is the "beat me and fight my brother" only a clause for wlad klitschko?

Klitschko's are ATG's, Haye is 100% fake. EOT.

 

No kill, but win for sure :good

 

Hey, I didn't come up with this. I prefer rematches, too.

 

Because killing folk make you an ATG? Well done Carnera huh?

 

Strange how everybody ignored our question...

Looks like people just want to talk...no matter if what they are debating about comes from pure fiction :tired

 

What if so?

I just asked for a link or source proving they demand that clause (like the other poster i quoted).

Of course i heard that before (here).

SO that means its true? is this how it works?
People say it then it's true?

NOw, source proving the Klits ask for that clause. This is all i want.
Thanks in advance.

 

AHhah thanks proving my point.

Only noobs here are not aware (yet) of your infinite tardness.

 

HAHAH,KLITSCHKOS ARE ATG,hahaha,that literally made me laugh out loud.thanks for that.hahahaahaha.OMG.

i would never claim haye to be an all time great either btw.

rematch clauses are fine if its the opponent rematching the guy he beat,if the fight was close,or worthy of a rematch.

to rematch a klitschko,then rematch the other brother,as the same contract,after the opponent wins a title,that is questionable.

and also im sure many have said its not just fighting a klitschko,rematching them,or their brother,but when they have to rematch.

like chisora has said he has to fight wlad twice if he wins,and then fight vitali ,and this all has to be done within a year.

haye said that he had to sign to rematch one and fight the other,and it tied him up for years.

so the challenger who beats one of them,and gains the title and becomes champion,he cannot decide when he next wants to fight.

cannot decide who he wants to fight next as he must rematch a klitshko right away.

as the new champion,he cant go on and make a big fight with another top fighter he hasnt already beaten,and then rematch a klitschko after that.

he cant take a break,then fight a klitschko when he so choses,and as the champion he has that right to decide when he so kindly offers a rematch to the dethroned loser he beat already.

 

The clause seems like insurance for rematches. The Klits probably don't want to go through another Lewis that promised a rematch and only won through stoppage. Instead he ended up ducking Vitali and never gave him the rematch he deserved.

 

Can anyone name a more unfair clause in boxing history? Any clause?

The Klitschko's holding all the titles in the division would be bad for the sport.

 

Perhaps you guys don't understand how options work. Should Chisora win K2 will have an option to promote his next Championship bout (rematch with Wlad) and should he win again - the unification (with Vitali). Promoter holding the option negotiates with alphabet orgs and if they can get the fight sanctioned then Chisora will have no choice. Well, he will have a choice to refuse to fight, get stripped, dropped from rankings and sued for breach of contract or go through the fight and get paid $$. No much of a choice though.