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

He would get ripped off in two of those fights. As a champion, he would deserve more.

Aside from that, what if he got an injury? Or it was a gruelling fight? Wouldn't hr deserve a soft bout too? And shouldn't he, as a champion, be allowed to have a choice who he fights?

When money is involved, people will always take their chances but it doesn't mean it's fair. Guys like Sergio Martinez would accept the same type of deal if Pacquiao or Mayweather offered it. It's bull****.

 

He's a ****ing nobody getting a title shot against the best HW on the planet... what the **** choices should he get?

 

This is bull****.

You make champ, you call the shots.

If he wants to fight some ***** next, that's his perogative. Just like that other guy was sayin, if Audley beats Haye, let's say Haye says you gotta fight Chisora...

Is that **** good with you?

So why the **** should Vitali and Wlad doin the same **** be alright? Are they or are they not different people?

 

Having the title has is not the determinant as to who gets the bigger purse.

Oscar got the huge end of the purse against Sturm, even though Sturm had the belt and Oscar was the challenger.

It's usually the name that gets the lion's share.


What's Chisora got if he faces another Sam Sexton or Carl Baker ?

**** all.

And he knows that and so do you.

This is a ****in' great opportunity for him.

 

If he gets a shot against the champ without earning it, then yes, he should make some concessions to get a high profile title fight.

Wlad can fight anyone he wants (if they aren't scared) so Chisora should take what he can get.

 

Don't they all say that they will fight the brother after they beat one of the Klitschkos?

What is the problem here. The rematch would be great, another prestigeous fight and a chance to prove the win against Klitschko is legitimate. Then a chance for unification against another Klitschko.

What these challengers are hoping for is a fluke win like Lamon Brewster and then trying to run away with the title.

 

Exactly. :good

 

Bingo.

 

Why Sosnowski had no problems with the contract? Being much more deserving than Chisora he was smart enough to know it was his big chance and biggest payday no matter how u look at it. I think British posters overprice a bit their boxers "Haye deserves more than 50-50, Chisora got bad contract".

 

I don't understand what the big deal is about. Everybody wants to fight the two Klitschkos anyways. I thought it would be something like "You have to take a rematch for 30-70 and then fight Vitali for a can of beer and a bag of peanuts"

 

See post # 37 in this thread.

 

After Vitali has retired, would it be ok for Wlad to dictate deals where he is guaranteed a rematch and, should he lose both these fights, where the new champ would have to face his (Wlads) buddy Jonathan Banks next then?

 

Any boxer should be scared of that contract...

 

It is, yes, but how many times does the guy who wins the first fight, get 50% or less in a rematch? Even the biggest draw of the recent era, Mike Tyson, got less than 50% against Holyfield the second time. Mayweather wanted more than 50% for a De La Hoya rematch.

The issue here isn't that Wlad is ripping Chisora off in the first fight. It's the fact that if there wasn't already a rematch with the purses already decided, Chisora would make more than he is. Assuming he wins both and then faces Vitali, he would probably make half of what he would, if he was able to negotiate as champion. So how it that fair?

I know that, yeah, and so do the Klitschko's, so they can do whatever they want, and he would have signed. They could have made it a 10 fight deal and he would have signed. Why wouldn't he? He's a boxer who wants to be world champion.

Just because he accepted and he doesn't have better offers, it doesn't mean it's fair.

 

if the so called champs are such bad asses why do they need to dictate **** like that?

**** that why the hell are they fighting derick cheeseburger?