lost.

 

The immediate rematches and trilogies has held up the top 6-7 of the HW division for sure.. It can be annoying I get guys negotiator rematch clauses but as you said guys are not fighting enough as is to be tied down 2-3 years with one online to when there are more interesting matchups to make.

 

The Whyte/Povetkin rematch clause was especially troubling. Whyte wasn’t even a champ and they dragged Povetkin out of the hospital bed to have a rematch.

 

Why? I hate tune up fights. Who wants to see Fury taking on the likes of Tom Schwartz or Joshua now facing someone before Usyk. Let them get straight back in and get on with it rather than wasting another 6 months with a tune up fight to pad out their records.