Should boxing banned rematch clause in title fights?

I say yes cause first off the big time favorite fighter will finally be focused on his opponent instead of talking about some other fighter with talking ****. And second off, if the big time under dog fighter wins it lets easily then a favorite to win in a first fight won't have a rematch clause to use it. I think also this is better for the sport cause now the big time favorite will be more focused on that fight and not other thing else. What you people think honestly?

 

It depends on what happens in the first fight. I feel rematch clauses should not be mandatory but if both fighters still want a rematch after their first fight I say go for it. Love the girl in your avatar btw:hey.

 

Much ado about nothing. You can only force a rematch clause on a voluntary challenger. Champ has earned the right for a rematch if he choses.

 

Champs deserve a rematch if they desire.

 

A champion always deserves a rematch if he wants it. Imagine if there had been no second Forrest/Mora fight!

 

If the first fight was competitive or if the fight can sell. I didn't like the Dawson vs Tarver 2 , rematch clause. That was SOOO unnecessary.

 

I'm more of the Boo, Hermit and renyo philosophy on this one, Ray.

 

Rematch clauses aren't mandatory, just smart champions have them in their contracts.

But they serve a purpose of keeping guys who win on a lucky shot, corrupt judge, etc. from running away with someones belt. Look at Forrest-Mora, Lewis-Rahman, Jones Jr.-Griffin, Cunningham-Wlodarczyck, etc. If there wasn't a rematch clause those fights would never have been set straight.

Now some guys abuse it, like Tarver when he activated his clause to get a rematch that he had no chance in hell of winning.

 

I've always thought so too. Specifically Lineal established Champions.

 

no... what if a ref makes a horrible decision... or you hurt your self from an un fight related event

 

I didn't say they were I just mean to say I don't think immediate rematches should be forced especially when the other fighter wants more options but then again, it takes two to sign contracts. As for the fights I highlighted, I'm sure with the competitive nature of Lewis & Jones that those fights would've happened anyways. Like I said earlier, it depends on what happened in the first fight amongst two fighters.

 

Awesome she's one of the sexiest female.

 

No. A champ deserves a rematch clause. Epecially with the number of doggy decisions that have happened in us...

 

I think champions can only demand it if its not a mandatory.

If it is a mandatory the champion can ask for a rematch clause just in case in exchange for a bigger purse split for the challenger.

 

I'm against rematch clauses. Only makes making fights in boxing more difficult. Klitschkos are a good example of why not.