Who's fault is it that opkins vs Jones 2 didn't happen

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by thewoo, Aug 11, 2008.


  1. thewoo

    thewoo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,769
    4
    Mar 3, 2005
    Ok. so I know this has been debated before but I can't recal ever seeing a poll for it. I think that the blame lies soley on hopkins and I'll state my reasons. OBvioulsy I am talking about when the fight was being discussed after hopkins beat Tito and the infamous "60/40 and I'll kick you ass"

    The 60/40 split that Jones was offering would have netted hopkins slighlty over 6 million dollars. This was 3 times his previous high payday of only 2 million dollars vs Trinidad. Against Tito hopkins was more than willing to take the smaller purse because it was a fight that he knew he could win. Against Jones he refused the offer and in his very next fight took on Carl Daniels for only 1.2 million dollars. Against Oscar he was willing to take the smaller purse Even though he was the undisputed middleweight champion (which is the excuse he used to not take the smaller purse vs Jones who was also an undisputed champion).

    It is no question that hopkins was not a draw of any magnitude at the time. My case is easily proven by simply watching hopkins vs Joppy. It co-headlined with Mayorga vs Spinks. During Mayorga vs Spinks the seats are full, During hopkins vs Joppy they are empty. Not only could Bhop not sell, he couldn't keep people in seats they had already paid for.

    Now the draw things aside, this would have been Bhop's oppurtunity to avenge the loss, had he won, his drawing power would have mulitplied several times over taking the career high purse was a wise business decision as well as a wise decision towards his legacy. Roy on the other hand really had no reason to make any concessions.
     
  2. PH|LLA

    PH|LLA VIP Member Full Member

    79,438
    2,645
    Feb 1, 2007
  3. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,594
    47,245
    Mar 21, 2007
    If Roy wants the Hopkins scalp, he should have fought at 50.50.

    If the reverse is true, Hopkins should have fought at 60.40.

    The money was more important to both so the fight didn't happen.

    I split the blame evenly, pretty much.
     
  4. BigReg

    BigReg Broad Street Bully Full Member

    38,117
    5
    Jun 26, 2007
    Jones. Roy wanted no parts of the ass whoopin that was gonna come his way had he fought Hopkins again.
     
  5. thewoo

    thewoo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,769
    4
    Mar 3, 2005
    Jones already has the hopkins scalp. It was up bhop to avenge that loss not up to jones to give him a second chance.
     
  6. BENNY BLANCO

    BENNY BLANCO R.I.P. Brooklyn1550 Full Member

    10,718
    9
    Mar 8, 2008
    I'd say equal as you stated Hopkins would have earned his biggest payday taking a 60/40 percentage, but Jones could have also took a 50/50 deal and fight Hopkins to shut his critics up who were saying that he's a cherry picker.
     
  7. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,594
    47,245
    Mar 21, 2007
    There is something to this.

    On the other hand it was the biggest fight out there, in real terms. You want the best, you cant always have it all your own way.

    Tyring to devolve Jones of ALL responsibility on account of what happened in the first fight (good fight), is not reasonable.
     
  8. aliwasthegreatest

    aliwasthegreatest Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,982
    1
    Jul 22, 2004
    jones was the huge name at the time hopkins was not. it should have been 60/40. however jones could have just taken it and gone 50/50
     
  9. thewoo

    thewoo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,769
    4
    Mar 3, 2005
    Read my opening post. There is plenty of reasons that Roy had every right to a 60/40 split. Nobody complains when DLH demands higher paydays that his opponents because it is generally agreed that he deserves it. I believe that was the case here. Imagine if somehow Jones vs DLH went through to you think that Jones would have had to settle for 10 million to Oscar's 30? Jones was the bigger draw by far at the time.
     
  10. catasyou

    catasyou Lucian Bute Full Member

    38,466
    21
    Apr 7, 2008
    If they win against Calzaghe and Pavlik there is a good chance we see them fight.
     
  11. JonOli

    JonOli Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,352
    2
    Nov 4, 2007
    Equal. Both apeared fairly stuck up over it, and that the fight could have been made had one of them budged.
     
  12. Rock0052

    Rock0052 Loyal Member Full Member

    34,221
    5,874
    Apr 30, 2006
    I agree with you 100%. If Hops felt that confident he could've avenged the loss, he'd have taken the 60/40 in a heartbeat. No way is it on Roy's shoulders to make that concession at the time considering he was a bigger draw and won the first fight. The ball was in Hopkins' court to make it happen, and he didn't. Now he can just make Roy the scapegoat and talk as if he really, really wanted the rematch then.
     
  13. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,594
    47,245
    Mar 21, 2007
    I did.

    Listen, the key thing is that the fight did not happen. Roy says, "I want sixty percent." Hopkins says, "Fight won't happen with those figures." Roy can now make a counter offer, or say, "Okay, **** you."

    He said, "Okay **** you."

    What is reasonable or unreasonable is not an issue. These were two great fighters. If you want the best - whoever you are - you sometimes have to make concessions to get the best in the ring with you.

    That being the case, you can't lay the whole thing at Bernard's door.

    The split in terms of blame, ironically, is something close to 60.40.
     
  14. Brighton bomber

    Brighton bomber Loyal Member Full Member

    31,237
    29,282
    Apr 4, 2005
    I blame both equally. While Jones was the more established star he was not a big draw himself at the time. HBO were losing money on every Jones fight and his highest PPV figures was only 110,000.

    Jones also had no real big money fight options at light heavyweight or even at supermiddle. Hopkins believed he was in a stronger bargaining position having just beaten Tito and with a possible rematch with Tito or a fight with Oscar had more lucrative options.

    But Jones believed he deserved the bigger purse having beaten Hopkins already.
     
  15. thewoo

    thewoo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,769
    4
    Mar 3, 2005
    Where does the line end as far as making concessions. Shoudl Mayweather have to take a 10/90 split in Margarito's favor to fight margarito? Concessions can be asked when a fightger is being unreasonable. Jone's offer of 60/40 was more than reasonable and fair, hopkins was unreasonable in his demands as he was asking for something that he clearly did not deserve