Why is Katsidis v Diaz only 10 rounds ?

It came into my head because it was a former Katsidis opponent(Graham Earl) that fought in it, but there is no rule against 12 round non-title fights which was basically my point. If they wanted it sanctioned for 12 without a title they would of got it.

 

This fight is now over 12 rounds and is sanctioned for the IBO lightweight title

 

Good stuff Phil, cant wait.:good

 

Two fighters coming off a loss fighting for a world title. Nice.

IBO computer generated Phil? lol

 

Juan Diaz is rated 3, Katisidis 21 both well within the Top-35. Fighters coming off a loss fighting for a world title? Never happened before has it PJ?

 

I've seen title fights where one guy is coming off a loss, but I can't recall EVER hearing of a LEGITIMATE title fight where BOTH guys are coming off losses, and the guys they lost to are still active in the division.

Since it obviously has happened according to you, I challenge you to provide me with ONE example?

 

Don't bombard me with evidence Phil lol

 

Who Cares as long as it doesnt get postponed.

 

i hope katsidis had improvements now

 

Sorry perfect jet, I actually have a life and other committments even though I should have put aside my work, family and masonic commitments to reply straight awaY!
One example straight away I can think of is Doug DeWitt V Robbie Sims for the vacant WBO 160lb title and I am sure I could provide others given enough spare time and motivation.
At the end of the day how can you rubbish this match up? Juan Diaz has lost only once and is still one of the best 135 pounders going around and Katsidis' performance against future hall of famer Casamayor was a fantastic effort after a shitty start to actually pull himself well back into the fight and could well have won if not for his brain explosion - Ray Mancini got a go at a world title straight after being completely dominated by Arguello.
The ratings don't generate the match ups genius, they simply rank the fighters without prejudice based on level of opponents beaten. Both are well inside the top-35 which is where they need to be and it stands to be a great fight

 

Firstly, you question me as if your decision to sanction this fight with two guys coming off losses isn't unusual and you support it with a fight that took place almost 20 years ago. lol. And you are wrong with the Mancini fight btw...not even close.


I'm not shitting on the fight. It's a great fight, and sells with or without the IBO trinket. I just question the motives above anything else of why you guys sanctioned it as a title fight.

I'd be interested to know the decision making process behind it all. What's the criteria besides being ranked in the top 35?

 

OK look back at what you asked; a precident of it happening before I provided an example a precident is just that it doesn't have a statute of limitations!
Why do you feel the need to question the decision to sanction the fight? It is no different to any other organisation: Both fighters are qualified ratings wise to contest the title, as you point out it is a great fight, it invloves one of the very best lightweights in the world against an all out action fighter who never disappoints and has garnered attention in the US and UK with his fights there - why wouldn't we sanction it? It would be completely moronic from a business standpoint not to. Both fighters qualify, both want to fight for it (The IBO has been in talks with Diaz for quite some time - before his loss to Campbell, hence the reason it has stayed vacant) end of story

 

You call it a precedent, I'd call it an obscure fight that nobody ever heard of from 20 years ago.

Call it anything you want, but attaching your so-called "title" to a fight between 2 guys both coming off losses is nothing more than a sanctioning fee grab.

Funny how Funeka vs. Raheem was made long BEFORE Diaz-Katz, and would easily have met your stringent "criteria".... but no sanction from you on that one? hmmmmm.

I guess you might add "being on HBO which means bigger purses which means more sanctioning fees" to your criteria list.

End of story.

 

Well quite simply if the fighters and the promoter wants to put it on and they qualify then we can do it, if they ain't interested they aint interested - is that too hard to understand? Keep looking for whatever you want in a situation just don't bother asking me for inside insight as to why it is done. Semantics and trying to prove yourself clever seem to be your main go. Now this is the end of story; I stopped posting in another site cos I got sick of the crap and I don't want to get sucked in again - far more important things need taking care of, at the end of the day I only came in here after hearing about the petition suggestion and just wanted to clear up what happens there

 

You chose to participate in a forum Phil and guess what... not everyone see's things the same way.

Sanctioning bodies have been the subject of all kinds of controversies over the years, is the IBO a moral crusader for the alphabet orgs or something?

I'm allowed to ask questions and give my opinion. it's not personal so I'm surprised you feel the need to discontinue posting. Yuor choice their.