Chisora Reveals Three-Fight Contract With Klitschkos - Says He Was Told Not To

Im on it apparently.

I take it as a great compliment. If Rushman can't win an argument, he puts you on his ignore list to save himself from further embarrassment in the future.

That's why I take childish amusement in popping up now and again just to call him a ****ING DOG'S LIPSTICK knowing he's oblivious to it!

Lol.:good

 

Death, Taxes and a Chef/Klitschko three way.

 

Rematch clauses are very common so I have no issue with that. Though in this case it's a bit excessive that should Chisora somehow beat Wlad twice he then must face Vitali. And what would Chisora's cut be should he beat Wlad? If he were to beat Wlad yet make not much more in a rematch with Wlad or a fight with Vitali then it's a terrible deal.

 

thats called a rematch clause.

 

Doesn't this appear to be standard practice with Klitschko contracts?

 

Given that he has not earned even one title shot, how is it a bad deal?

If the unthinkable happened and he won twice then lost, he will have made around ten times more for his next three fights than otherwise would have happened.

He would also have made himself into a legend and would be earning a shitload for all of his fights afterwards.

Remember, he has not earned this opportunity, and it appears to be a package deal.
The deal: you get something you never earned, but if you get lucky then you don't take home as much as you would have if you had earned the right to negotiate in the first place.
It's like being given a shitload of free lottery tickets, with the only catch being that if you win the jackpot you only keep 10% of it.

This deal is way too good for Chisora. But Wlad needs somebody to step into the ring so that he can earn money too. I guess Chisora just got lucky to live in an era of cowards.

 

The same Barrett that said Haye send him to a garbage hotel before his fight vs Haye?

 

There he is again!

Pissflap!:good

 

a 4 star hotel was garbage?

 

It's funny how people excuse this, yet if the Klitschko's thought it was fair, why would they want it hidden? I guarantee that their recent opponents have all signed the same deals and it's just not fair.

Assuming Chisora did win, he'd get nothing like the money he should and would be tied down to two more fights, at least. He wouldn't get 50%, despite being undisputed champion, which is funny considering how Klitschko fans have a massive issue with Haye wanting over 50%.

 

a rematch clause for an optional defense is normal. The only thing out of the ordinary is the obligation to fight the brother

 

True, but as the brothers are working together to unify the division it is effectively the same as having a two rematch clause which is dog****.

 

Clyde, lad.

You need to look up the meaning of the word 'cowardly.'

There are criticisms one might put forth regarding the deal, but the term cowardly has **** all to do with things here.

Any chance for a whack at the Klitschkos, eh ?


And as I've pointed out, multi-fight contracts are the norm with most promoters. And given that Chisora is practicaly a nobody, signing a possible three fight deal to get such an opportunity is the greatest piece of luck the lad is ever likely to stumble across.

Most of you lads seem to miss the point that the brothers are promoters as well as boxers.

 

That they're brothers is not the issue.

They are also promoters and their biggest properties are Wlad and Vitali.

And for the third time, multi fighjt deals are the norm with promoters, even for established fighters.

 

So if Top Rank said "we will do Pacquiao/Bradley but only if it's a three fight deal" and if Bradley won, he'd have to rematch Pacquiao and then face Cotto for a previously arranged sum, which wouldn't be close to the amount he would deserve, nobody would accept that. Just because the Klitschko's are brothers, they aren't a unit, so there shouldn't be any exceptions.

And again, if the Klitschko's thought it was fair, why would they want it to remain a secret?