What if in 10 years time, someone decides to write a phony article about how Vitaly Klitschko was so afraid of Hasim Rahman he cancelled on him 3 times claiming injuries just so he could duck Rahman. The writer might add details like, Rahman, impatient with Vitaly's ducking, chose to take a voluntary stay busy fight against Monte Barrett that could have jeopardized his shot against Klitschko but was very much a necessity since he was in bankruptcy and in dire need of a payday. As the Rahman vs Barrett fight approached, Vitaly decided to use the opportunity to call out Lamon Brewster instead. He did so hoping that public interest in a Klitschko vs Brewster fight might give him a smooth exit in case Barrett doesn't beat Rahman. And when the WBC ruled that Vitaly can't face anybody but the winner of the Rahman vs Barrett fight, Vitaly panicked. He grew more worried and withdrawn when Rahman was awarded a unanimous decision sealing his date with destiny. His usual mild mannered demeanor privately turned into agitation and growing frustrating over his decision to leave Europe for America. This content is protected Then the writer will add in some allegations of Finkel back channeling with Don King to put together a unification bout with the WBA & WBC and pay Rahman, who was cash strapped, some step aside money and a shot at the winner of both the WBA & WBC with the potential to increase his originally promised $4.82 million guarantee to $10 million ($2 million of which will be an advance from the step aside payment) if he agrees to wait. King agreed to the proposal but demanded options on Vitaly if he beats Ruiz but given Rahman's recent separation from King and possibility of falling back under his wing the deal was DOA. Faced with no options, Vitaly decided to retire and give up his belt rather than take the $10 million dollar payday against Hasim Rahman and face what he felt was going to be a knockout loss. If someone puts it together and weaves fact and fiction interchangeably, a new generation of casuals will swear by it's authenticity even though we all know it's false. Thoughts?
Because it's not a phoney article. That's what happened. I went to Rahman-Barrett. Vitali did cancel the fight with Rahman repeatedly. And everyone thought Rahman-Vitali was next after the Barrett fight. HBO even did a prefight show that aired. But Vitali "retired" due to "injuries."
@Colonel Sanders Journalistic behavior. Vitaly most likely beats him. But in 10 years time from now (2031), if some hack decided to write an article using what I wrote in my OP and put it together nicely (even if the truth was stretched) would people buy it?
In my experience, casual boxing fans tend not to care too much about boxing from twenty years ago and don't really have a view on fighters from the past. If a casual fan is looking to learn (in effect, becoming a more serious fan) and happens upon such an article, one would hope they might investigate the claims a bit further and seek verification. Anyone swearing by it is going to be asked for corroborating reports, in order to be taken seriously. Otherwise, they're just another sucker. One article doesn't cut it, these days, if it ever did.
To be fair the facts do reveal that Vitaly cancelled 3 times against Rahman citing injuries. And he did call out Lamon Brewster while Rahman was fighting Barrett (also verifiable) to which the Rahman camp responded by getting the WBC to enforce his rights as the mandatory (again verifiable). These things did happen. And yes Vitaly ended up retiring on the basis that he felt as though he wasn't fully healed not because he was afraid of Rahman. Everything else I wrote in the OP was purely fabricated. The point I'm making here is that there is enough circumstantial evidence to create a narrative that simply isn't true by weaving fact and fiction.
