"Why should I rematch him?" Teofimo Lopez says he will leave Loma behind to fight his "leftovers”

The world has a way of humbling overzealous, prideful men. Loma experienced that on his fight against Lopez.

And now Lopez is experiencing that now with his lack of star appeal. He overestimated his own ability to draw and is paying for it.

 

I tend to agree with you. I believe the rematch should happen. But, in all honesty, I feel if the fight was exactly the same and Loma won, he would not give Lopez a rematch. Loma is the person that snubbed the rematch clause in the first place. So, I don't feel bad for Loma. Would love the rematch tho!

 

Paying for it to a degree. But the difference between getting a few million and a lot of million is miniscule in the grand scheme of things imo.

 

Because Loma didnt put in a rematch clause, thats why it likely wouldn't have happened had Lomachenko won

 

I know but surely they can make the rematch if they offer right money.
If he can get better offers other places good for him.

 

Thing is: Loma is not his lawyer. Strange to hold him to account simply because his legal team was confident in his winning to not include/negotiate a rematch clause (usually seen as a safeguard). Not sure it says much about Loma's perspective on a rematch: Remember the days where rematches would happen out of pride and public demand (and money) rather than pure legal obligations?

 

Loma's legal team are not going to make that decision
Thats crazy

Its Arum/loma that will

Their own fault

 

Whatever. His legal team are writing the contract not the fighter, and not all of it is necessarily communicated (Arum is a more likely source than Loma). Either way, the point is that the contents of the contract don't always tell you much about what the fighter is thinking.

If you include a rematch clause it implies that one or both of the fighters are worried about losing (or their promotional team is and includes it by standard, as with Matchroom). The fact they were confident doesn't tell you much about how they'd respond to the prospect of a rematch in a close/controversial fight.

How many fighters do you think requested a rematch clause for the benefit of the other fighter?

But generally, if you care about glory you will not be content with a close/controversial fight and you will take a rematch regardless of legal compulsion.

 

We'll then maybe he should have asked them to put one just incase. The reality is there wasn't one. Lopez beat Lomachenko.

yeah i do and I'd love to see a rematch, but in this particular case the rematch isn't contractually obligated like say Fury vs Wladimir 2 so if Lopez doesn't rematch Lomachenko it can't be classified as a duck, especially if Lopez goes on to fight another elite operator like Josh Taylor, although the catch weight stuff is bs.

 

They neglected a rematch clause because they assumed victory was assured and therefore planned to move on

It just backfired

 

My point is, again, rematch clauses are supposed to protect your fighter. They're a 'shield' not a 'sword'. Suggesting that someone failed to include one so that if they narrowly won the fight and there was a public demand for a rematch they could avoid it, is silly. Loma's team didn't include one because they were confident; Lopez's team didn't negotiate one because they were confident too.

Rematch clauses are not or should not be the standard.

I don't see the logic in suggesting that you need to add this fairly onerous contractual clause in order to deserve a rematch. Obviously I'm not suggesting Loma has legal ground, but that's not what boxing should be about.

It was a very close fight that could have been scored a draw, with a controversy element (in the judge's scorecards), an upset element, and an underperformance element (Loma's injury): this is the perfect set up for a rematch.

If you care about glory, you take the rematch. If you refuse it altogether with no better reason than 'he would have done the same ... I'm assuming,' then you're dodging the fight.

 

I mean ... when you think of 'ducks' in boxing, how many of them are legal in nature? It's a matter of pride, fighting the best, proving you're the best. If you barely snatch a win against a fighter that seemed to underperform on an injury, and looks infinitely better before and after the fight: you haven't proven yourself. If the other fighter is so keen on a rematch and you make every effort to avoid it: you're ducking them.

This was the case with Fury-Wlad now you mention it. I don't think many people are interested with the legal obligation when calling it a 'duck'.

Lopez could go on to fight and beat great opponents, but the fact is we never got a certain answer to Loma-Lopez. How would Lomachenko do in the rematch, healthy? I don't think anybody is confident of a Lopez win, and it would be naïve to think Lopez hasn't thought of that too.

 

Please, the lawyer works for him. That is all part of the negotiation process. Something I would think any fighter should have a vested interest in. If, by chance Loma let someone else do his bidding for him, then shame on him and he pretty much gets what he deserves. Either way, the no rematch came from Loma's camp.

 

Excuses, Lomachenkos plan was to drag Lopez into deep waters and drown him by avoiding his powershots early and making him gas, then going for the kill. The plan failed because Lopez was tough. He weathered the storm, adjusted at the end of round 11 and dug deep in the 12th, hurt Loma and won the final round. There's no contractually obligated rematch i can't call him a duck. He beat Lomachenko. It wasn't controversial. Anybody who scored it for Loma is deluded. A draw would be giving Loma a gift.

It was arguably duck because Wlad activated the rematch clause and Fury planned on fighting him. Then all of the sudden he pulled out time and time again. And then retired. Had there not been a rematch clause i don't think too many people would be mad at Fury ending the boring Wlad reign and moving on. However Fury's mental state was apparently not well so it's also arguable that it wasn't a duck

We did get a certain answer. Lopez UD

 

If Loma wouldn't have given him a rematch, so what? He's the bigger name and more proven. It wouldn't have been necessary. But Lopez barely made it out with the W. There are still too many questions. Could have easily been an off day for Lomachenko.