Tarver ducking Dawson

Dawson should not be looking to fight shot have-been NAMES, like Tarver, but prime, live, unbeaten, dangerous, hungry up-and-comers like Diaconu. This is how you build a legacy at this stage of your career. After yu beat a live one, you can fight a has been too, of course...but not one has-been after another...after a guy like Mendoza...

 

thats kinda beside the point on wether or not Tarver has ducked him and IMO he has.

Tarver knew SHowtime wanted the match al along.

 

Dawson couldn't have fought Tarver anyway because Diaconu was his mandatory.

 

come on now, what fight makes more money for either fighter? Diaconu, Muriqui? Gimme a break, I always liked Tarver and I thought he beat RJJ in all three fights, and Glen Johnson in both fights. . . but I gotta call em like I see em and Tarver ducked Dawson. Sad but true.

 

That is so true. Heck, even after Dawson fight that night, was watching Tarver fight. And Jim Gray asked him if he would like Tarver and he said no doubt. And it was pretty much all but set up that Tarver/Dawson should've fought next. But Tarver didn't want it.

 

If we're talking money, Tarver is doing better fighting Woods...so...no point in talking ducking. If your're talking ducking, we're talking rules and mandatories...so Dawson should have concentrated on Diaconu.

It's as simple as that.

 

Get real man, Tarvers second gimme on Showtime brough less money than Dawson (thats when he clearly should have fought him and didnt).

Diaconu is a red herring, I aint biting.

Like I said, I was a big fan of Tarver but one thing I hate is shameless ducking and he did it.

 

You need to learn about the concept of risk/reward, buddy!:deal

For Tarver, it's not good risk/reward to fight Dawson. For Dawson, it's not good risk/reward to fight Diaconu. For Tarver, good risk/reward is Woods. For Dawson - any of the have-been NAMES.

Tarver wasn't ducking Dawson. Shouldn't have been fighting him in the first place. Dawson was ducking Diaconu - whom he should have been fighting, instead of chasing Tarver.:deal

Tarver is the red herring here, buddy...he is not in the picture as a serious contender at 175...Diaconu is, whether you want to accept it or not.

 

Showtime was clearly setting up the Tarver-Dawson fight . . . Tarver knew this and got a gimmie showcase fight out of it, fine. But after that gimme you better GIVE ME a fight worth watching . . . then he gets ANOTHER GIMME . . .thats when I call BS.

You obviously have your mind made up here so we'll just agree to disagree. Just keep this in mind, I was a big Tarver fan and argued that he shoulda had all W's in his three fights with RJJ and his two fights with Glen Johnson - so I aint no Traver "hater".

 

That was a very clever move by Tarver. Remember, he is finished and he knows it...it's all about money for him now...not about beating top contenders with elite skills.

Once you realise that, you understand why it's silly to say "Tarver ducked Dawson"...:yep

Tarver played both SHOWTIME and Dawson and won! Good for him!

Shame on Dawson for wanting to tart up his resume with that trophy win. Shame on Showtime for wanting to hype-up Dawson by giving him a leg-up against a shot past legend...:-(

I am glad Tarver outsmarted them both...as a Tarver fan, you should be realistic and understand the situation from HIS point of view. He did the right thing by fighting someone his own age.:good

 

You have revisited your imagination world on this issue.

First, ducking in the way you and most people use it implies that one fighter is avoiding another fighter for competitive reasons. Tarver, despite a big push from Showtime, operated at his financial detriment in 2007 by not fighting Dawson. That is the definition of ducking.

What isn't ducking is Hopkins fighting Calzaghe instead of Dawson, or Hopkins fighting even Roy Jones over Dawson. Hopkins will avoid Dawson, sure, but he's working to his financial benefit. Avoiding and ducking are different concepts.

Now that we've established this rule, let's apply it to Dawson. Chad wants the biggest-money fights he can get, and Tarver is a big name in the United States. He waited for him last fall, didn't get him, fought crappy subs (more on that below), and now is fighting Johnson, a lesser name than Tarver but still someone who brings money to the table.

In his ideal world, Dawson would love to fight Jones, or Calzaghe/Hopkins, or still Tarver, if he wins, or Woods, if he wins and looks impressive. That's the boxing business, and the reason why Floyd Mayweather will fight ODLH 1,000 times before he takes on Margarito. It's avoiding one guy to get to a more lucrative guy -- not ducking.

To the mind of your average boxing fan, Diaconu means nothing. He has no name, nothing to sell at all. And still, because he was out of money options, Dawson was set to fight him last fall. Diaconu pulled out.

Now, Dawson has a more lucrative fight against Johnson than what Diaconu can provide, and if he wins, he'll be set for Woods or Tarver or Jones most likely, clearly better financial options than Diaconu.

You seem to be under the impression that Dawson should be concerned about belts/legacy/etc., when in fact fighters pay their sanctioning fees only because it makes them more marketable. It's an investment.

Bottom line: Dawson probably values his belt enough to fight Diaconu, rather than be stripped. That said, if he could bypass that undesirable fight for something more prosperous, he'd happily do it.

It has nothing to do with him being afraid of Diaconu, which you continue to imply.

 

In doing so he also "played" the fans of boxing . . .if youre o.k. with that then perhaps youre not a true fan of the sport. :-(


Im done with this topic, it pissed me off that I used to be a fan of this guy.

 

Exactly. He single-handedly ruined one of Showtime's cards last year, all because he didn't want to stare near-certain defeat in the face.

Remember, he called out Jeff Lacy to fight him for next weekend's card, but then had to settle for a more dangerous opponent in Woods. I think Showtime is wise to his game now, at least.

 

Wrong, buddy; I never implied Dawson was afraid of Diaconu. What he is afraid of is the risk/reward that Diaconu represents, compared to the other available risk/reward presented by Tarver and Johnson, for example. This is the reason he ducked Diaconu, before being forced to sign to fight him when Tarver continued to refuse to fight him, and after he fought Mendoza and tried to have Diaconu's mandatory status revoked. Had Diaconu been just another guy who presented a bad risk/reward who called Dawson out, that would not have been a ducking, but since Diaconu was Dawson's mandatory, and was reinstated as his mandatory, after he tried on several occasions either to ignore the fact that Diaconu was his mandatory (pre first contract) or to have his status revoked (post Injury), making a laughing stock of himself in the process...that DOES represent a ducking. Fortunately for boxing, the WBC, who had put up wiht a lot of nonsense from this prima donna, decided to say enough is enough and forced him to sign a contract saying he'd fight the Interim Champ within a certain timeframe (4 months??) or get stripped.