K2 and the contracts offered to various fighters......

Well that was a Political answer. You wouldnt say "not" that you wouldnt say "yes":good:yep

 

That’s because there isn’t black and white answer in reality.

Only in nut hugger land, the other party gets all the blame

 

Does anyone remember the contracts DLH and Roy Jones would offer optional defenses? And you want to complain about these? :roflatsch

 

Sauerland was pissed because he wanted more money that mandated 75/25 split
and because no-one can realistically outbid K2 on brothers fights nowadays. If he had real issues with the contract he could have taken it up with IBF but it was all about money.

 

If he didn't like the contract then why didn't he have his lawyers contact the IBF? Why did Povetkin instead miss the press conferences and simply was missing in action? Not even Sauerland knew where the hell he was when they gave the "he's sick with a sinus infection excuse".

All the Sauerland's complaints were a bunch of baloney. They were bitching Povetkin had to pay his own insurance? That he had to pay his own travel expenses out of his $2 million dollars guaranteed payday? That he had to wear gloves manufactured by the same company as those worn by the champ?

Damn evil greedy Klitschkos! Oh please!

 

So you support fighters offering bad contracts? What about what the fans want? People like Mayweather get **** on daily because they choose not to fight the best. No champion needs to fight any decent challengers and could offer meagre money to avoid the fight fans want to see.

And had Vitali beaten Rahman, Toney, Valuev and a couple of others, they would have been the best win on his resume.

 

By definition, if you get a voluntary defense and you're a nobody it is hard to argue you are offered a "bad contract" when you're offered a piece of the HW crown. Who are guys like Dimitrenko, Tua and Boytsov to complain about "bad contracts"?

I realize a guy like Adamek can earn decent money just fighting tune-ups in the US while positioning himself for a mandatory shot, but these other C class bums? They ought to take what is offered to them, or take the long hard stony way to a mandatory shot themselves.

But guess what. They're not good enough, they're too fat and worst of all: they're too ****ing lazy to work their butts off. They rather ***** and complain like pathetic homeless bums.

 

Damn straight he ought to be fined $250k for missing a presser. He gets a guaranteed $2 million and it is his job to promote a fight. Wlad and his company are taking the entire risk of filling up the stadium and turning a profit while Povetkin makes a guaranteed huge pay day no matter if the tickets are sold or not.

Without a clause to punish a no-show for Povetkin why on earth would Povetkin get his ass out of training camp and appear on the pressers? Ever think about that? What would be Povetkin's motivation to promote the fight at all, after he already received his guaranteed paycheck straight out of Wlad's bank account?

This has nothing to do with greediness this is simply common sense.

Wanna earn your guaranteed $2 million Dollar payday? Show up to 3 pressers, get some insurance, wear Grant gloves and get your ass in the ring come fight night. Apparently too much to ask for a brain-washed psychopath like Povetkin.

 

I agree that they should be extremely grateful to be considered worthy of a shot, especially Tua and Dimitrenko, but there's still a limit to what a title contender should get paid. Look at the example of Toney earlier on. He was offered $1.5m by Klitschko, which, many will say is a fair offer, but he earned almost twice that against Rahman which is a fight which would have generated less money. It wasn't that Toney's promoters just thought they'd give him three times what he brought to the table, they knew he was worth $2.8m and they paid him accordingly.

So these Klitschko offers aren't what a title contender, regardless of their stature, should be making. Even Derek Chisora deserves a good amount of money because he's now a contender.

I think the divide amongst fans is that one side say "they should be happy with what they get" and the other side think "there is a limit to what they should get paid".

I understand your logic and if you use the often repeated argument that these guys can't earn anything like the Klitschko's offer without them, you'd be right, but I feel that is missing the point. Even when Tyson was dominant and the biggest draw by a long way, his opponents were given fair paydays.

Even the lowest promoters are offering better deals than the Klitschko's currently are. I think that's a shame. I expect so much more from the Klitschko's but they're just another pair of promoters who will happily hold their titles hostage if their possible opponents won't bend over backwards.

 

I'm not saying at all times, but right now it doesn't make a difference. They offered Haye a damn good deal and he turned it down. They give mandatories whatever is mandated. As for optionals, fighting shot fat Toney or shot fat Mormeck or shot fat Tua doesn't enhance their legacies anymore than facing prime fat Chisora.

Where there's value added, they've offered big money. Their offer to Haye could have been worth 10 million pounds or more. IIRC, Chagaev got over 2 million Euro. Arreola made seven figures. They offered Valuev 1.5 million Euro (which he turned down, then came back and accepted it a half year later after the offer was already off the table). But why would they offer more than a half million to someone who brings nothing to the table? They could just as easily fight someone else who brings nothing to the table for that same half million.

It doesn't even make sense to me to complain about the rematch clauses. So what if you have to fight the Klitschkos three times in a row if you keep winning. It just means you get three paydays in a row that are way bigger than you would have gotten otherwise. And besides, it's not like people are beating them left and right. If you lose, you're free to do whatever you please afterwards.

If the fans stop supporting them because they're ducking top opposition, then they'll need to start offering better contracts. But market forces dictate all of this, and right now the market forces are on the Klitschkos' side.

Floyd to me is in a very different situation in terms of market forces, but that's a topic I don't want to get into.

 

Agreed. I don't see what the big deal is. The Klitschko Brothers keep winning, 22 straight victories, and the haters just can't deal with it.

They were hung up on Haye for a long time, but seeing that Haye has pussied out multiple times that's really run it's course, so they try to move on to other topics. Anything to try and discredit the accomplishments of Wladimir & Vitali.... Sad really. I bet they lose a lot of sleep over it. :-(

 

It obviously wasn't good enough then.

In principle I agree, but not really. You've got guys that HAD ability, but are old, vs a guy who's yet to show anything.

You think more people will watch Tua try (and fail) to decapitate one of them, or tune in to watch a guy nobody has ever heard of?

You're saying somebody should be happy to be forced to (if they win) fight 3 fights in a row against 2 belt holders, without any chance to have a voluntary defence/easy fight to make some decent money?

Odds are, if forced to fight 3 fights in a row against the brothers, you're going to lose 1. If you do, the series is over, and guess where the belts end up? With a brother.

Even if you consider every single fight to be a 50/50 fight going in, the chances of ending with any belts (and possibly a career) at the end of it is 12.5%, or 1 in 8.

Yeah, ****ing great opportunity.

Agreed.

Like anything. If people didn't buy it, nobody would be selling it.

 

Meh. I don't know. I work in corporate law, and I see this kind of stuff all the time. Most corporate executives have clauses in their contracts that say they can't work in the same industry for a few years after termination. Is that a slave contract? No, because they're compensated well for it, and he has the choice whether to enter into it at the beginning. If he doesn't want to be subject to the provision, then he doesn't sign the contract.

That's what Haye did here, though I don't really agree with it. Sure, he doesn't have a great chance of ending with the belt (he always COULD just retire), but it's not like there's a better option out there anyway. If he wins, his options are fight another Klitschko for another 10 - 15 million quid, or fight joe blow for a fraction of that. Rationally, he should WANT to fight a Klitschko again after he wins, since that would by far be his best option anyway.

As for the contract finances not being "good enough", he was offered 50/50. That's BETTER than he should be expecting. He should be doing backflips over that. He signed to fight one of them (with the same rematch provisions, presumably) for about 1/4 of that, then beats a lumbering and limited giant and gets offered a gigantic raise, and still won't take the fight? Frankly, I think he's waiting for them to start showing cracks in the armour before going after them and he wouldn't sign even if he was getting the lion's share.

But just because one party is being unreasonable, it doesn't mean the other one isn't offering a good deal.

 

That's kind of different though. That's because of the knowledge they take with etc, but I don't disagree entirely.

Not really. He could fight a K Bro once, earn good money, but be a good chance of losing.

He could fight 2 or 3 stiffs, with little chance of losing, and end up with more money.

We don't know what else is in the contract. And if Haye truly believes he brings more money to the table, why should he settle for less than that?

Belts, history in the division? We've seen that means nothing these days in boxing. (unfortunately - not what I believe, but seems to be the case).

I'm not defending Haye either. I think he signed his life away to get a crack at Valuev and is paying for it now. I've got no sympathy for him either.

You think all the guys quoted are being unreasonable?

I think what the end result is, sadly, is that guys with no chance will take the money on offer, because it's the best offer they're going to get. Guys with more bargaining power, will tell them to take a walk, and take easier fights for the same money.

That's what's happening. Vitali's last few opponents have been appalling. Not even B grade opponents.

How much is down to the way K2 promote, and how much is down to guys not wanting to fight, I don't know. It certainly doesn't look like they're offering good money (perhaps over the odds) to attract the best fights though.