Why is Haye getting so much hate over the Klit negotiations?

Reality checking in again which fights were none of those you named were they did not negotiate in public certain parts were leaked to the public :deal

as for Valuev Haye you are so full of **** the fight was negotiated in private what details did we know again Remember according to you when the fight was first announced there was no rematch clause in the fight, Also how the hell were they public when it was negotiated in secret when he was hiding from Vitaly. in the negotiations up to Vaulev haye did you know haye signed away rights to Saurland... no matter of fact you along with many other brits claimed it was a lie when it was released much like rematch clause. :deal

And again jack you need to take off your union jack goggles there was no restriction to information being released it wasnt like he could not talk about the fight to the press only certain things which again if you have ever been privy to a legal contract you would know that most things are kept under wraps it is a standard practice.

You sit there and claim no other promoters have had confidentiality in there contracts but have no proof you just make up facts you have never seen a contract you dont know what the hell was agreed to so you are just blowing smoke out of your ass all the details that were released were what is normally released for a fight.

Also what details did you know of valuev-Haye, Barrett- Haye, Ruiz-Haye and Haye harrison during negotiations?

We knew all this about the klit-haye fight the monetary split who had what ring corner their choice of doctors, who walks out first and information on judge selection information on rematch. a hell of a lot more then the other fights which were supoosedly "public" according to you.

Name any of those fights where you knew more then that information while it was in negotiations?

truth is that all the details that are normally discussed are out in the open the small details are not open to public knowledge the klits are no different then any other promoter.. Don king

 

Negotiations have already been public between K2 and Haye. How on earth did we learn about the money issues between the camps and all the nitty gritty rematch and TV deal details?

How much more public do you want it? Live webcam from the conference room?

 

A rematch or 3 promoted fight with Haye by Sauerland which ends after he has fulfilled his mandatory.

 

Well if you knew why didnt you put up? [either you are trying to make the subject matter look a certain way or you didnt know]. Also your ramblings are your perception/opinions not reality Mr keyboard warrior.

 

:yikes,,,,,,:rofl:nut

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Jack made good point about public negotiation having wider meaning but i agree that negotiation has been pretty open however there has been so much from fight fans toward either side that people want to know which is playing games even though some have already made their mind up.

As i previously stated, i hope Shaunster101 is right that Wlad want contract to run out [after fight with Chisora] so that he can renegotiate to make pot bigger and Haye too is delaying to get rid of Sauerland's hand from the pot by fulfilling his 3 promotion fights with them, then we can get the fight on.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

fact is that Haye broke a signed contract with Vlad! Haye broke an implied contract with Vitali. Haye is a fraud.

 

Why do you say "implied"? It was a verbal contract. In some parts of the world, verbal contracts can be as strong as written ones.

In other words, you could just say that Haye broke a contract with both guys. "Implied" makes it sound weaker.

You might want to consider changing your copy+paste script.

 

Implied contracts are real.................

 

"Implied" sounds wishy-washy.

If it is a real contract, just say that Haye broke two contracts. That gives his delusional fanboys less crawl space, puts it right in their faces.

 

Wow. The Klitschko propaganda machine in full swing. So this is how your bull**** starts.

"wlad was poor in that fight - it was like he was drugged or something".

"well don't say it's LIKE he was drugged, it's too wishy washy - say he WAS drugged. If we keep saying it it might catch on and excuse our big hunky hero. I don't know how i'd cope if people thought Wladdy got legitimately Ko'd and was just a mere mortal"

"Good point. Wlad WAS drugged in that fight"

You guys are too funny/embarrassing.

 

If you haven't worked out that I am stirring up Farmboxer, who is borderline ******ed, then your judgement has slipped even further than I imagined.

He makes Klitschko fans look bad, like you do for Haye fans. Neither of you are good for anything but being mocked.

 

Yes - it's clear you was winding him up - I think 'change you copy and paste script' make it pretty obvious. Thanks for the clarification though. Likewise, I was just joking about with what I said, although it does encapsulate the mentality of a lot of fanboys on here. I guess you could say it's satirical . . .

Now, speaking of people's judgment slipping it seems as though you're unable to distinguish between someone who simply detests the attitude and general ignorance of the majority of Kkitschko fans around here and someone who is a fan of David Haye. It apoears you've fallen into the trap (as most fanboys do) of assuming that just because a person might disagree with or criticise something your favourite fighter does, then they must be a fan of their 'rival'. It happens with Pac/May all the time. I guess it's just a natural reaction for people when they're a fan of a personality rather than the sport.

 

Or...... you are a Haye fan but prefer to think of yourself as neutral. So you justify your constant defense of Haye as being because the dreadful Klitschko fans are so awful....

Seriously mate, I do think you have the makings of a good poster. Lately that has been slipping, and the attacks are flowing. If you really, really prize neutrality then I think you are wandering a little away from it. But it is a good thing that you see neutrality and objectivity as desirable.

Don't worry about telling me that I am not neutral. I know I am not, and I admit I am not. That doesn't mean I can't be objective. On the contrary I am well aware of the effects of confirmation bias - and I actively filter my posts on the assumption that I am affected by it (but that I can't see it).

I think if people can understand how confirmation bias affects absolutely everyone - then make the assumption that it must be affecting themselves without even being aware of it, then we can probably get posts which are closer to being based on reality.