Rematches dont make sense for the winner

SRL never gave Hagler a rematch and Lewis didn't rematch Vitali. From a legacy perspective these were the right choices. If he beats you in the rematch your legacy suffers and people call for a third fight which you may also lose, if you beat a guy twice people will start questioning how good he actually was. It's lose-lose.

 

My problem w/these modern rematches is this. If the "A side" loses the first fight they get a do over. If A side wins the second fight it's like "it's all good", and like they never lost the first fight. A perfect example is the recent AJ-Ruiz. Ofc Ruiz stopped AJ in #1, then AJ UDs Ruiz in #2. They're 1-1 and Ruiz has the stoppage but it's like the do over win erases the first loss. It's beside the point that Ruiz came in as a fatter slob than he was when he won fight #1. Why doesn't Ruiz get a second chance to right his mistake?

In the "old days" if they split the first two there was often a 3rd fight (Ali-Norton, Ali-Frazier, etc.).
Pov-Whyte is another recent example. Pov should fight for the Super CW title if they ever get that going or retire at this point. Regardless of what Pov should do, if Whyte wins fight #2 it's like his KTFO loss never happened

In my view we've regressed.

 

Nope. For starters, did Foreman or Hearns insist upon a rematch? That needs to be answered first.

I'm of the mind that every close fight does NOT require a rematch. If someone loses a close fight, well, that's boxing. If one legitimately loses (and I don't mean the BS 'it could have gone either way stuff'), even close, back in line.

 

Good point. It gives the 'A side' too much power for them to request and get an immediate rematch. I feel like rematch clauses should be done away with, or at the very least, make them go both ways.

Look at 3G and canelo. First a dubious draw, then a dubious win for Canelo. But since canelo is the shot caller in this, he can walk away from a potential third at any point.

 

I've noticed how back in the day they would just rematch a couple years down the line anyway.

 

If the decision was very close or he thinks that he might have been given a beneficial decision it might be in his interest. Floyd gave Castillo and Maidana rematches. Manny would not give Horn a rematch and he was given the L officially. Enough people saw it as a robbery that it wasn't worth a second look.

 

Ruiz is still in process of losing the blubber, he hasn't fought anyone since the loss to AJ, other than the person hindering his way to the buffet.

The contract he signed for first fight had the rematch clause, after the second fight no contracted rematch on the table.

A slimmed down Ruiz would be a very marketable opponent for AJ, so once Ruiz wins the fight on the scales, who knows AJ vs Ruiz might happen.

 

Foreman hunted down a rematch but was denied the opportunity at every turn by Ali. He tried to get a mandatory position but neither the WBC nor WBA would grant him one for a long time, that's why Foreman lost his spirit and retired the first time around.

 

Foreman probably never beats Ali, until after the Shavers fight at least
Hearns I don't think ever beats Hagler,
You're right, Lopez won't fight Loma again,
I think the Duran meltdown after he beat Leonard was inevitable, his management putting him back into the ring knowing he wasn't ready wasn't however.

 

Well that's partially because Ali's been shielded from any and all criticism on his resume.

 

Eh, there's a reason Ali didn't want to rematch Foreman when he saw him working on his patience and stamina. I feel he knew quite well that a rematch would likely have ended up badly for him as he largely won that first fight on being very durable and with the lesser capacity for punishment he would've undoubtedly had after the first fight he would've been screwed.