Whyte v Wallin off

Sorry who was that final eliminator against in 2016?

He should have just taken the Ortiz final eliminator, shouldn't be anytbing for a guy who will fight anybody, anywhere. Some fighters just have to play the game.

Whyte went the UK PPV route for the money, selling himself as a feared, will fight anybody guy. Fair play to him but he has no right to whinge. He's had 3 big chances that we know of and turned them all down. That is a fact.

 

What were those final eliminators he turned down?
He won an eliminator against Chisora in 2016.
Was it Stiverne v Whyte, 2017? Nope they let Stiverne cherry pick Breazeale (who was ranked below Whyte and hadn't fought an eliminator)
Was it Breazeale v Whyte, 2017? Nope they let Breazeale cherry pick Molina (they were both ranked below Whyte and neither had fought an eliminator. Oh and Molina was serving a UKAD drugs ban - but the WBC allowed that one to slide).
Was it Breazeale v Whyte in 2018? Nope they elevated Breazeale to mandatory status and let him fight Wilder.

I'm curious what were these two WBC final eliminators he turned down?

 

I didn't say he fought a final eliminator btw, I said he fought a title eliminator; which made him eligible (next in line really) to fight for the mandatory position in a final eliminator.

According to the WBC themselves on the day of the fight, Chisora in 2016 was a WBC title eliminator

 

Annoying situation. I hope this is just a WBC power play: force Whyte to drop the litigation in exchange for ordering the mandatory.

Horrible feeling this is going to become a long-running saga that keeps both Fury and Whyte inactive.

This needs to sort itself out quickly, otherwise us fans are going to see the division paralysed again.

 

Brezeale got entangled in some legal stuff so that put him ahead of Whyte unfortunatley. Whyte was offered a final eliminators as said no. Simple facts. Again, he went the UK money route and I won't knock that at all, just dont play the victim card.

 

No again that's not actually how it went down. Breazeale was given the right to fight in an eliminator because he had a contract with Stiverne. But by all rights when Stiverne needed an opponent following the removal of Povetkin, Whyte should have been next inline. But anyway, okay, so Breazeale had the contract.
Whyte makes an offer to fight Breazeale. Breazeale rejects it, and PBC choose to match him up in an eliminator against Molina. The WBC then declare publicly this will be a final eliminator. The media pull them up on this (knowing Whyte has been waiting some time now). The WBC admit their mistake and make a retraction. They declare it was an administrative error, and yes Breazeale v Molina will be a title eliminator NOT a final eliminator. Then after things settled down, the WBC publicly announced Breazeale was the mandatory. I kid you not.

So I am curious what WBC final eliminator people think Whyte was offered. Was he offered Breazeale? Because that is what the next fight needed to be by rights.

I suspect this is a large part of why Whyte started litigation against the WBC

 

I said this on another thread but I hope whyte sues the wbc to oblivion over their treatment of him

its disgusting at this point

 

It was against Ortiz so he would have been elevated the Mandatory after the Wilder Brezeale fight basically. So they turned thatdown before begging a year later to make the Rivas fight for the Mandatory position. We all know what happened there.

It is Murky but Whyte has been offered chances and turned them down. Ortiz, Pulev and AJ. I dont have sympathy for him at all, especially as he is sat on PPV earning millions.

 

Sorry I missed your part about Ortiz in your earlier post. So you are correct that the Ortiz fight was to make Whyte the second mandatory behind Breazeale. However, if that wasn't bad enough, the WBC refused to guarantee a title shot should he have beaten Ortiz. So that wasn't a difficult decision to refuse the fight and continue to insist on fighting Breazeale in a final eliminator to get Wilder next.
This is probably when people started giving Whyte crap for ducking fights. But basically the WBC have been trying to screw him for years now.

Regarding Pulev, I think people do have a point there. He could have fought Pulev for the IBF eliminator in Bulgaria. But he instead chose to fight Parker (who in fairness to Whyte was higher ranked than Pulev by most outside observers) for a lot more money. Plus you got to remember he likely thought he was going to get the final eliminator for the WBC belt. But anyway, I can understand why people want to say he ducked Pulev. Personally, I give him a pass, because Parker was the better opponent.

Regarding Joshua. I personally feel that was a low-ball offer from Joshua, designed to allow Joshua to cancel the Wembley date so he could pursue his American dream, whilst saving face and not pissing off all the fans who already booked hotels and flights. So I don't consider that a duck from Whyte. If anything it was the other way around.
I mean really, Joshua at the height of his popularity offered Whyte (WBO#1, WBC#1, Ring#4) 3.5m to fight at Wembley. That's pretty ridiculous.

 

I mean the WBC certainly messed up but seemed to offer a valid solution that suited them.

So say Whyte is pissed of with the WBC, great, he can fight Pulev for the IBF no1 spot instead, **** the WBC for treating him so bad, but no that is also turned down as they want PPV and to keep going down the WBC route when they KNOW they still have to wait. Come on man this is boxing politics but lets not claim Whyte is a victim here.

Was it 3.5m? Apparently Whyte had an issue with the rematch clause. What a surprise that he was popped soon after, guess these 2 cant be related at all.

 

haha, sorry, we seem to be editing past each other. I addressed Pulev and Joshua in the post above. However, you have a point, but I would say: Everyone and their grandma wanted to get a shot at Wilder. Why? Because he held the final piece of the undisputed jigsaw. Whyte beats Pulev, sure he gets the mandatory challenger shot against Joshua, and the purse split that comes with that. BUT if Whyte unburdens Wilder of the WBC title...he gets to make the undisputed fight, and all the riches that come with that.

Now I understand there is something to be said for the immediacy of sporting glory by going the IBF route. But they are prize fighters after all, and being part of that potential undisputed fight against Joshua was the prize everyone had been after.

 

Haha yeah we are missing each others points! Lets just agree to disagree, i see it as 3 offers he has turned down. Its not just 1 that hes had issue with but 3! That's far too coincidental for me.

 

Whyte v Chisora in 2016 wasn’t a final eliminator. Around the time they were only barely in the top 15. I’ve just googled it and only one website (of very little credibility) says this was an eliminator. Nothing on Sky/Matchroom’s websites or anything who’d have been all over it like a rash.

The fact we’re all arguing how many eliminators and title shots Whyte has turned down shows how ridiculous his demands have got. Some say 3 mandatories and a title shot, others say 2 mandatories and a title shot, others are claiming he’s fought 2 eliminators. If he’s the Can Man or whatever he calls himself it should be 0 mandatories turned down and 0 world title shots turned down. It’s his own fault.

 

Whyte is 1-1 in his last two fights against a very old fighter.
He has two or three current fighters to beat if he even wants to prove himself the 3rd best HW in Britain really.
It is laughable really.