So can we agree letting a fight "marinate" is dumb af?

Khan vs Brook is now the more prestigious fight.

 

The 'marinate' garbage ended for me when Bowe dropped his belt in a garbage can and wouldn't fight Lewis

If a fight is there, you fight. You can always fight more than once. So no need to wait years to have the first one.

 

And so what? What does marketability and potential revenue mean for the casual fan, or for any fan?

This is loopy. We have a much more competitive and stylistically intriguing fight on the horizon and you're bemoaning the fact that it won't hit record PPV buys or whatever. Casual fans aren't dumb. They've just witnessed a guy many may not have heard of before totally outclass Joshua; there's obviously going to be some buzz to see how he's going to do against Fury. And with his eclectic personality I'd wager that Usyk is going to become very fan friendly in the upcoming months.

 

Right... rematches and rubber matches for competitive fights are some of the most exciting fights there are.

The whole "marinate" excuse falls apart when you look at it from that angle... In the time it's taken to "marinate" Crawford-Spence and potentially juice up the revenue by 15-50%, they could've fought 3 times for 3x the cash (and glory, which doesn't seem to matter these days).

 

I think it makes sense sometimes, but nowadays it's more used as an excuse to duck.

 

There's a difference between letting a bout marinade and the bout not happening for other reasons. The latter is applicable in this case - it doesn't matter, anyway, because Usyk clearly deserves to be in an undisputed bout more than Joshua. He's better than him.

 

Aside from the fact it was an all UK clash, and the big money, I don't see why Fury vs AJ is in any way more appealing than Usyk vs Fury.

It's the 2 most skilled in the heaviest division going at it for all the marbles, with the extra ingredient that Usyk would be aiming to be double undisputed

What's not to like?

The casual mugs can get fleeced by Haye coming back or some other crap, why should I care about the casuals?

Fury vs Usyk = The Best fighting the Best.

Of course Wilder might have something to say on that, but I doubt he beats Fury.

 

Rematch clauses have a lot to do with this. Nobody ever risks a belt without having one these days which I guess you'd call the AJ effect as his team have used the mega-money he generates as a means to invoke that level of control. It works for both parties as anyone who beats him is guaranteed ~$20 million in the rematch.

The spin off of that is we get sequels and trilogies being fought within 6 - 24 months where those used to take 5 - 10 years. With the general rule seeming to be a maximum of 2 fights a year at the top tier these days and the fights that fans really want to see just keep getting kicked down the road. Fury vs Wilder 3 is the worst example of a fight that only has appeal to a tiny minority of fans (Wilder fan boi conspiracy theorists).

 

Only thing I want to see marinate is spaghetti with tomato sauce.

 

Sure, if your not one of the people who cares about how much money is being made

 

As others have pointed out, it probably is an excuse built on the fear that their cash cow will lose.

However, we continually see fighters lose anyway, unexpectedly, on smaller fights, so it still seems like a mistake to avoid the big fights for fear of losing them. From the outside looking in, it feels like they're just letting their fear overrule their judgment: the cash cow is going to die eventually no matter what, so you should have the big, risky fights while you can.

But without a breakdown of the financial gains from the two strategies, it's difficult to say the promoters are wrong.

 

Not Furys and Wilder's fault that AJ ducks and can't win fights that he is a favourite in

 

Over-marinating ruins things.

 

I am still waiting for Juanma vs. Gamboa