Eddie Hearn has OCRD (Obsessive Compulsive Rematch Disorder)

The truth is.....

ALL voluntary title defences have rematch clauses.

The difference is Hearn matches people tough. So some of his fighters lose. He doesn’t do the PBC boring fights. For and occasional loss with a rematch see Charlo and Hurd. Although Hurd didn’t take it

 

One thing I'd say is that as boxing fans, we castigate a fighter for not "avenging a loss", which means any defeat we expect them to rematch; and an immediate rematch clause is the most likely way for someone to do that.

How often do we get two fighters facing each other again with fights in between?

 

It s simple.

As the A side you get a rematch clause.The B side signs since they have no choice.
It is what it is.

 

Nobody held a gun to kiko's head.

Kiko got a shot at the champion via a voluntary defence and now gets to potentially defend the title for a good payday against a guy he just beat. Where's the downside?

Forum posters seem to think it's such a bad thing but I've never seen a fighter explain why these rematch clauses are such a bad thing for them.

 

So say Lewis and Rahman never rematch immediately.

Lewis has to win an eliminator to get his title shot.

In the meantime Rahman defends his belt against the number 1 contender.

Rahman loses because he's crap. Lewis wins his eliminator because he's mint. Lewis beats whoever dethroned Rahman because he's mint.

If Lewis is to ever defend against Rahman, he probably won't be the most deserving challenger unless he works his way back up himself.

So the chances of the rematch happening become less, unless Lewis does it as a gimme defence, which the defeats the whole objective of no immediate rematches.

 

I thought your first post was tongue in cheek!

 

It's not about being bad for Kiko, it's bad for us because there's now a champion who would fight a bear if the price was right and one of his few remaining fights is being wasted on a guy he already beat.

This is exactly what I would like to see happen, everyone gets what they worked for and more contenders get their chance so there aren't these logjams at the top of many divisions.

Plus the former champ is still on the fast track back to the belt if it really was a fluke.

 

I just think, like that, too many rematches go unmade..

 

No I love rematches of upsets.

 

Rematches can make for great drama but but not all are warranted and Hearn takes the ****.

Bari doesn't deserve one for last night.

 

I get that but Kiko doesn't even get the fight unless the champion offers him it.

It's not like kiko fought himself into a position where people thought kiko deserves his shot.

Should a champion/promoter who gave him that opportunity deserve to be given the same opportunity if they lose?

I would agree when a fighter wins in dominent fashion you can question what's the point of a rematch? Froch v Bute was a great example of that where Bute had a rematch clause but it would have been pointless. Was Bute's team wrong to demand a rematch clause to fight Froch? Probably not as they never had to give Froch the opportunity.

 

Mate I still hold it against Amir Khan that he never rematched Prescott.

As far as I'm concerned a fighter should always aim to avenge every defea.

 

Lennox wouldn't have been back then. When Lewis lost to McCall he had such a long road back as the division (don king) did everything possible to stop Lennox getting another shot.

What should change is the ridiculous ranking system where a champion of one organisation isn't ranked highly in the other organisations rankings.

Its ridiculous for example that AJ is ranked outside the top 15 with the WBC.

 

They had to give someone the opportunity, otherwise there's no value in having the belt. Plus Galahad had home field advantage and got paid more (I assume). He got KTFO anyway, he needs to rebuild a little before his next shot.

Under the system @lufcrazy mentioned where the deposed champion is immediately eligible to fight in an eliminator they'll get their shot soon.

I would like to see fighters face competition good enough that even the best (especially the best?) lose too often to do this.

I know we're a million miles from this but I can dream, can't I?

I don't remember the machinations from back then, but I do think part of the solution to guys getting frozen out is just generally making it harder to hold on to a belt so it gets passed between fighters and promotions and makes the protection arms race futile.

The sanctioning body rankings are absolutely absurd, I agree with that. The WBC and WBA seem to be competing to be as shameful as possible.

 

Yes completely agree with the sentiment, but Hearn style rematch clauses are holding up divisions, and stopping us from getting other good fights